English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88613/118155 (75%)
Visitors : 23470922      Online Users : 214
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/123319


    Title: 美國著作權律師費用賠償制度之發展與我國之反思
    The Development of Attorney's Fee in Copyright Litigation in the U.S. and Some Reflection on Taiwan
    Authors: 楊智傑
    Yang, Chih-Chieh
    Contributors: 政大智慧財產評論 
    Keywords: 美國著作權法;律師費用;著作權訴訟;客觀上合理性;濫訴行為
    U.S. Copyright Act;attorney's fee;Copyright Litigation;objective reasonableness;abusive litigation
    Date: 2018-02
    Issue Date: 2019-05-10 10:31:46 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 美國著作權法第505條規定,法院可以判予勝訴方合理律師費用,作為其成本之一部分,亦即可判賠勝訴方合理律師費用。但美國法院最早採取雙重模式,直到美國最高法院於1994年的Fogery v. Fantasy案,改採公平模式,亦即承認雙向的律師費用賠償,並對著作權法第505條的適用,提出了重要標準。但各巡迴上訴法院對於地區法院決定判賠律師費用行使裁量權時,仍採取不同標準。因此,2016年美國聯邦最高法院受理並做出John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng案判決,對著作權訴訟敗訴方何時須賠償律師費用問題,做出最新見解。其認為在考量是否判賠律師費用時,應對於敗訴方主張之客觀合理性給理予相當份量,但強調地區法院仍應參考其他因素,做出適當裁量。其次本文比較國際條約之規定,尤其是TRIPs與TPP與律師費用賠償有關之規定,並檢討臺灣制度與法院判決。最後提出具體建議。
    Section 505 of the U.S. Copyright Act provides, the court may award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party as part of the costs. Originally, the courts adopted a dual approach, until Supreme Court’s 1994 opinion in Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc. changed to the evenhanded approach, holding that "prevailing plaintiffs and prevailing defendants are to be treated alike." Nevertheless, after the Fogerty v. Fantasy, circuit courts adopted different approach in awarding attorney’s fee. In 2016, Supreme Court in John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v. Kirtsaeng come back this issue and affirm the Second Circuit’s approach, saying that the District Court should continue to give substantial weight to the reasonableness of Wiley's position but also take into account all other relevant factors. This Article will compare some important international treaties, especially the provisions about attorney's fee in TRIPs and TPP. Then the laws and court decisions about attorney's fees in intellectual property cases in Taiwan will be discussed. Finally, some amendments suggestion will be proposed.
    Relation: 政大智慧財產評論, 15(1), 113-161
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[智慧財產評論] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML29View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback