商业化人格权探析
|
摘要
人格权异化是指将人格要素上的财产利益纳入人格权的权能之中,这种观点无论是在学术界,还是在司法实践中,都存在着一定争议。将人格要素之上的财产利益剔除出人格权的保护范围,并将其作为一种独立于人格利益的财产利益加以保护,不仅能够纯化人格权概念,明确商业利用中人格符号的财产性质,而且更有利于人格权概念的属性定位。
The alienation of personality rights refers to incorporating property interests in factors of personality into the power of personal rights. However, this view is facing enormous challenges in both theoretical research and judicial practice. This paper advices to exclude property interests in personality factors from the scope of protection of personal rights and claims to protect the former independently from the later. This could purify both the concept of personal rights and the property nature of personal symbols in the commercial use. It also helps to position the attributions of the concept of personal rights.
The alienation of personality rights refers to incorporating property interests in factors of personality into the power of personal rights. However, this view is facing enormous challenges in both theoretical research and judicial practice. This paper advices to exclude property interests in personality factors from the scope of protection of personal rights and claims to protect the former independently from the later. This could purify both the concept of personal rights and the property nature of personal symbols in the commercial use. It also helps to position the attributions of the concept of personal rights.
引文
[1] 王泽鉴.人格权法[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2013.
[2] 张善斌.人格要素商业化利用的规制模式选择及制度构建[J].江汉论坛,2015(2):126-132.
[3] 陈龙江.人格标志上经济利益的法律保护理由之辨——学说商榷与正确思路[J].河南省政法管理干部学院学报,2011(3):88-95.
[4] 沈建峰.一般人格权财产性内容的承认、论证及其限度———基于对德国理论和实践的考察[J].比较法研究,2013(2):48-60.
[5] 黎桦.民法典编纂中的财产性人格权研究[J].政治与法律,2017(8):12-19.
[6] 王坤.人格符号财产权制度的建构及其法律意义[J].浙江社会科学,2013(11):69-75.
[7] 亚里士多德.范畴篇·解释篇[M].方书春,译.北京:商务印书馆,1959.
[8] 王坤.作品概念的科学建构及其在著作权法上的意义[J].知识产权,2010(6):82-88.
[9] DANNEMANN G.The German Law of Unjustified Enrichment and Restitution[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2009.
[10] 梅迪库斯.德国债法分论[M].杜景林,卢谌,译.北京:法律出版社,2007.
[11] 王泽鉴.不当得利[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2009.
[12] 王辉.论侵害人格权之获益返还——兼论《侵权责任法》第20条的适用[J].广西政法管理干部学院学报,2012(5):91-95.
[2] 张善斌.人格要素商业化利用的规制模式选择及制度构建[J].江汉论坛,2015(2):126-132.
[3] 陈龙江.人格标志上经济利益的法律保护理由之辨——学说商榷与正确思路[J].河南省政法管理干部学院学报,2011(3):88-95.
[4] 沈建峰.一般人格权财产性内容的承认、论证及其限度———基于对德国理论和实践的考察[J].比较法研究,2013(2):48-60.
[5] 黎桦.民法典编纂中的财产性人格权研究[J].政治与法律,2017(8):12-19.
[6] 王坤.人格符号财产权制度的建构及其法律意义[J].浙江社会科学,2013(11):69-75.
[7] 亚里士多德.范畴篇·解释篇[M].方书春,译.北京:商务印书馆,1959.
[8] 王坤.作品概念的科学建构及其在著作权法上的意义[J].知识产权,2010(6):82-88.
[9] DANNEMANN G.The German Law of Unjustified Enrichment and Restitution[M].New York:Oxford University Press,2009.
[10] 梅迪库斯.德国债法分论[M].杜景林,卢谌,译.北京:法律出版社,2007.
[11] 王泽鉴.不当得利[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2009.
[12] 王辉.论侵害人格权之获益返还——兼论《侵权责任法》第20条的适用[J].广西政法管理干部学院学报,2012(5):91-95.