著作權
著作權最新諮詢
著作權
著作權
截圖他人網站
臉書貼文留言截圖問題
白白做了這麼多年的設計，難道沒得求償嗎
臉書公開社團文章截圖到IG限時動態觸法嗎？
在網路上抓圖，然後圖片有做修改
收到了警察局通知書要我去做筆錄，罪名是違反著作權 ，是關於2
自己改編的曲子可不可以演出?
含有他人商標的著作，著作權歸屬於誰？
批發阿里巴巴廠商的商品，網拍零售不知道商品有侵權，收到傳票"
我花錢請人幫我畫畫，然後將其重新上色印刷成布料製作作品，無販
不是我做的圖卻被告侵犯著作權
拼貼畫的素材是否會侵權該素材原始創作者？
我放在蝦皮的文案被盜用
肖像權
未經同意 盜用照片上架公開平台販售課程盈利
開設私服
著作權授予買方後能註明我能公開展示及教學使用嗎？該怎麼寫？
智慧財產相關案例分享
蘇思鴻律師
▲蘇狀師談娛樂法(藝術工作者作品之轉讓及授權)
Assignments and Licensing Overview 作品讓與及授權概論 As an artist, one of the best ways to make money is to license or assign your work. Although many people use the terms interchangeably, there is a tremendous difference between licensing and assigning your art. 身為藝人，其中一種最棒的賺錢途徑，即是將自己的作品授權或讓與他人。雖然很多人會將現成的契約條款加以更改來利用，但是授權與讓與著作兩者是有很大之差異。 Assignments: An assignment is basically handing your art over -- for good. Assigning your art to someone else gives them full ownership of the art, to do with as they please. There are plenty of good reasons to do this, but if you're going to give your art away for good, you should pay very close attention to what you're actually giving away. 讓與：基本上讓與係將你作品移轉出去以換取利益。讓與你的作品予某人，是讓與作品的所有權；讓受讓人為符合其意願之事。有諸多好理由作為讓與所有權之依據，但讓與之前，你必須仔細考慮，你將讓與的標的是什麼，想清楚是讓與作品的所有權，例如如果是著作的話，你讓與的即是著作（財產）權，亦即之後該著作所有的著作財產權你都無法利用。 Licenses: A license is more like renting your art out. It gives someone the rights to use your art for a limited time and for limited purposes while you, the artist, retain ultimate ownership of your art. Once the license expires, the licensee can no longer use your art. 授權：授權極近似出租你的作品；此賦予某人在授權契約所限制之期間及限制之目的下可利用該作品，然而創作人你仍保有該作品的所有權。一旦期間屆滿，被授權人不得再利用你的作品。 Unfortunately, many companies use terms like "exclusive licenses" for agreements that are actually assignments. Read the fine print carefully, and make sure you know exactly what you are, and aren't, giving away. 很不幸，許多公司在契約裏使用像〝專屬授權〞這種字眼，但探其本質，實乃讓與。請仔細研讀你的契約，確認你真正想交付出去或你不想交付出去的權利是什麼。 Reversions 權利回彈（以著作財產權為例） A reversion is when something happens that causes the rights to your artwork to spring back to you. Knowing the difference between assignments and licenses, it should be apparent that most reversions should occur in licensing agreements. You grant a company a license to use your artwork for awhile, and then when some predetermined event or events happen, those rights terminate and flow back to you. 當有些約定事由發生，作品的權利將回歸於原創作者。以著作財產權為例，已知著作權之讓與與授權兩者間之差異，顯而易見權利回彈之情形，發生在著作財產權授權契約裏。作品創作者於一段期間內授權公司利用其作品，當一些契約預定事由或事由等發生，該等權利之利用即告終結並回彈於授權者通常是作品的創作者。 請尊重著作權，違法利用，本人必究。
▲蘇狀師談娛樂法
本律師專攻著作權法及其相關之娛樂爭議。舉凡：著作權侵害、藝人經紀合約之爭議、著作權之授權及契約之撰擬、藝人知名度或肖像究竟主張何者較為有利等，以謀求當事人最佳利益為圭臬。
▲蘇狀師談娛樂法(搖頭公仔之保護)
搖頭公仔可受那些智慧財產權的保護 我國旅美知名的棒球投手甲在大聯盟屢創佳績，某乙看準當下商機，竟未得其同意，仿效該投手之身形樣貌，製作成造型可愛的搖頭公仔〈娃娃〉，並將該球員投球的英姿縮小成一吋相片大小，使用於其發行筆記本、拖鞋等商品，以增加商品的買氣，某乙的行為可能涉及那些智慧財產權？ 爭點解析 名人的身形樣貌受智慧財產保護否？搖頭公仔受何種智慧財產權保障？將名人身形樣貌予以縮小，使用於商品上涉及那些智慧財產權？ 結論 首先知名度〈名氣〉是那一種權利？我國有無保護名氣？是否名人才享有名氣的保護？簡單的說，名氣就是個人姓名財產化的保護，姓名在我國是人格權非財產權，而在美國名氣不僅是一種財產權，更是一種智慧財產權，其是由隱私權演化而來，而此種權利並非僅存在於名人，而係人人都有，只是通常名人才會去主張，一般人比較不會主張；試想一個默默無名的人，廠商會否將其姓名或樣貌使用於其商品或服務來做廣告行銷之用，以提升其買氣？即使廠商如此為之，若他人未得該人同意，將其姓名或樣貌使用於商品或服務上，係增加該人的名氣，即使有所侵害，該人亦不會因之興訟。美國之所以將名氣認定為財產權，主要是因為財產權可以讓與或繼承，一旦認定為人格權，在權利的行使上就受到限縮，而不可否認的是，肖像或姓名這些屬於人格權範疇的權利，在利用上不可諱言地產生財產上利益，已非僅具人格權性質乃是不爭的事實，然在我國因受限於歐陸法系框架，仍堅守樣貌或姓名屬於人格權，對人民權利的保護實屬不周。據此；本題乙將甲的樣貌身形製作成搖頭公仔，可解釋成侵害甲的肖像權，但限於甲生存時才可以依民法相關規定主張財產上和非財產上損害而獲賠，至於搖頭公仔依著作權法第五條第一項各款著作內容例示〈行政命令〉，其中第二條〈四〉美術著作：包括繪畫…美術工藝品及其他之美術著作，可認定為美術工藝品而受著作權法保障。本題的乙雖有可能侵害甲的肖像權，但並不當然代表侵害著作權，端視該搖頭公仔是否為乙自行創作而定，畢竟侵害肖像權和著作權係兩碼子事，這點要特別分清楚。〈其餘部分待續〉 參拙著美國名人權法制研究
▲蘇狀師談娛樂法(藝人代言契約實務–藝人代言契約應注意事項)
Rights & Licenses 權利及授權 [Sender.Name] is requesting the exclusive right and license to utilize this name in connection with the advertisement, promotion, and sale of their product. This contract is an agreement for those rights and services with the following terms being in place. 被授權者（下稱甲）要求專屬權及被授權利用權利者（下稱乙）之姓名於廣告行銷與銷售產品。本契約係依根據下列條款所為係爭權利與服務之協議。 [Endorser.Name] will provide rights for [Sender.Company] to hold all exclusive rights and licenses needed during the term of [Agreement.Term]. including the ability for use of any nicknames, initials, autographs, photographs, or any other property in relation to the advertisement or sale of mentioned product. 在契約期間，乙將專屬授權與甲，包括有權去利用任何乙之別名、藝名、簽名，照片或其他任何與廣告行銷有關之財產或本契約提及之銷售產品。 Endorsement Agreement Effective Date 代言契約生效日 This agreement shall become effective as of signature dates below and will remain effective for a term of 12 months unless prematurely terminated for failure to comply with any of the terms or conditions listed in this agreement. 本契約於下簽名日時生效，並於簽名生效後12個月為契約期間，除非契約任一方有違約情事，於預先終止本契約，否則契約仍有效存續。 Payment of Royalties 給付權利金 [Sender.Company] agrees to pay all royalties due from sales of such products as agreed between parties.Any and all royalties owed will be due on a yearly basis and shall be payable no later than thirty (30) days after the termination of the preceding full calendar quarter. 甲願給付雙方同意銷售產品所得所有之權利金。如何拖欠及所有之權利金應以年度為基準來給付。 For each royalty period due [Sender.Comany] will provide endorser with written notice of all royalties as well as any and all descriptions of Products that were sold during the Royalty Period or whether any actual Royalty was owed. “Net Sales” shall mean [Sender.Company] gross sales of Product, excluding all customary discounts and allowances as well as returns. The receipt or acceptance by [Endorser.LegalName] for above mentioned statement or payment shall not prevent Endorser from challenging or requesting proof of such document findings. Any and all obligations for the payment of Royalties shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement and will continue for as long as Endorsed Constructor continues to sell the Product or payment is owed. In the event of underpayment to endorser for any and all royalties, endorser will bill for all royalties as well as interest fees in relation for said royalties. 請尊重著作權；違法利用，本人必究。
▲蘇狀師談娛樂法(名氣權vs著作權）
Right of Publicity v Copyright Infringement 知名度v著作權侵權 There have been instances in which a Right of Publicity claim has been preempted by Plaintiff’s copyright infringement claim. The Ninth Circuit recently found that a Plaintiff actor’s claim that his Right of Publicity had been violated was preempted by the Copyright Act because the “factual basis of his right of publicity claim was the unauthorized reproduction of his performance on the DVDs.” Jules Jordan Video, Inc. v. 144942 Canada Inc., 617 F.3d 1146, 1154 (9th Cir. 2010). Therefore, the “essence” of Plaintiff’s claim was the reproduction and distribution of DVDs without authorization, which fell under Copyright protection. Explaining the rationale behind this, the Ninth Circuit stated that: “Were we to conclude that [Plaintiff’s] misappropriation claim was not preempted by the Copyright Act, then virtually every use of a copyright[] would infringe upon the original performer’s right of publicity.” Laws v. Sony Music Entm’t, Inc., 448 F.3d 1134, 1145 (9th Cir. 2006). 最近有一案例，知名度優先著作權而受保護。第九巡迴法院最近認定，原告起訴主張其知名度被侵害優先適用著作權法而受保護；因該知名度訴求之事實上依據係未經其授權重製DVD上 之表演，Jules Jordan Video, Inc. v. 144942 Canada Inc., 617 F.3d 1146, 1154 (9th Cir. 2010). 所以，原告訴求之重製及散布DVDs，其落入著作權之保護。詮釋其背後之理論，第九巡迴法院闡述，我們總結原告起訴主張盜用著作權並不應先適用，實際上每一利用著作權係侵害原創表演者之知名度。Laws v. Sony Music Entm’t, Inc., 448 F.3d 1134, 1145 (9th Cir. 2006).
