近年来,人工智能的迅猛发展,冲击着以“人类作者为中心”的传统作品的构成要件,急需传统著作权制度对人工智能生成内容的法律属性、权利归属问题等系列著作权难题作出回应。本文试图通过比较论证国内外人工智能生成内容的法律制度及司...近年来,人工智能的迅猛发展,冲击着以“人类作者为中心”的传统作品的构成要件,急需传统著作权制度对人工智能生成内容的法律属性、权利归属问题等系列著作权难题作出回应。本文试图通过比较论证国内外人工智能生成内容的法律制度及司法实践,在不突破我国现有《著作权法》制度框架的前提下,从作品的“智力成果”要件和“独创性”要件两方面解释、分析,从而肯定人工智能生成内容属于我国《著作权法》意义上的作品,得出人工智能生成内容应受到我国《著作权法》保护的结论。In recent years, the rapid development of artificial intelligence has impacted the constituent elements of traditional works centered on “human authors”, and it is urgent for the traditional copyright system to respond to a series of copyright problems, such as the legal attributes and rights ownership of AI-generated content. This paper attempts to compare and demonstrate the legal systems and judicial practices of AI-generated content at home and abroad and explain and analyze from the two aspects of “intellectual achievement” and “originality” elements of works on the premise of not breaking through the existing institutional framework of China’s Copyright Law, so as to affirm that AI-generated content belongs to works within the meaning of China’s Copyright Law and draw the conclusion that AI-generated content should be protected by China’s Copyright Law.展开更多
区别于普通民事合同,行政协议中的行政机关占据行政协议的主导地位。为了防止行政机关滥用权利,法院有必要对行政主体的单方变更解除权进行司法审查。目前我国对于单方变更解除行政协议的司法审查不够完善,存在适用依据不清晰、认定标...区别于普通民事合同,行政协议中的行政机关占据行政协议的主导地位。为了防止行政机关滥用权利,法院有必要对行政主体的单方变更解除权进行司法审查。目前我国对于单方变更解除行政协议的司法审查不够完善,存在适用依据不清晰、认定标准不统一、补偿标准不明确等问题。基于现行法律体系对该权利规制现状,本文依据相关法律规范、判例探讨行政协议中行政机关单方变更解除权的行使规则,以期为完善审查单方变更解除权案件的法律适用、审查行政机关行使权利条件和对相对人的补偿提供思路。Different from the ordinary civil contract, the administrative organ in the administrative agreement occupies the dominant position of the administrative agreement. In order to prevent the administrative organs from abusing their rights, it is necessary for the court to conduct judicial review on the unilateral modification and rescission of the administrative subject. At present, the judicial review of unilateral modification and termination of administrative agreements in China is not perfect, and there are some problems such as unclear application basis, inconsistent identification standards, and unclear compensation standards. Based on the current legal system’s regulation status of this right, this paper discusses the exercise rules of the unilateral modification and rescission right of the administrative organ in the administrative agreement according to relevant legal norms and precedents, in order to provide ideas for improving the application of law in the review of unilateral modification and rescission right cases, reviewing the conditions for the exercise of the right of the administrative organ and compensating the counterparty.展开更多
2009年修订《保险法》时对责任保险做出较大调整,学者们对于在立法领域以及法学理论上是否赋予责任保险第三人请求权存在不同的观点。我国《民法典》规定了“代位权”“债权转让”“利他合同”等民事法律制度,但在法学理论中,责任保险...2009年修订《保险法》时对责任保险做出较大调整,学者们对于在立法领域以及法学理论上是否赋予责任保险第三人请求权存在不同的观点。我国《民法典》规定了“代位权”“债权转让”“利他合同”等民事法律制度,但在法学理论中,责任保险第三人(被保险人所致损害的人)由于合同相对性的限制等往往会遇到各种困难导致其难以直接向保险人主张给付保险金等问题。这一方面削弱了强制责任保险的社会保障性功能,另一方面在法律层面赋予第三人直接请求权似乎有违背保险人的私主体地位以及债的相对性原则的嫌疑。因此本文旨在从保险法、民法典合同编等文件中为第三人行使请求权提供适用依据。Significant adjustments were made to liability insurance during the 2009 revision of the Insurance Law, and scholars have different opinions on whether to grant the right of claim to third parties in the legislative field and legal theory. China’s Civil Code stipulates civil legal systems such as “subrogation”, “assignment of claims”, and “third-party contracts”, but in legal theory, third parties in liability insurance (persons harmed by the insured) often encounter various difficulties due to the limitation of contract relativity, making it difficult for them to directly claim insurance payments from the insurer. This not only weakens the social security function of compulsory liability insurance but also seems to violate the insurer’s private entity status and the principle of relativity of debt at the legal level. Therefore, this article aims to provide a basis for the third party’s exercise of the right of claim from documents such as the Insurance Law and the Contract Law of the Civil Code.展开更多
文摘近年来,人工智能的迅猛发展,冲击着以“人类作者为中心”的传统作品的构成要件,急需传统著作权制度对人工智能生成内容的法律属性、权利归属问题等系列著作权难题作出回应。本文试图通过比较论证国内外人工智能生成内容的法律制度及司法实践,在不突破我国现有《著作权法》制度框架的前提下,从作品的“智力成果”要件和“独创性”要件两方面解释、分析,从而肯定人工智能生成内容属于我国《著作权法》意义上的作品,得出人工智能生成内容应受到我国《著作权法》保护的结论。In recent years, the rapid development of artificial intelligence has impacted the constituent elements of traditional works centered on “human authors”, and it is urgent for the traditional copyright system to respond to a series of copyright problems, such as the legal attributes and rights ownership of AI-generated content. This paper attempts to compare and demonstrate the legal systems and judicial practices of AI-generated content at home and abroad and explain and analyze from the two aspects of “intellectual achievement” and “originality” elements of works on the premise of not breaking through the existing institutional framework of China’s Copyright Law, so as to affirm that AI-generated content belongs to works within the meaning of China’s Copyright Law and draw the conclusion that AI-generated content should be protected by China’s Copyright Law.
文摘区别于普通民事合同,行政协议中的行政机关占据行政协议的主导地位。为了防止行政机关滥用权利,法院有必要对行政主体的单方变更解除权进行司法审查。目前我国对于单方变更解除行政协议的司法审查不够完善,存在适用依据不清晰、认定标准不统一、补偿标准不明确等问题。基于现行法律体系对该权利规制现状,本文依据相关法律规范、判例探讨行政协议中行政机关单方变更解除权的行使规则,以期为完善审查单方变更解除权案件的法律适用、审查行政机关行使权利条件和对相对人的补偿提供思路。Different from the ordinary civil contract, the administrative organ in the administrative agreement occupies the dominant position of the administrative agreement. In order to prevent the administrative organs from abusing their rights, it is necessary for the court to conduct judicial review on the unilateral modification and rescission of the administrative subject. At present, the judicial review of unilateral modification and termination of administrative agreements in China is not perfect, and there are some problems such as unclear application basis, inconsistent identification standards, and unclear compensation standards. Based on the current legal system’s regulation status of this right, this paper discusses the exercise rules of the unilateral modification and rescission right of the administrative organ in the administrative agreement according to relevant legal norms and precedents, in order to provide ideas for improving the application of law in the review of unilateral modification and rescission right cases, reviewing the conditions for the exercise of the right of the administrative organ and compensating the counterparty.
文摘2009年修订《保险法》时对责任保险做出较大调整,学者们对于在立法领域以及法学理论上是否赋予责任保险第三人请求权存在不同的观点。我国《民法典》规定了“代位权”“债权转让”“利他合同”等民事法律制度,但在法学理论中,责任保险第三人(被保险人所致损害的人)由于合同相对性的限制等往往会遇到各种困难导致其难以直接向保险人主张给付保险金等问题。这一方面削弱了强制责任保险的社会保障性功能,另一方面在法律层面赋予第三人直接请求权似乎有违背保险人的私主体地位以及债的相对性原则的嫌疑。因此本文旨在从保险法、民法典合同编等文件中为第三人行使请求权提供适用依据。Significant adjustments were made to liability insurance during the 2009 revision of the Insurance Law, and scholars have different opinions on whether to grant the right of claim to third parties in the legislative field and legal theory. China’s Civil Code stipulates civil legal systems such as “subrogation”, “assignment of claims”, and “third-party contracts”, but in legal theory, third parties in liability insurance (persons harmed by the insured) often encounter various difficulties due to the limitation of contract relativity, making it difficult for them to directly claim insurance payments from the insurer. This not only weakens the social security function of compulsory liability insurance but also seems to violate the insurer’s private entity status and the principle of relativity of debt at the legal level. Therefore, this article aims to provide a basis for the third party’s exercise of the right of claim from documents such as the Insurance Law and the Contract Law of the Civil Code.
