Today the advancement of the Internet has brought a great convenience in us, but in the meantime different various social problems and the criminal acts which go through an Internet appeared neck to neck. The wide range of the copyright infringement w...
다국어 입력
あ
ぁ
か
が
さ
ざ
た
だ
な
は
ば
ぱ
ま
や
ゃ
ら
わ
ゎ
ん
い
ぃ
き
ぎ
し
じ
ち
ぢ
に
ひ
び
ぴ
み
り
う
ぅ
く
ぐ
す
ず
つ
づ
っ
ぬ
ふ
ぶ
ぷ
む
ゆ
ゅ
る
え
ぇ
け
げ
せ
ぜ
て
で
ね
へ
べ
ぺ
め
れ
お
ぉ
こ
ご
そ
ぞ
と
ど
の
ほ
ぼ
ぽ
も
よ
ょ
ろ
を
ア
ァ
カ
サ
ザ
タ
ダ
ナ
ハ
バ
パ
マ
ヤ
ャ
ラ
ワ
ヮ
ン
イ
ィ
キ
ギ
シ
ジ
チ
ヂ
ニ
ヒ
ビ
ピ
ミ
リ
ウ
ゥ
ク
グ
ス
ズ
ツ
ヅ
ッ
ヌ
フ
ブ
プ
ム
ユ
ュ
ル
エ
ェ
ケ
ゲ
セ
ゼ
テ
デ
ヘ
ベ
ペ
メ
レ
オ
ォ
コ
ゴ
ソ
ゾ
ト
ド
ノ
ホ
ボ
ポ
モ
ヨ
ョ
ロ
ヲ
―
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
예시)
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
А
Б
В
Г
Д
Е
Ё
Ж
З
И
Й
К
Л
М
Н
О
П
Р
С
Т
У
Ф
Х
Ц
Ч
Ш
Щ
Ъ
Ы
Ь
Э
Ю
Я
а
б
в
г
д
е
ё
ж
з
и
й
к
л
м
н
о
п
р
с
т
у
ф
х
ц
ч
ш
щ
ъ
ы
ь
э
ю
я
′
″
℃
Å
￠
￡
￥
¤
℉
‰
＄
％
Ｆ
￦
㎕
㎖
㎗
ℓ
㎘
㏄
㎣
㎤
㎥
㎦
㎙
㎚
㎛
㎜
㎝
㎞
㎟
㎠
㎡
㎢
㏊
㎍
㎎
㎏
㏏
㎈
㎉
㏈
㎧
㎨
㎰
㎱
㎲
㎳
㎴
㎵
㎶
㎷
㎸
㎹
㎀
㎁
㎂
㎃
㎄
㎺
㎻
㎽
㎾
㎿
㎐
㎑
㎒
㎓
㎔
Ω
㏀
㏁
㎊
㎋
㎌
㏖
㏅
㎭
㎮
㎯
㏛
㎩
㎪
㎫
㎬
㏝
㏐
㏓
㏃
㏉
㏜
㏆
인터넷상 저작권침해에 대한 온라인서비스제공자의 형사책임 : 음악저작권침해를 중심으로 = OSP's criminal liability in case of copyright infringement through Internet
한글로보기https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T11989062
- 저자
-
발행사항
서울 : 경희대학교 대학원, 2010
- 학위논문사항
-
발행연도
2010
-
작성언어
한국어
- 주제어
-
DDC
340 판사항(22)
-
발행국(도시)
서울
-
형태사항
iii, 195 p. : 삽도 ; 26 cm
-
일반주기명
경희대학교 논문은 저작권에 의해 보호받습니다.
지도교수: 정영일
참고문헌 : p. 183-192 -
소장기관
- 경희대학교 국제캠퍼스 도서관
- 경희대학교 중앙도서관
- 국립중앙도서관
- 경희대학교 국제캠퍼스 도서관
-
0
상세조회 -
0
다운로드
인용문이 복사되었습니다.
부가정보
다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
Today the advancement of the Internet has brought a great convenience in us, but in the meantime different various social problems and the criminal acts which go through an Internet appeared neck to neck. The wide range of the copyright infringement which occurs through internet is also a representative type of such social problems, and with respect to a law against such copyright infringement through internet, the important subject of the legal responsibility is the online service provider who provides such internet service (OSP).
As OSP has the ability to prevent or restrict the various copyright infringement which occurs through the service operated by himself(herself), if OSP for the profit of him(her)self connives such copyright infringement, or, further, leads away and/or promotes such copyright infringement, civil and/or criminal responsibility must be as a matter of course recognized.
Hitherto OSP's legal responsibility is plentifully discussed in the field of the civil affair, and there has been deep discussion only about the certain type of service, that is, P2P service, but the type of online service becomes very variously, and research about criminal liability is necessarily at a point in carrying out in different terms from civil liability.
With respect to the music work, when the form of criminal liability according to OSP types is studied, first of all, the principal offender or joint principal offender of direct infringement of copyright may be constituted in case of Streaming Service providers, and the joint principal offender by feasance may be, in principle, constituted together with the users who commit direct infringement act in case of P2P services or Web hard service.
Then again, in case of the Internet Portal Service, it assumes that only an abetter(aid AND abet) by nonfeasance may be constituted in light of establishment goal or feature of the service.
Meantime, with respect to OSP's responsibilities, it seems that most opinions take the position which restricts the responsibility of the service provider under the proposition of a technical protection, however, in order to prevent indiscriminate lawsuit against the multiple users, and if ever to create the healthy internet environment which attaches importance to a copyright protection, it appears that it is necessary to put the increased responsibility fitted for the influence and technical power on the service provider.
In this regard, in order to solve the confusion in interpretation and the problems in the application of the law which are currently manifested, it is thought that the legislative solution is ultimately required. Namely, by newly furnishing the provisions of grounds for responsibility, separate duty assessment and penalty for OSP, the argument of attrition as to whether to punish OSP or the type of responsibility etc. must be avoided at the time of infringement of copyright, and on the other hand the active protection of copyright by OSP and the user protection thereby must be extracted.
As OSP has the ability to prevent or restrict the various copyright infringement which occurs through the service operated by himself(herself), if OSP for the profit of him(her)self connives such copyright infringement, or, further, leads away and/or promotes such copyright infringement, civil and/or criminal responsibility must be as a matter of course recognized.
Hitherto OSP's legal responsibility is plentifully discussed in the field of the civil affair, and there has been deep discussion only about the certain type of service, that is, P2P service, but the type of online service becomes very variously, and research about criminal liability is necessarily at a point in carrying out in different terms from civil liability.
With respect to the music work, when the form of criminal liability according to OSP types is studied, first of all, the principal offender or joint principal offender of direct infringement of copyright may be constituted in case of Streaming Service providers, and the joint principal offender by feasance may be, in principle, constituted together with the users who commit direct infringement act in case of P2P services or Web hard service.
Then again, in case of the Internet Portal Service, it assumes that only an abetter(aid AND abet) by nonfeasance may be constituted in light of establishment goal or feature of the service.
Meantime, with respect to OSP's responsibilities, it seems that most opinions take the position which restricts the responsibility of the service provider under the proposition of a technical protection, however, in order to prevent indiscriminate lawsuit against the multiple users, and if ever to create the healthy internet environment which attaches importance to a copyright protection, it appears that it is necessary to put the increased responsibility fitted for the influence and technical power on the service provider.
In this regard, in order to solve the confusion in interpretation and the problems in the application of the law which are currently manifested, it is thought that the legislative solution is ultimately required. Namely, by newly furnishing the provisions of grounds for responsibility, separate duty assessment and penalty for OSP, the argument of attrition as to whether to punish OSP or the type of responsibility etc. must be avoided at the time of infringement of copyright, and on the other hand the active protection of copyright by OSP and the user protection thereby must be extracted.
Today the advancement of the Internet has brought a great convenience in us, but in the meantime different various social problems and the criminal acts which go through an Internet appeared neck to neck. The wide range of the copyright infringement which occurs through internet is also a representative type of such social problems, and with respect to a law against such copyright infringement through internet, the important subject of the legal responsibility is the online service provider who provides such internet service (OSP).
As OSP has the ability to prevent or restrict the various copyright infringement which occurs through the service operated by himself(herself), if OSP for the profit of him(her)self connives such copyright infringement, or, further, leads away and/or promotes such copyright infringement, civil and/or criminal responsibility must be as a matter of course recognized.
Hitherto OSP's legal responsibility is plentifully discussed in the field of the civil affair, and there has been deep discussion only about the certain type of service, that is, P2P service, but the type of online service becomes very variously, and research about criminal liability is necessarily at a point in carrying out in different terms from civil liability.
With respect to the music work, when the form of criminal liability according to OSP types is studied, first of all, the principal offender or joint principal offender of direct infringement of copyright may be constituted in case of Streaming Service providers, and the joint principal offender by feasance may be, in principle, constituted together with the users who commit direct infringement act in case of P2P services or Web hard service.
Then again, in case of the Internet Portal Service, it assumes that only an abetter(aid AND abet) by nonfeasance may be constituted in light of establishment goal or feature of the service.
Meantime, with respect to OSP's responsibilities, it seems that most opinions take the position which restricts the responsibility of the service provider under the proposition of a technical protection, however, in order to prevent indiscriminate lawsuit against the multiple users, and if ever to create the healthy internet environment which attaches importance to a copyright protection, it appears that it is necessary to put the increased responsibility fitted for the influence and technical power on the service provider.
In this regard, in order to solve the confusion in interpretation and the problems in the application of the law which are currently manifested, it is thought that the legislative solution is ultimately required. Namely, by newly furnishing the provisions of grounds for responsibility, separate duty assessment and penalty for OSP, the argument of attrition as to whether to punish OSP or the type of responsibility etc. must be avoided at the time of infringement of copyright, and on the other hand the active protection of copyright by OSP and the user protection thereby must be extracted.
목차 (Table of Contents)
- 제1장 서 론 1
- 제1절 연구의 목적 1
- 제2절 온라인서비스제공자와 음악저작물의 개관 5
- Ⅰ. 온라인서비스제공자의 개념 5
- Ⅱ. 음악저작물의 개념 및 권리자 7
- 제1장 서 론 1
- 제1절 연구의 목적 1
- 제2절 온라인서비스제공자와 음악저작물의 개관 5
- Ⅰ. 온라인서비스제공자의 개념 5
- Ⅱ. 음악저작물의 개념 및 권리자 7
- Ⅲ. 음악저작물의 디지털화와 인터넷을 통한 유통 10
- 제3절 저작권침해에 대한 형사적 제재 11
- Ⅰ. 저작권법의 벌칙규정 11
- Ⅱ. 저작권침해영역에서의 민사책임과 형사책임의 관계 13
- 제4절 연구의 범위 및 방법 15
- 제2장 OSP 책임에 관한 전통적 논의 및 입법 18
- 제1절 OSP 책임문제의 등장 18
- Ⅰ. 인터넷을 통한 저작물복제의 확산과 OSP 책임문제의 등장 18
- Ⅱ. 온라인서비스제공자에 대한 책임추궁의 필요성 18
- 제2절 명예훼손에 대한 OSP의 책임론 20
- Ⅰ. 개요 20
- Ⅱ. 미국의 판례 및 입법 21
- Ⅲ. 우리나라의 판례 및 입법 22
- 제3절 OSP의 책임근거에 관한 기존 논의들 25
- Ⅰ. 서설 25
- Ⅱ. 미국 判例上의 책임이론 26
- Ⅲ. 우리나라의 관련규정 및 책임근거논의 28
- 제4절 각국의 입법례 40
- Ⅰ. 미국의 입법 40
- Ⅱ. 유럽연합(EU)의 입법 42
- Ⅲ. 독일의 입법 42
- Ⅳ. 일본의 입법 44
- 제3장 P2P서비스제공자의 刑事責任 46
- 제1절 P2P 서비스의 의의 46
- Ⅰ. P2P의 개념 및 중요성 46
- Ⅱ. P2P서비스의 분류 47
- 제2절 P2P에 대한 외국의 판결례 49
- Ⅰ. 미국 49
- Ⅱ. 일본 등 다른 국가 57
- 제3절 우리나라의 P2P서비스 관련판례 62
- Ⅰ. 서론 62
- Ⅱ. 소리바다에 대한 민사판결 63
- Ⅲ. 소리바다에 대한 형사판례 79
- 제4절 P2P서비스제공자의 형사책임 87
- Ⅰ. 문제의 제기 87
- Ⅱ. 형사책임의 인정여부 87
- Ⅲ. 책임의 형태 89
- 제4장 최근 문제되는 온라인서비스의 형사책임 93
- 제1절 웹하드 서비스 93
- Ⅰ. 웹하드서비스의 개요 93
- Ⅱ. 웹하드서비스에 대한 민사판결 96
- Ⅲ. 웹하드에 대한 형사판결 99
- Ⅳ. 웹하드서비스제공자의 형사책임 103
- 제2절 뮤프리 등 스트리밍서비스 107
- Ⅰ. 스트리밍서비스의 개요 및 초기의 판결들 107
- Ⅱ．뮤프리서비스의 개요 및 문제의 소재 113
- Ⅲ. 뮤프리에 대한 법원의 판결 116
- Ⅳ. 뮤프리 등 스트리밍 서비스의 형사책임 118
- 제3절 인터넷 포털서비스의 책임 121
- Ⅰ. 문제의 소재 121
- Ⅱ. 포털서비스에 대한 법적 쟁송 124
- Ⅲ. 포털서비스제공자의 형사책임 131
- 제5장 OSP의 형사책임에 대한 재검토 135
- 제1절 문제의 소재 및 침해되는 권리 135
- Ⅰ. 문제의 소재 135
- Ⅱ. 침해되는 권리 136
- 제2절 형사책임의 인정여부 및 면책규정의 의미 139
- Ⅰ. 형사책임의 인정여부 139
- Ⅱ. 저작권법상 면책규정의 적용 144
- 제3절 책임의 형태 150
- Ⅰ. 작위·부작위의 구별문제 151
- Ⅱ. 정범성의 인정문제 160
- Ⅲ. 서비스유형별 책임의 형태 168
- 제4절 개선방향 및 立法論 170
- Ⅰ. OSP 책임의 강화 필요성 170
- Ⅱ. 개선방향 및 입법론 173
- 제6장 결 론 180
- << 參考文獻 >> 183
- Abstract 193
분석정보
이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료
나만을 위한 추천자료
