权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

The Fundamental Research of Intellectual Property Law & Virtual World" in the Internet

知识产权法基础研究

基本信息

批准号：
21730102
负责人：
HIRASHIMA Ryuta
金额：
$ 2.08万
依托单位：
University of Tsukuba
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B)
财政年份：
2009
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
2009 至 2010
项目状态：
已结题

项目摘要

The main purpose of this research plan is to research and explore legal protection for the "Virtual World"("Metabase"), that is rapidly generated in the Internet. This research especially focuses on three points ; that is 1) How could be "Avatar" in the "Virtual World" protected under current intellectual property law system?, 2) Could trademark law and unfair competition law and design law afford to provide enough protection to "Trademarks","Design" in the "Virtual World"? 3)How legal liability of the "providers of Virtual World" should be delined? The abstract of this research's conclusion is below (corresponds to the above three points); 1)the legal doctrine of publicity could provide "Avatar" in some aspects, but we could not expect full protection for "Avatar". 2)Current trademark law and unfair competition law might possibly work for protecting "Virtual Trademark" etc., but we should discern some theoretical problems to be solved being remained. 3)Legal liability of the "providers of Virtual World" is relevant to so- called "secondary liability of IPRs". However, legal doctrine of secondary liability of copyright and trademark right in Japan makes much discussion in multi-aspects now. So, it's very difficult to acquire clear conclusion about this point, but, it seems the "providers of Virtual World" would be accused of copyright infringement liability in some circumstances under current case law.

本研究计划的主要目的是研究和探讨在互联网上迅速产生的“虚拟世界”（“元数据库”）的法律保护。本研究特别着重于三点；即1)“虚拟世界”中的“阿凡达”如何在现行知识产权法律制度下受到保护？2)《商标法》、《不正当竞争法》、《外观设计法》是否能为“虚拟世界”中的“商标”、“外观设计”提供足够的保护？3)如何界定“虚拟世界提供者”的法律责任？本研究结论摘要如下（对应以上三点）；1)公共性的法律原则在某些方面可以为《阿凡达》提供保障，但不能指望对《阿凡达》给予充分的保护。2)现行的商标法和反不正当竞争法可能对“虚拟商标”等进行保护，但我们应该看到一些尚待解决的理论问题。3)“虚拟世界提供者”的法律责任涉及所谓的“知识产权二次责任”。然而，目前日本对著作权、商标权的次要责任法律学说进行了多方面的探讨。因此，在这一点上很难得出明确的结论，但是，在现行判例法的某些情况下，“虚拟世界的提供者”似乎会被指控侵犯版权。