- 學位論文
電子遊戲的著作權保護範圍與侵權判斷
The Scope of Copyright Protection and the Copyright Infringement of Video Games
摘要
電子遊戲產業蓬勃發展、競爭激烈，同時也存在許多侵權的誘因，若放任不管，可能使辛苦投入創新的遊戲開發商血本無歸。我國有許多遊戲開發公司，也是世界上重要的遊戲市場，因此法院勢必得面對電子遊戲的侵權訴訟。 在侵權訴訟中有兩個重要因素會影響電子遊戲的著作權保護範圍及侵權判斷結果。其一，是作品類型認定；蓋著作類型牽涉電子遊戲作品的原創性認定，也與著作權人的權利行使息息相關。其二，是思想與表達二分原則的運用，蓋思想不受著作權法保護，因此如何釐清電子遊戲作品中的思想部分極為重要議題；此外亦須謹慎對待合併原則、必要場景原則的運用。過大保護範圍會妨礙其他競爭者的創作自由，但若保護不足會對開發者造成傷害。 本文研究發現，由於相關案例數量較少，發展尚未成熟，我國法院目前在電子遊戲侵權訴訟中所採用的侵權判斷方法存在許多缺失。過度強調作品類型認定，僅提供將電子遊戲切割為多個著作（如：語文著作、美術著作）進行侵權比對的做法，導致割裂的原創性判斷及割裂的權利行使。此外，粗糙的思想與表達二分原則運用也有待加強。 鑒於美國與中國著作權法與我國有諸多共通之處，其法院在電子遊戲侵權訴訟中的做法值得參考。參酌美國、中國法院處理模式之後，本文以為我國法院應更積極在案例中將電子遊戲整體視為一個作品，並更仔細釐清電子遊戲作品中各個遊戲元素的性質，而非一概將遊戲規則視為思想。 承前，電子遊戲侵權訴訟依被告侵權態樣又可分為三類。本文以為，在「整體遊戲相似」的案例中，我國法院整體將電子遊戲當作一個作品，在綜合比較原被告遊戲的各遊戲元素後，決定是否構成實質近似；在「遊戲規則相似」的案例中，我國法院除了須將電子遊戲整體當作一個作品外，應視遊戲規則的性質於個案中釐清思想與表達的界線；在「部分遊戲元素利用」的案例中，法院亦得於必要時在整個遊戲作品的脈絡下，判斷個別遊戲元素的創作性。 綜合前述，不論在何種類型的侵權案例中，法院都應該更加積極將電子遊戲整體視為一個作品，方能給予完整的著作權保護。
並列摘要
The video game industry is experiencing robust growth, but it also faces challenges, particularly the rising instances of copyright infringement. To illustrate, inadequate protection under copyright law could pose significant threats to video game developers who invest substantial efforts in creating innovative games, resulting in huge financial losses. It is inevitable for Taiwanese courts to address copyright infringement lawsuits against video games, since there are numerous video game developers in Taiwan, and Taiwan is one of the major mobile game markets in the world. In copyright infringement litigation regarding video games, two important issues will affect the scope of copyright protection and the outcomes of the lawsuits. The first is which categories of work video games fall into. The answer to this question involves how to judge the originality of video games, and is also closely related to the exercise of the copyright holder’s right. The second is the application of the idea-expression dichotomy principle. Since ideas are not protected under copyright law, clarifying the scope of ideas in video games becomes extremely important. Moreover, the application of merger doctrine and scenes a faire principle also requires careful discretion. Overall, insufficient protection for video games will cause harm to developers, while excessive protection may hinder competition in the video game industry. This essay finds that there are many deficiencies in the methods of determining copyright infringement of video games adopted by Taiwanese courts. For instance, overemphasizing the categorizing of work results in a practice that merely slices a video game into multiple works (e.g., literary works, artistic works) when conducting the comparison. This approach leads to fragmented assessments of originality and fragmented exercise of rights. Furthermore, the rough application of idea-expression dichotomy in cases should also be enhanced. Given the shared commonalities of copyright law among the U.S., China, and Taiwan, the courts’ practice of these countries in copyright infringement cases concerning video games is worthy of reference. Taking inspiration from the approaches of U.S. and Chinese courts, this essay suggests that Taiwanese courts should proactively consider each video game as a whole a “work” under copyright law in litigation. It is also suggested that Taiwanese courts should meticulously examine the nature of various game elements, rather than treating all game rules as unprotected ideas. Besides, this essay divides video game infringement lawsuits into three categories based on the defendant’s infringement pattern and makes the following findings. First, in cases where the allegation is "overall game copying," it is recommended that Taiwanese courts treat each of the plaintiffs’ video games as a unified work. And then, after comprehensively comparing the various elements of the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s game, the court can then determine whether there is substantial similarity. Second, in "game rules copying," the court should consider the plaintiff’s video game as a unified work and carefully examine the nature of the game rules, clarifying the boundary between ideas and expression. Third, in cases of "specific game elements copying," the court may, when necessary, assess the originality of game elements within the context of the entire video game. In sum, to provide complete copyright protection for video games, the Taiwanese courts should consider each video game as “a work” under copyright law in litigation.