網路相關著作權刑罰妥適性之研究

Abstract

網路科技之發展，對數位化著作產生前所未有之衝擊，亦使著作權人面臨著作權法史上最嚴峻之考驗。針對此革命性之科技，國內外之著作權人，莫不鼓足全力，以各種可能方式抵抗，以力保其經濟利潤不被網路科技所侵吞。 其中，由著作權修法之歷史觀之，著作權人屢屢於面臨新科技挑戰時，即動用資源遊說國會立法，或對觸法者提起訴訟，以法律作為捍衛其權利之主要手段。美國於1997年通過No Electronic Theft Act (NET)及1998年之Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA)，均係針對網路時代下著作權之立法。其中，RIAA更於2003年間，對於網路之一般使用者，直接提起侵害著作權之訴訟，更使此議題陷入白熱化。我國亦未在此網路著作權議題中缺席，早從成大之MP3事件到ezPeer及Kuro等P2P侵權，均引起學界及社會之重視。 以美國著作權之刑事責任為例，其歷史雖可追溯至一百多年前，但對於網路上之著作權案件訴諸刑事處罰，卻引起正反兩方之爭論。支持者認為倘不加重刑罰之處罰，將無法嚇阻網路成為侵害著作權之天堂。反對者則認為著作權侵害之本質不具有刑罰之應刑罰性及需刑罰性，更將對網路之發展產生不必要之限制。 本文延續此議題，除對於過去國內外文獻進行整理與評析外，更進一步以法院判決實證統計之方法，觀察並評估現行實務上著作權刑事案件運作之妥適性，除指出現行實務運作上之弊端外，並一一試圖提供建議與解決之道。本文希望能藉此觀點切入著作權侵害刑罰化之問題，認為現今實務上運作之諸多不當，多可歸因於立法先天上之問題，而應以修法為優先之解決方法。倘以刑法之原理原則修法，仍無法解決目前司法實務上之問題時，則可反證該種著作權侵害並不適宜訴諸刑罰，此時立法者即應慎重考慮，對該行為進行除罪化。

With the emergence of broadband internet and file-sharing technology, the record industry is facing the biggest challenge in the history of copyright. P2P software such as KaZaa, Grokster, and BitTorrent provides internet users free access to copyrighted works on a massive scale. While the social norm of file sharing is in chaos, copyright owners sought numerous ways to deter copyright infringement. In the U.S., through lobbying the Congress, the No Electronic Theft Act and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act became the record industry’s solution to the problem. In 2003, RIAA began waves of lawsuits against individuals sharing files on the internet. This move not only attracted public attention, but also spurred intensive debates over the issue of overcriminalization. Scholars argue that the copyright law has gone too far, tipping the constitutional balance formulated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 8. This crisis is not only domestic, the internet has become a heaven for free copyrighted works around the globe, including Taiwan. In 2002 and 2003, the IFPI brought criminal suits against the local online music-sharing sites ezPeer and Kuro, alleging them for violating the vicarious and contributory liabilities of copyright infringement. This thesis aims at following up on the issue, basing the arguments on empirical evidences drawn from descriptive statistics. By pointing out the inconsistency between the copyright law and the criminal theory that causes injustice common in judicial practice, this thesis argues that if the current copyright statues can’t be revised to serve the intended goals of criminalization, it would be wiser to consider other remedial solutions.