Property Rights

在德国民法中，尚未有专门关于各种所有权(例如有形财产、著作权或专利法)中是否固有统一模式这一根本问题的全面著作。在研究和教育中，这样的模式被认为是存在的，至少是隐含的。然而，由于有形财产、各种知识产权和人格权是在完全不同的条件下发展起来的，这种假设绝不是不言而喻的，这种模型的描述需要一定程度的进一步发展。为了区分异同，本文采用了一种考虑这些权利的功能和背后的理论的方法。其结果是一个解释产权基本结构和功能的综合模型。这与传统财产权向数字时代的转移有关，也就是与数据和信息权利问题有关，这一问题已经讨论了好几年。后者实际上是拟议模式的关键：从作为财产权的逻辑前提的“权利标准”的起源开始，前半部分工作的重点是法律对象和处分对象(“Verfüwarggsobjekte”)。本课程将所有知识产权解释为“信息决定权”。在知识产权法中，这不仅允许脱离不那么精确的“知识产权”概念，因为“知识产权”指的是数字胶片和图像文件或软件复制品等信息产品，很少有明确的定义。建议将这些商品理解为理想商品的信息表示，通过显示现有产权在多大程度上将哪些层次和类型的信息分配给有资格的人，同时允许直接但最小限度地与数据所有权问题联系在一起。研究的后半部分致力于汇集围绕物权的各种、有时是模糊的概念。在这里，知识产权与物权法的教条相联系。在这方面，问题和概念在多大程度上重合以及在哪里存在主要差异也是不确定的。这一步是一个全面模型的核心，因为这些问题与法律对象的理论紧密交织在一起。最后，这些发现与许可证的结构结合在一起，这也是教条式的、只进行模糊调查的。大量的例子确保了工作始终与实际问题联系在一起。这不仅有助于理解，而且有助于对各种结果进行系统控制和核查。

In German civil law, there has not yet been a comprehensive work specifically on the fundamental question of whether a uniform model is inherent in the various proprietary rights (e.g. tangible property, copyright or patent law). In research and education such a model is, at least implicitly, assumed to exist. However, since tangible property, the various IP rights and personality rights have developed under completely different conditions, this assumption is by no means self-evident and the depiction of such a model requires a certain degree of further development.In order to draw the line between similarities and differences, the work uses an approach that takes into account the functions of these rights and the theories underlying them. The result is a comprehensive model that explains the basic structure and functioning of property rights. This is linked to the transfer of traditional property rights into the digital age, i.e. to the question of rights in data and information, which has been intensively discussed for several years. The latter are in fact the linchpin of the proposed model:Starting with the genesis of the “Rechtsgegenstand” as the logical precondition for property rights, the focus of the first half of the work is on objects of law and objects of disposal (“Verfügungsobjekte”). All IP rights are explained in this course as "information-determining rights". In IP law, this not only allows a detachment from the less precise notion of "intellectual property", whose reference to information products such as digital film and image files or software copies is rarely clearly defined. The proposed understanding of these goods as informational representations of an ideal good allows at the same time a direct but minimally invasive connection to questions of data ownership by showing to what extent the existing property rights assign which layers and types of information to the entitled persons.The second half of the study is devoted to bringing together the various, sometimes fuzzy, concepts surrounding rights in rem. Here the connection of IP rights to the dogmatics of property law is carried out. In this respect, too, there is uncertainty as to the extent to which the problems and concepts coincide and where principal differences exist. This step is central to a comprehensive model, since these problems are closely intertwined with the doctrine of the objects of law.Finally, these findings are combined with the structure of licenses, which is also dogmatically only vaguely investigated.Numerous examples ensure that the work is constantly linked to practical problems. This serves not only for comprehensibility but also for systematic control and verifiability of the various results.