著作權
著作權最新諮詢
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？
參加手做課程，店家擅用作品照片當廣告
被前公司吿“著作權法” 認為我在職期間公開公司行銷資源於網路
淘寶購買人像繪圖作為商用是否有著作權問題
打碼截圖評論是否有違法？
如果將他人手繪(電繪)畫作 重新設計成向量圖檔 是否侵犯原作
評論他人的言論是否違法？
未經他人同意將共同創作照片放於學校展覽
未經他人同意將共同創作照片放於學校展覽
收到保二偵查隊的著作權法侵權通知
關於使用古典樂作為作品內商用
盜圖非用於網拍
補習班函授出售給甲方 甲方之後的後續行為跟賣家有關嗎?
淘寶購買人像繪圖作為商用是否有著作權問題
拍攝影片時，拍攝到IG的使用畫面是否需得到IG的授權
如賣仿品被品牌方提告
模仿網路教學的作品並販售
請問蝦皮上有很多商家販售盜版軟體 有違法嗎
關於販售補習班正版講義
原創的插畫作品被公然侮辱是盜圖
智慧財產相關案例分享
蘇思鴻律師
▲蘇狀師談營業秘密法
淺談祖傳藥方的智財權保護 文/蘇思鴻律師 ▲各位是否知道世界上最貴的商標是什麼？ 答案是可口可樂。而可口可樂的配方屬於營業秘密，它的價值在世界上也是數一數二，可見智慧財產權的威力是何等強大，現在這個時代是屬於知識經濟的時代。 我們常在不管是藥房或是夜市，常會見到祖傳祕方這幾個字，例如在中藥房老闆常會拿出幾帖藥方，稱說這是其幾代前所留下專治某某病的祖傳秘方，或是在夜市賣仙草茶或綠豆湯的阿婆，稱說他的仙草茶或綠豆湯與他人的不同，因為她所賣的加入了祖傳秘方。暫且不管係宣傳花招或噱頭，我們現在聚焦於智慧財產權的討論。 就上述祖傳藥方而言，若你是該祖傳藥方的傳人，你會選擇受那一種智慧財產權的保護？首先，該藥方涉及那些智慧財產權？ 依我之見，此涉及專利權及營業秘密，至於要受那種智慧財產權的保護，端視權利人的選擇。 如果權利人選擇受專利權保護，首先要提出申請，同時要指明申請那一種專利。藥品屬於物的發明，應申請發明專利。若通過審查，則取得二十年排他的權利。若選擇受營業秘密保護，則無庸申請，而營業秘密則永久保護。(暫且不管藥物需取得許可方面的管制性法令)如果一個人透過藥物成分解析，得知該祖傳藥方的成分，進而做成口服藥在市面上銷售，此不侵害營業秘密，人透過科學之解析或還原工程去製造營業秘密所保護的標的，是被允許，此和專利不同，專利權人可排除他人製造其已取得專利權的發明、新型或設計。另外提醒一點，專利權和營業秘密是互斥的，只能選擇其一受保護。
▲蘇狀師談娛樂法(名模吉吉哈蒂案深度解析二)
New York-based O’Neil asserts that Hadid infringed his exclusive rights as the copyright holder of the photo “by reproducing and publicly displaying [it] on her Instagram story,” despite the fact that she “is not, and has never been, licensed or otherwise authorized to reproduce, publicly display, distribute and/or use the photograph.” In doing so, O’Neil claims that the 24-year old supermodel ran afoul of his exclusive right to display the image, and distribute copies of it to the public by sale or another form of transfer, such as licensing, among other things. As a result, she should be forced to pay “statutory damages up to $150,000 per work infringed for [her] willful infringement of the photograph,” he argues. 位在紐約的O’Neil 主張哈蒂的行為侵害其為攝影著作之著作人專有重製及公開展示之著作財產權。事實是她未取得授權去重製、公開展示、散布或利用該照片。 O’Neil起訴主張這位24歲的超模，不管是藉由銷售或是另外諸如授權的方式去移轉，侵害其公開展示及散布之排他權。因此，她須就其惡意侵害之每一張照片給付最高至15萬元之法定賠償金。
▲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. 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.
▲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(商標爭議篇)
Central Manufacturing, Inc. v. Brett et al. 492 F. 3d 876 (7th Cir. 2007) Central Manufacturing, Inc. (“Central”), the registrar of the “Stealth” trademark for baseballs, brought a Lanham Act and state law infringement action against Brett Brothers Sports (“Brett Bros.”), a baseball bat manufacturer that produced a bat of the same name. Brett Bros. is owned in part by Baseball Hall of Famer George Brett. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois granted summary judgment which Central subsequently appealed. The issues on appeal are whether the evidence presented by Central was sufficient for a finding of infringement, whether the district court abused its discretion by ordering cancellation of the registration, and whether the granting of attorney’s fees to Brett Bros. was warranted. The district court’s judgment was affirmed. Central製造公司是有關棒球相關製品“Stealth”商標之所有人，其對Brett Brothers Sports公司，該公司係由棒球名人堂成員George Brett部分持股，提起聯邦商標和州法商標侵權訴訟。美國伊利諾州北區地方法院准予即決判決，Central製造公司隨後提起上訴，上訴的爭點在於，Central所提呈的證據是否足以認定對造侵權，法院是否濫用裁量為撤銷商標註冊令，是否判決應給付Brett Brothers律師費係有正當理由，二審維持一審之判決。 An action for trademark infringement can only succeed if the plaintiff owns the mark. Registration provides prima facie evidence of ownership that can be rebutted by competent evidence. More importantly, the mark must be used in commerce to ensure that entrepreneurs do not reserve brand names, making their competitors’ products more costly. If a court decision raises doubts about the validity of a trademark registration, a court may cancel the mark, so long as there is no abuse of discretion. Attorney’s fees and other costs may be awarded to the prevailing party “in exceptional circumstances.” 一個商標侵權訴訟，只能在原告擁有該商標時勝訴。商標註冊只是證明商標所有權之初步表面證證，其是可被有利的證據所推翻。更重要的是，商標需確保企業無保留於商業上使用該品牌名稱，使其競爭對手之產品更昂貴。假如法院對商標註冊之有效性生疑。只要無濫用其裁量權，法院可撤銷該商標註冊。在特別的情狀下，律師費及其他費用可判賠給勝訴之一造。 In 1984, Central’s owner and sole shareholder, Leo Stoller registered the Stealth mark for a variety of sporting goods and registered the mark for baseball bats in 2001. Brett Bros. sold its first Stealth bat in 1999 and has sold 25,000 since.Stoller has licensed the mark and sent various cease-and-desist letters to business such as Kmart, Panasonic and even the stealth bomber.Similarly, Stoller sent a letter to Brett Bros. demanding $100,000. Brett Bros. argued that the mark was never used in commerce and requested that Stoller produce evidence to the contrary. The district court found that no valid evidence was produced that the mark was ever used in commerce and the court of appeals agreed. The court of appeals also found that there was no abuse of discretion in cancelling the mark as the registrant’s asserted rights to the mark were invalid.Finally, the court of appeals determined that under the Lanham Act there was no clear error in awarding attorney’s fees as Central’s actions in bringing the case were oppressive. The court of appeals affirmed the district court’s finding that Central produced no evidence of trademark infringement in that no documents were filed, that Stoller mislead the court with his testimony, and that his documents made a mockery of the proceeding. Therefore, the cancellation of the mark and the grant of attorney’s fees were justified. 1984年Central公司的所有人兼唯一股東Leo Stoller將Stealth標記申請註冊於運動用品，同時於2001年將該標記申請商標註冊於棒球棒。 Brette Bros於1999年售出印有Stealth第一枝棒球棒，從那時起共賣出25,000枝。Stoller有將該商標予以授權，同時發出警告信予諸如像Kmart, Panasonic ，甚至像stealth bomber等廠商。同樣地，Stoller對Brette Bros.發出警告函，要求100,000的賠償金。Brette Bros爭執該標記從未用於商業使用，要求Stoller提出證據。地方法院判決無任何有效證據可證該標記曾用於商業，上訴審亦同此見解。終審法院亦認定撤銷商標註冊無濫用裁量，商標權人主張就該標記有商標權，是無效的。最終，終審法院認定Central's提起本件訴訟判予律師費係苛刻的，在藍能法下並無明顯錯誤。 終審法院確認地院判決Central公司提不出商標侵害之證據，而Stoller用其證詞誤導法院，同時其文件對訴訟程序無助。是故，撤銷該商標及判賠律師費予以判決確定。
