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

本研究计划的主要目的是研究和探索对互联网上迅速产生的虚拟世界(元数据库)的法律保护。本研究特别关注三点：1)虚拟世界中的“阿凡达”如何在现有的知识产权法律制度下得到保护？2)商标法、不正当竞争法和外观设计法能否为“虚拟世界”中的“商标”、“外观设计”提供足够的保护？3)“虚拟世界提供者”的法律责任应如何界定？本研究的结论提要如下(对应于上述三点)：1)公示的法律原则可以在某些方面提供阿凡达，但我们不能期待对阿凡达的全面保护。2)现行商标法和反不正当竞争法在保护“虚拟商标”等方面有可能发挥作用，但也存在一些理论问题有待解决。3)“虚拟世界提供者”的法律责任与所谓的“知识产权次级责任”有关。然而，目前日本关于著作权和商标权次要责任的法理学说却从多个方面展开讨论。因此，这一点很难得出明确的结论，但在目前的判例法下，似乎在某些情况下，虚拟世界的提供者将被指控承担著作权侵权责任。

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.