Browse

종합유선방송사업자의 지상파 재송신에 대한 저작권 쟁점 연구
The research on copyright issues regarding terrestrial broadcast retransmission by cable broadcasters

Cited 0 time in Web of Science Cited 0 time in Scopus
Authors
정상조; 박준석
Issue Date
2009-12
Publisher
한국저작권위원회
Citation
계간 저작권 Vol.22 No.4, pp. 4-27
Keywords
사회과학재송신의무 재송신지상파 방송 재송신케이블 텔레비전종합유선방송사업자동시중계방송권저작권retransmissionmust-carryterrestrial broadcast retransmissioncable tvMSOmultiple system operatorright of simultaneous relay broadcastcopyright
Abstract
종합유선방송사업자 (이하에서는 케이블방송사라고 약칭함)의 지상파방송 재송신은 이미 오랫동안 계속되어 왔고 또한 장래에 일반공중에 대한 공적 정보의 전달에서 중요한 역할을 할 수 있는 부분이다.현행법의 해석상 케이블방송사에 의한 지상파 재송신행위가 편집을 전제로 한 방송의 개념에 꼭 들어맞는 것도 아니고 송신범위의 확대를 염두에 두고 마련된 동시중계방송의 개념에 꼭 들어맞는다고 해석하기도 어렵다. 현행법의 문구만을 토대로 한 문리해석에 의해서는 침해부인론이나 재송신의무여부에 따른 구별론의 두 가지 해석론 가운데 무엇이 더 합리적인 것인지 구별하기 어렵다. 따라서 지상파의 동시재송신을 둘러싼 지상파방송사와 케이블방송사의 이해관계를 면밀히 분석한 후, 방송법과 저작권법의 취지에 부합되는 정책적 판단을 모색할 필요가 있다.궁극적으로는 케이블방송사와 지상파방송사업자가 상호이익이 되는 조건을 모색하고 합의하는 것이 가장 바람직한해결방안이다. 해석상의 이견이 있음은 분명하지만, 그럼에도 불구하고 지상파 재송신의 금지를 청구하고 형사처벌을하려고 하는 것은 케이블방송에 의존하고 있는 수많은 공중의 이익을 해하고 법정이용허락을 규정한 저작권법의 취지에 맞지 않는다.
It will be much more appropriate and productive to discuss the limitations and exceptions to copyright by focusing on only property right of copyright. Korea had had various individual provisions system for copyright limitations and exceptions until, in parallel with the above system, she recently adopted the US-style comprehensive fair use provision system. The legal systems for copyright limitations and exceptions in the world would be classified as three different types; various individual provisions system in Germany & Japan, a comprehensive fair use provision system in US, and so-called fair dealing provision system in UK. It is strongly suggested that the intrinsic conflict between property right of copyright and moral rights in Korea should be solved by broad interpretation of the statutory limitations and exceptions to moral rights in favor of the property right.
The main reason why the limitations and exceptions to copyright are much more complicated than those to patent or trademark is that nature of copyright is actually much more close to intangible asset separated and even isolated from tangible goods in which the right is embodied. Therefore, even an ordinary person who is not the competitor or at least the entrepreneur with industrial manufacturing equipment could easily infringe copyright by reproduction and etc. Thus the need for balance between the protection of exclusive right and the other side of the coin, the shield of fair use for the general public, has been always a realistic issue, not idealistic one that would be in patent or trademark.
The most cases by Korean courts in field of copyright limitations and exceptions are about the Article 28 in the Korean Copyright Act which has been intentionally interpreted as Korean comprehensive fair use provision in some dominant cases. Meanwhile, the Enforcement Decree delegated by paragraph 2 of Article 29 should be amended for correcting the legislative error which was made by including the government and etc., absolutely non-profit organizations, that should be placed under paragraph 1 of the same article, as a result of overlooking the difference between legal logics in copyright law of Japan and Korea.
ISSN
1226-0967
Language
Korean
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/10371/83613
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in Collections:
College of Law/Law School (법과대학/대학원)Dept. of Law (법학과)Journal Papers (저널논문_법학과)
  • mendeley

Items in S-Space are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Browse