RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

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.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      캐릭터 저작물의 표절 여부- 마징가와 태권 V를 중심으로 - = Plagiarism or not of Work of Character- focusing on Mazinger and Taekwon V -

      한글로보기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Taekwon V, which emerged in 1976, has been known to present as the Korean representative character. However Taekwon V is not free from the suspicion that it plagiarized Mazinger, which is the Japanese representative robot character. Even though the sequel to Taekwon V has not emerged since 1990, local governments and the private sectors have continued to forge the big-sized sculptures imitating the shape of Taekwon V. Therefore the legal analysis to decide whether Taekwon V plagiarized Mazinger or not is necessary regardless of Korean people’s general sentiments towards Taekwon V.
      Taekwon V and Mazinger are all the robot characters in the cinematographic works. Although Copyright Act basically protects the cinematographic works by giving them the copyright, whether the individual characters in the cinematographic are protected by the Copyright Act or not has been arguably discussed. It is necessary to review whether Taekwon V and Mazinger are individually protected as the character work and therefore protected as the Copyright Act.
      If characters are granted the copyright works, the similarity of the tow robot characters seriously needs to be discussed. If the two robot characters are substantially alike, Taekwon V, which emerged later in time, possibly copied the Mazinger, the precedent, and therefore infringed the copyright of the Mazinger. Among many theories to judge the substantial similarity, the overall approach and the analytic approach are two main theories. The Supreme Court reviewed the substantial similarity by adopting the analytic approach in a game character case.
      Even though a lower court judged that Taekwon V and Mazinger are not similar because they are distinctly different in terms of the exterior, and individuality and features. This article made a conclusion on the substantial similarity between the two characters by analyzing them in a detailed and specific manner.
      번역하기

      Taekwon V, which emerged in 1976, has been known to present as the Korean representative character. However Taekwon V is not free from the suspicion that it plagiarized Mazinger, which is the Japanese representative robot character. Even though the se...

      Taekwon V, which emerged in 1976, has been known to present as the Korean representative character. However Taekwon V is not free from the suspicion that it plagiarized Mazinger, which is the Japanese representative robot character. Even though the sequel to Taekwon V has not emerged since 1990, local governments and the private sectors have continued to forge the big-sized sculptures imitating the shape of Taekwon V. Therefore the legal analysis to decide whether Taekwon V plagiarized Mazinger or not is necessary regardless of Korean people’s general sentiments towards Taekwon V.
      Taekwon V and Mazinger are all the robot characters in the cinematographic works. Although Copyright Act basically protects the cinematographic works by giving them the copyright, whether the individual characters in the cinematographic are protected by the Copyright Act or not has been arguably discussed. It is necessary to review whether Taekwon V and Mazinger are individually protected as the character work and therefore protected as the Copyright Act.
      If characters are granted the copyright works, the similarity of the tow robot characters seriously needs to be discussed. If the two robot characters are substantially alike, Taekwon V, which emerged later in time, possibly copied the Mazinger, the precedent, and therefore infringed the copyright of the Mazinger. Among many theories to judge the substantial similarity, the overall approach and the analytic approach are two main theories. The Supreme Court reviewed the substantial similarity by adopting the analytic approach in a game character case.
      Even though a lower court judged that Taekwon V and Mazinger are not similar because they are distinctly different in terms of the exterior, and individuality and features. This article made a conclusion on the substantial similarity between the two characters by analyzing them in a detailed and specific manner.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 윤경, "캐릭터의 저작물성" 한국저작권위원회 (가을) : 2005

      2 전원열, "캐릭터의 법적 보호-저작권법을 중심으로" 법원도서관 30 : 1999

      3 박성호, "캐릭터 상품화의 법적 보호" 현암사 2006

      4 정상조, "지적재산권법" 홍문사 [전국] 2011

      5 윤선희, "저작권법개설" 세창출판사 2022

      6 정진근, "저작권법 요론" 청목출판사 2011

      7 최경수, "저작권법 개론" 한올아카데미 2010

      8 오승종, "저작권법" 박영사 2020

      9 박성호, "저작권법" 박영사 2017

      10 이해완, "저작권법" 박영사 2019

      1 윤경, "캐릭터의 저작물성" 한국저작권위원회 (가을) : 2005

      2 전원열, "캐릭터의 법적 보호-저작권법을 중심으로" 법원도서관 30 : 1999

      3 박성호, "캐릭터 상품화의 법적 보호" 현암사 2006

      4 정상조, "지적재산권법" 홍문사 [전국] 2011

      5 윤선희, "저작권법개설" 세창출판사 2022

      6 정진근, "저작권법 요론" 청목출판사 2011

      7 최경수, "저작권법 개론" 한올아카데미 2010

      8 오승종, "저작권법" 박영사 2020

      9 박성호, "저작권법" 박영사 2017

      10 이해완, "저작권법" 박영사 2019

      11 강기봉, "저작권 판례 평석집 2" 한국저작권위원회 2023

      12 이해완, "저작권 판례 평석집 1" 한국저작권위원회 2022

      13 차상육, "저작권 사건과 판례 1" 한국저작권위원회 2021

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼