民國九十年刪除著作權審議及調解委員會事前費率審議制之後,對於集體管理團體訂定使用報酬率之爭議僅提供利用人向智慧財產局提起審議之方式,當事人如果不服智慧財產局之決定則提起行政訴訟,但是商業利用人有使用著作之迫切性和必要性,此方式緩不濟急。參考美國權利金委員會以及英國著作權法庭之功能,本文建議我國著作權審議及調解委員會應具有決定使用報酬率之權能,當事人如調解失敗,以強制仲裁之方式處理使用報酬率之爭議。本文認為採取強制仲裁之手段才具有爭議之解決力,且仲裁制度程序迅速有效率,又現行之商業運作,對於仲裁並不陌生,此亦是商業紛爭常用之解決方式之一,故政府應當勇敢立法,使著作權審議及調解委員會具有使用報酬率之爭議解決功能,並亦應加強審議委員會之專業性,足以適任處理費率等著作權之爭議。
Under current Taiwanese copyright regime, royalty rates are first set by collecting societies. Disagreements on tariffs are referred to the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), which will in consultation with the Copyright Review and Mediation Committees, IPO decide the case. The decision of the IPO is not final. The dissatisfied party will be able to resort to the judicial system.The operation of this mechanism is characterized by inconvenience and inefficiency for both right holders and users. It is the finding of this study that the Copyright Royalty Board in USA and the Copyright Tribunal in UK, both are equipped with the authority to make decision on copyright tariffs, and are conducive to the development of healthy copyright ecosystem. This study therefore recommends that the Copyright Review and Mediation Committees be entitled to make decision on copyright royalties and to function as a compulsory/mandatory arbitration mechanism