- 期刊
是壟斷智慧？還是創造財產？－從勞動財產權理論論智慧財產權擴張之趨勢
Is Intellectual Property a Property? Examining the Propertization Tendency of Intellectual Property from the Labor Theory Perspective
摘要
關於智慧財產之本質與定性，一直以來均呈現紛雜交錯的情況。其究竟是獎勵創作之法定獨占特權？或是與生俱來之自然權利？還是經由作者或發明家勞心勞力而應享有之財產？即便搜尋美國最高法院之判決亦無法有明確的答案。其中，「法律所賦予之有限獨占的獎勵」所衍生之功利主義性質（Utilitarianism）之「獎勵理論」以及由「作者或發明家付出勞力而獲得之財產」所衍生之洛克勞力理論( Labor Theory )下的「財產權理論」，即為當今學界相互爭辯之重心。從二十世紀末起，智財權之保護期間不斷延長、保護客體及態樣不斷擴張、以及保護強度不斷增加的趨勢看來，智慧財產之「財產化( propertization )」傾向，已是無可否認的事實。根據學者的觀察，經由美國法院、擁護財產權的學者、與美國國會之交互演繹，以及現今美國與諸多已開發國家之智慧財產制度的發展趨勢看來，智慧財產權的財產權化已產生了一個無可回復的後果－智慧財產權的擴張。本文之目的，在於簡述自然法下之洛克勞動財產權理論擴充至智慧財產權領域之趨勢，從「智慧財產權」此一名稱之來源及意涵為出發點，釋明其背後「財產權化」之動機與淵源，再簡介洛克勞動權理論之主張，及其如何運用於智慧財產權領域，並例證智慧財產權確實發生財產化之現象，導致該等權利不斷擴張之現況。當智慧財產被權利人等同與實體財產權看待時，權利人之權利將不斷擴張，而智慧財產權制度－尤其是著作權與專利制度－所欲維持之平衡，恐將傾斜而逐漸瓦解。
並列摘要
The essence and nature of the ”Intellectual Property” long has been a fiercely debated issue among the legal professions. Is ”Intellectual Property” a ”Property”? or is it a ”Limited Exclusive Right” granted by The Congress as provided by Article I Section 8 Clause 8 of the U.S. Constitution? The importance of this debate reflected by yet another question: To what extend or strength is the scope of ”Intellectual Property Rights” which can be exercised by or deserved for the rights' holders? In the eyes of the Property scholars, the answer is straightforward: Intellectual Property is just another kind of Property, or at less should be treated as Property, and hence the right to exclude in intellectual property is no different in principle from the right to exclude in physical property. And the ”right to exclude”, accordingly, means no one can engage any kind of use of their property-the copyrighted works, patented inventions, acquired goodwill, etc.-without permission or compensation. Theories adopted by Property scholars rely heavily on the Labor Theory originating in the writings of John Locke, which is widely thought to be especially applicable to the field of intellectual property. This article, therefore, will first introduce the basic concepts of the Labor Theory, it's originate and propositions, and how it be interpreted into the area of intellectual property. Followed by a short comment on the concerns about the consequence of the irreversible expansion of intellectual property rights, this article will provide a series of instances in four major reigns of intellectual property-copyright, patent, trademark, and the right to publicity-to illustrated the ”propertizaticn” tendency of intellectual property.