著作权权属、侵权纠纷案例汇编 | 法宝双语案例

一、余征等与琼瑶侵害著作权纠纷上诉案

【裁判要旨】

权利人的作品通过刊登、展览、广播、表演、放映等方式公开，也可视为将作品进行了发表，被诉侵权人依据社会通常情况具有获知权利人作品的机会和可能，可以被推定为接触。被诉侵权作品在情节选择、结构安排、情节推进等设置上与权利人的作品具有一定数量、比例的相似，可以认定为构成实质性相似；即使其在被诉侵权作品中所占比例不大，但足以使受众感知到来源于特定作品时，也可以认定为构成实质性相似。

[Judgment Abstract] 

When a work is disclosed through such means as publication, exhibition, broadcasting, performance and screening, the right holder thereof may be deemed to have had the work released to the public, and the alleged infringer thereof should thus have had the opportunity to acquaint himself with the work in general, or to say, the infringer’s exposure to or contact with the work should have occurred. If the alleged infringing work includes expressions that resemble the works of the copyright holder in a notable number or proportion from aspects such as plot, structure, and progress, substantial similarity should be determined on this basis; substantial similarity should also be determined even if such duplication appears in only a small portion in the allegedly infringing work, but to such an extent that the relevant public feels as though they originate from the other work.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.8318801

CCTV Animation Co., Ltd v. Hangzhou Datouerzi Cultural Development Co., Ltd, et al (case regarding dispute over copyright infringement)

【裁判摘要】

在已有作品的基础上经过创造性的劳动而派生出来的作品即为演绎作品，经过改编、翻译、注释、整理的演绎作品的著作权应当归改编、翻译、注释、整理人所有。但是，由于演绎作品是以原作品为基础，对原作品具有依赖性，所以演绎作者对演绎作品享有的著作权，并不是完整的著作权，不能独立地行使。换而言之，在使用演绎作品时应当同时取得演绎作品的著作权人和原作品的著作权人的双重同意并支付一定的报酬。

[Judgment Abstract]

Any works adapted on the basis of existing works through creative works should be classified as derivative works. The copyright of the works derived through adaptation, translation, annotation, and redaction of original works should remain with the party in charge of adaptation, translation, annotation, and redaction. Nevertheless, in view that derivative works are created on the basis of original works and thus dependent on them, the author thereof doesn't enjoy intact copyright over the works, and thus shall not independently exercise the copyright. In other words, when using a derivative work, one should get authorization from both the copyright owner of original work and the copyright owner of derivative work, and pay remunerations accordingly.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.9776438

[CLI Code]CLI.C. 9776438 (EN)

三、深圳市声影网络科技有限公司诉无锡欢唱娱乐有限公司音乐房子分公司侵害著作权纠纷案

Shenzhen Shengying Network Technology Co., Ltd. v. Music House Branch of Wuxi Huanchang Entertainment Co., Ltd. (case regarding dispute over infringement upon copyright)

【裁判要旨】

根据相关法律规定，卡拉OK经营者与著作权集体管理组织订立著作权或者与著作权有关的权利许可使用合同并向管理组织支付使用费用的，应当认定卡拉OK经营者对歌曲的著作权已经尽到注意义务。因曲库中歌曲数量巨大，不能要求卡拉OK经营者对每一首歌曲尽到注意义务。在实践中，卡拉OK经营者对其中一首歌曲造成侵权，也应认定对侵权行为的发生没有主观过错，无需承担赔偿责任。

[Judgment Abstract]

According to the provisions of relevant laws, where a karaoke operator concludes a contract for the licensing of copyright or copyright-related rights with a collective copyright management organization and pays royalties to it, it should be determined that the operator has fulfilled its duty of care to the copyright of the music. Since there are a large number of songs in the music library, it makes no sense to require the karaoke operator to fulfill his duty of care with respect to every song. In practice, even if the karaoke operator infringes upon the copyright of any song, it should be determined that the operator does not commit subjective fault for such infringement, and therefore should be exempt from compensatory liability.

【法宝引证码】CLI.C.10480382

[CLI Code] CLI.C.10480382 (EN)