著作權法旨在調和大眾使用利益及著作權人之保護,為避免傾斜失準,著作 權法對於受保護之著作設下諸多要件,企圖衡平雙方利益。其中最具爭議者非原 創性此一要件莫屬,學者就此要件諸多著墨、司法實務爭訟上(例如侵權訴訟)之 焦點亦往往取決於原創性之有無,原被告砲火全開、爭執原創性此一概念。 本論文先從原創性之上位概念-思想表達區分理論談起,首先確立「表達」之範圍。接著自比較法觀察,以美國、日本、中國大陸之學說、實務為中心,思考外國法制度值得我國借鏡之處。再回歸本土,分析、探討我國學說對於原創性概念之看法。最後分從立法、學說、實務探討我國現況值得改進之處。
The Copyright Law seeks to strike a balance between guaranteeing the general public’s access to works and protecting the copyright owners’ interest. To avoid tipping of the precarious balance of interests, the Law sets various qualifying requirements that a work must meet to receive protection. Amongst these qualifications, the originality requirement unleashes the most heated debates. Much scholarly attention has been directed to this requirement while the presence (or the absence) of originality continues to be the dominating issue that dictates the outcome of legal proceedings such as copyright infringement litigations. In these circumstances, plaintiffs and defendants go all out to debate about the concept of originality. This thesis begins with a discussion of the idea-expression dichotomy, a concept from which the originality requirement emanates. The domain of “expression”is clearly demarcated. Since experiences in foreign countries always lend valuable lessons to legal development in Taiwan, this thesis adopts the comparative approach and studies foreign legal systems with special attention to relevant theories and practice in the United States, Japan, China and the United Kingdom. An analysis of the theoretical reflections on the originality requirement in Taiwan’s legal system ensues. The thesis ends with recommendations for improvements to the status quo in Taiwan from the legislative, theoretical and practical perspectives.