ೳȶ⏬ᜨḢᕞࡽࡳࡓࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢἲ⌮ࡢᚓኻ ࡑࡢᜟ ɶఋСࡇƷ௩᠂҄̿߸ᓸ˺ೌඥƷ્ Jonathan GRIFFITHS ᇛᡤ ᒾ⏕ল ोljᜨ ؝సᶒࡢး⏺ไးࡢศญ࠾ࡅࡿḢᕞೳྜࡢWἲⓗࢽࢩࢸࣈࡼ ࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࢀࡲ࡛ຍ┕ᅜ࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓᨻ·ୖࡢҜ⏤ᗘࡀᖜไljࡉࢀ࡚ࡋࡲࡗ ࡓࠋ؝సᶒἲࡣࠊҜ⏤৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿࢌⅭࡢúᅖࢆᣑᙇࡍࡿࡇࡀࠊࡲࡍࡲࡍႤࡋࡃ ࡞ࡗ࡚ࡁ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓᣑᙇࡀࠊ♫ⓗࠊᢏⓗ࡞≧ἣࡢኚᑐࡍࡿപษ࡞ᑐ ᛂ࡛࠶ࡿ৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞ሙྜ࡛ࡍࡽࠊᣑᙇࢆ৶ࡵ࡞࠸ഴྥ࠶ࡿࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࡑ ࡢཎᅉࢆᴫ५ࡋࠊॾỴ·ࢆᥦࡍࡿࠋ୍ࡘࡢॾỴࡣࠊྜࢇᅜ؝సᶒἲ᮲ ᆞఝࡋࡓࠊ࣮࢜ࣉࣥࡘोǢ࣮࣋ࢫࡢࣔࢹࣝࡢ᥇⏝࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࡶࡗ┿᳨ খࡉࢀࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࡶࢃࡽࡎࠊ᳨খࡉࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࠋࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢࣃ ࣛࢲ࣒ࡣࠊഓᗘண ྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠊᅜၯἲചࡍࡿࠊࡲࡓ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᩥⓗ ␗࡛࠶ࡿࠊࡢ⌮⏤࡛ᣄྰࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࠊ┤ಶࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ◊" ࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢḞⅬࡀ৲ᙇࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࣭ ࣔࢹࣝ࿔ⓎࡢࡶࡓࡽࡍྍЏᛶࡣ᳨খ್ࡍࡿࡇࠊࢆᣦࡍࡿࠋ ࣮࣮࢟࣡ࢻᜨ ؝సᶒࠊไးࠊး⏺ࠊࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠊ Wittem ࢢ࣮ࣝࣉ © ࢪࣙࢼࢧ࣭ࣥࢢࣜࣇࢫ ᮏਭᩥࡣ Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL) ࡢ᮲௳ࡶ࡙࠸࡚ႱᏊⓗᅪᕸࡋࠊ ࢲ࣮࢘ࣥࣟࢻ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࣛࢭࣥࢫࡉࢀࡓਭᩥࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࡣ http://nbn-resolving.de/urn: nbn:de:0009-dppl-v3-en8 ࡽධᡭ࡛ࡁࡿࠋ ᥎ዡࡉࢀࡿᘬ⏝ᜨ Jonathan Griffiths, “Unsticking the centre-piece-the liberation of European copyright law?” [2010] 1 JIPITEC 87, para 1. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࡣࡌࡵូ ᜯၥᆏ࣮୰᰾ไᗘࡢ◳┤ូ ᮏਭᩥࡣࠊࠕࢥࣔࣥࢬࠊ࣮ࣘࢨ࣮ࠊࢧ࣮ࣅࢫ࣭ࣉࣟࣂࢲ࣮ࠖએ࡛ ࣭࢟ࢥ࣑ࣗࣀࢸ࣮ࣝthe acquis communautaire লὀᜨ១៱ ἲయDŽࡢ ɢయࡼࡗ࡚☜Wࡉࢀࡓไးࢩࢫࢸ࣒ ᑐࡋ࡚ࡣࠊከࡃࡢᢈุࡀ࠶ ࡢⓎࢢਭᩥࢆࡶࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋJournal of Intellectual Property Information ࠕไးᜨ Technology and e-Commerce ࡀหࡉࢀࡓએ࡛࠶ࡿࠋਭᩥࡣࠊ ࡿࠋሗ♫ᣦ௧ Information Society Directive ࡢ୰᮲ᩥࡉࢀࡓ ؝సᶒࡢ୰᰾॔ᐃࡢ◳┤ࠖ࠸࠺ࢱࢺ࡛ࣝⓎࢢࡉࢀࡓࠋࡇࡢ࢚ᧁⓗ ἲᚊࡣࠊ≉ᙉ࠸ᢈุࡀ࠶ࡿࠋᣦ௧ࡣࡼࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺ࠊ୍ೳ ࡞࣓࣮ࢪࡣࠊ௨๓ࡣ༑ศ࡞₶Ἔࡢാࡁࡼࡗ࡚ࠊҜ⏤⛣ືࡋ࡚ ࡢᗈ̿ᐃ̿ࡉࢀࡓᶒ ࢆযᐃࡋࠊࡑࢀࡽࡢᶒࢆไး࡛ࡁࡿሙྜࢆ ࠸ࡓᖹ࢞Ʉᣢࡢ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ࡀࠊ⌧ᅾ࡛ࡣṆࡋࠊ୍Ðᡤᅛᐃࡉࢀ࡚ࡋ ิᣲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋไးࡣᩘࡇࡑከ࠸ࡀࠊ࢜ࣉࢩࣙࢼ࡛ࣝࠊไးࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡿ ࡲࡗࡓࡇࢆ♧၀ࡍࡿࠋࡇࡢ♧၀ࡣࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ؝సᶒἲࡢး⏺ไ းࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ⌧≧ࢆࠊṇ☜ࢢ⌧ࡍࡿẚ႘ࡢࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋࡑࢀࡲ࡛ࠊ Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer pro- ຍ┕ᅜ৶ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓᰂమᛶࡀࡃࡋ؝ไးࡉࢀࠊ؝సᶒἲࡀҜ⏤ grams, Arts 5, 6; Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and ᐜࡉࢀࡿࢌⅭࡢúᅖࢆᑡࡋ࡛ࡶᣑᙇࡍࡿࡇࡍࡽႤࡋࡃ࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑ on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (codified by Di- ࠺ࡋࡓᣑᙇࡀ♫ⓗ࣭ᢏⓗ࡞ኚᑐᛂࡍࡿࡢപᙜ࡛࠶ࡿͳ࠼ࡽ rective 2006/115/EC) Art 10; Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the ࢀࡿሙྜ࡛ࡶࠊྍЏ࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࠊࡇࡢၥᆏࡘ࠸࡚ࠊᗈ ࡃ৶ઁࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿཎᅉࢆᴫ५ࡋࠊ࠸ࡃࡘࡢॾỴ·ࢆᥦࡍࡿࠋ୍ࡘࡢ ॾỴ·ࡣࠊྜࢇᅜ؝సᶒἲ᮲ᆞఝࡋࡓࠊ࣮࢜ࣉࣥࡘोǢ࣮࣋ Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, Art 6; Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, Arts 5, 6(4). ᮏਭᩥ࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊࠕไးexceptionsࠖ࠸࠺⏝ਂࡣྛᅜࡢᅜෆἲ࡛ࠕไး ࢫࡢࣔࢹࣝࡢ᥇⏝࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࡶࡗ┿᳨খࡉࢀࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ exceptions ࠖࠊࠕ း ⏺ limitations ࠖࠊࠕ ྍ ࡉ ࢀ ࡓ ࢌ Ⅽ permitted acts ࠖࠊࠕ ᢠ ᘚ ࡶࢃࡽࡎࠊ᳨খࡉࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࠋࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢࣃࣛࢲ࣒ࡣࠊ defensesࠖ࡞ࡢᵝࠎ࡞॔ᐃࢆᣦࡍࠋࡇࡢ⏝ਂࡢവᢥࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ ࠕไးࠖࢆࠊసᐙ ഓᗘண ྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠊᅜၯἲചࡍࡿࠊࡲࡓ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᩥⓗ ␗࡛࠶ࡿࠊࡢ⌮⏤࡛ᣄྰࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࡇࢀࡽࡢḞⅬࡀ৲ᙇ ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࢆᣦࡍࡿࠋ ࡸ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᶒᑐࡍࡿཝᐦးᐃࡉࢀࡓࠕไးⓗ࡞ࠖධincursions࡛࠶ ࡿॾจࡍࡿࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆവዲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࢆ♧ࡍពᅗࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢⅬࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ ྡ័ࢌ࠾ࡼࡧᨻຊᏛࡢએਭࡋ࡚ࡣࠊsee A Kur, “Of Oceans, Islands and Inland Water – How Much Room for Exceptions and Limitations under the Three-Step Test?” in Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition & Tax Law Research Paper লὀᜨཎᩥࡣྛᅜἲ࡛ࢃࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ exceptions, limitations, permitted acts, de- Series No. 08-04 (available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1317707). fenses ࠸࠺⏝ਂࢆ exceptions ࡛௦ࢢࡉࡏ࡚࠸ࡿὀ ཧ↷ࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊ exceptions ࡀᆆฟࡍࡿࡀࠊlimitations ࡶࡲࢀࢃࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ᪥ᮏࡢ؝సᶒἲ the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information soci- Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on ࡣࠊ f ÷ Ḱࢆࠕ؝సᶒࡢไးࠖ࠶࡚࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺ࠊ ࠕไးࠖ ety (“Information Society Directive”). ࠸࠺ؕࡣࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊ ࠕእࠖ࠸࠺ؕࡣࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊ লࡣ᪥ᮏἲྜࢃࡏ࡚ࠊexception ࢆ ࠕእ࡛ࠖࡣ࡞ࡃ ࠕไးࠖ ࠊlimitation ࢆ “Billowing White Goo” [2008] Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 587; M Senftleben, ࠕး⏺ࠖࡋࡓࠋ ⓗᶒࡢúᅖࡀᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓࡢព॒ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊsee, for example, J Litman, “Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law – the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defenses” in Horizontal Issues in Intellectual Property Law: Uncovering the Matrix, ed A Kur (Edward Elgar, 2010) 6-7. ࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊcf J Ginsburg, “Recent Developments in US Copyright Law – Part II, Caselaw: Exclusive Rights on the Ebb?” Institut für Rechtsinformatik, Leibniz Universität Hannover, March 17-18, 2010. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO [2009] Revue Internationale du Droit d’Auteur. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࡣࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆ‶ࡓࡍᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿᝯ ࡉࡽࠊไ പ⏝ࡣࠊྛᅜࡢWἲ͵ࡢࡳྥࡅࡽࢀࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿॾจࡍࡿࡇࠊࡀ းࢆ⚗Ṇࡍࡿዎlj࠾ࡼࡧ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᢏⓗ᪉ἲࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ ͳ࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊInfopaq International A/S v. Danske Dagblades ุỴ ࡚ࠊไးࢆ↓ຠࡍࡿࡇࡶ࡛ࡁࡿࠋLucie Guibault ࡣࠊ៦៥៥៰១ ࡢᮏྕ ࡣࠊḢᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ୰᰾॔ᐃࢆࡇࢀࡲ࡛௨ୖ◳┤ࡉࡏࡿ᪉ྥ ᥖࡢਭᩥ࡛ࠊሗ♫ᣦ௧ࡢ·ᐃഓ⛬࡛ࠊWἲ͵ࡀୗࡋࡓุ᩿ࡀࡶࡓ ࡽࡏ࡚ࡋࡲࡗࡓࡼ࠺࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡽࡍྰᐃⓗ࡞ᙳᅚࢆ᫂ࡽࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋGuibault ࡣ≉ࠊ ࠕ࿒ཀⓗ࡞ࠖไ းࢆవࡍࡇࢁ࡞ࡃิᣲࡋࡓȆᯝࠊ၎йࡍࡿഴྥࡀഺࡅࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࡋ Infopaq ௳࡛ࡣࠊࣅ࿌ࡢ࣓ࢹ࣭ࣔࢽࢱ࣮௦⌮ᗑࡣࠊࢹ࣐࣮ࣥࢡ ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ Martin Senftleben ࡣࠊຍ┕ᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ ࡢ᪂Ϊࡽവࢇࡔঠࢆोljࡋ࡚ࠊᆣᐈᥦ౪ࡋࡓࠋ௦⌮ᗑࡣࠊവࢇࡔ ࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆ┤᥋പ⏝ࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡇࡢࢫ࣮࣒࢟ࡢྰᐃⓗ࡞ഃჳࡀ ঠయࢆࢫ࢟ࣕࣥࡋ୍࡚ⓗಖᏑࡋࠊঠࡢ୍ൺࡘ࠸࡚ࡣᜏஂⓗ ᙉਚࡉࢀࠊᰂమᛶࡶἲⓗᏳᐃᛶࡶ࡞࠸؝సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࠊsⓗ࠼ࡤࠊ ಖᏑࡍࡿࣉࣟࢭࢫࢆҜືࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࠋุ࣒ᡤࡀ᳨খࡋࡓ࡞ਭⅬࡣᜩ ࠕ᭱ᝏࡢࢣ࣮ࢫࠖࢆ⏕ࡳฟࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᣦࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ϸࠕయࡲࡓࡣ୍ൺࡢࣽࣷࠖ ᮲ࡢᴫᛕࢆ࠺ॾจࡍࡿࠊϹ ؝స≀ࡢ୍ⓗࣽࣷࡢᢠᘚࡀࣅ࿌പ⏝࡛ࡁࡿ࠺ࠊ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋุ লὀᜨ࣋ࣝࢾ᮲lj ᮲ ᅟࡣࠊࣽࣷᶒࡘ࠸࡚ࠊࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸ Ỵࡣ؝సᶒἲᑓ࿋ᘚઔኈࡗ࡚ࠊฌो࡞ពࢆᣢࡕࠊࡇࡢࡘࡢਭⅬ ࢫࢺࡤࢀࡿ ो௳≉ูࡢሙྜࡘ࠸࡚ࠊ؝స≀ࡢ೫ᖖࡢ⏝ࢆጉࡆࡎࠊ ࢆ୨࠼ࡓࣥࣃࢡࢺࢆᣢࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ࠶ࡽࡺࡿᙧែࡢ؝స≀പ⏝ࡉࢀࡿ ࡑࡢ؝స͵ࡢṇᙜ࡞┈ࢆᙜᐖࡋ࡞࠸ࡇࢆ‶ࡓࡏࡤࠊᅜෆἲ௧࡛ไ ࠕసᛶࠖࡢᇶ‽ࠊุỴࢆ᥋ⓗࡢࡼ࠺ਚࡍࡿᚰࡀႏ း॔ᐃࢆᐃࡵࡿࡇࢆ৶ࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ ࡲࡗࡓᝯ ࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࢃࢀࢃࢀࡀࡇࡇ࡛ᠱᛕࡍࡿࡢࡣࠊϸ ᮲ ࡇࢀࡣཝࡋ࠸⌧ᐇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡶࢃࡽࡎࠊែࡣࡉࡽᝏࡋ࡚࠸ ॔ᐃࡉࢀࡓไးး⏺ࢆ࠺ॾจࡍࡿࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊϹࠕ୍ൺࡢࣽ ࡿࠋ⌮ⓗࡣࠊุ࣒ᡤࡀࡇࡢWἲࡢ₯ᅾⓗ࡞▷ᡤࢆɶࡍࡿࡇࡶͳ ࣷࠖᙜࡓࡿྰࡀᣦ௧ࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࡢࡼ࠺ุ᩿ࡉࢀࡿࠊࡘ ࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊḢᕞೳྜࡢἲไᗘࡢࡶ࡛ࡉࢀࡿไးࡣࠊപᙜ ࠸ุ࡚࣒ᡤࡀ☜Wࡋࡓ୍ӑⓗ࡞ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿሙྜࡓ࠼ࡤࠊ࣮ࣘࢨ࣮ࡢᇶᮏⓗ࡞ᶒࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿሙྜࠊ ࠾ࡼࡧ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᢏࡢⓎᒎࢆಁࡍࡿሙྜࡣᗈ̿ॾจࡍࡿࡇࠊ ไးࡋ࡚ࡣࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺ࡿᜨ ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊᣦ௧ ᮲ࡶ࡙ࡃࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ ࠕ͐ᣦ௧ࡀᐃࡵࡓ୍ӑཎ๎ࡽഃЪࡍࡿᣦ௧ࡢ᮲ᅟࡣࠊཝ᱁ॾจࡉࢀ See, Council Directive 91/250/EEC of 14 May 1991 on the legal protection of computer programs (“Computer Programs Directive”), Art 6(3); Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of [2009] ECDR 16. intellectual property (codified by Directive 2006/115/EC) (“Rental Right Directive”), Art 10(3); Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 Wonderful or Worrisome? The Impact of the ECJ Ruling in Infopaq on UK Copyright Law” on the legal protection of databases (“Database Directive”), Art 6(3); Information Society [2010] EIPR 2010 247; M Handig, “Infopaq International A/S v. Danske Dagblades Directive, Art 5(5). Forening (C-5/08): is the term ‘work’ of the CDPA 1988 in line with the European Direc- L Guibault, “Why Cherry-Picking Never Leads to Harmonisation: The Case of the Limi- Infopaq International AS v. Danske Dagblades Forening (C-5/08), 16th July 2009 (ECJ) See, for example, E Derclaye, “International A/S v. Danske Dagblades Forening (C-5/8): tives?” [2010] EIPR 53. tations in Copyright under Directive 2001/29/EC” [2010] 1 JIPITEC 55. prudence: IceTV in the light of Infopaq” [2010] Oxford University Commonwealth Law M Senftleben, “The International Three-Step Test: A Model Provision for EC Fair Use Journal (forthcoming). Legislation” [2010] 1 JIPITEC 67. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" On (ii), see J Pila, “An Australian Copyright Revolution and its Relevance for UK Juris- 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸͐ ุ࣒ᡤࡀࠊࡇࡢุỴࢆᨭᣢࡍࡿࡓࡵࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖ ౫ᣐࡋࡓࡢࡣਇࡾ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࠊἲไᗘࡢ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ࢆࡁࡃ␗࡞ ࡇࡢ௳࡛ࡣࠊᣦ௧ࡼࡾ৶ࡵࡽࢀࡓᶒࡣࠕ୍ӑⓗཎ๎࡛ࠖ࠶ࡿࡇ ࡿᶵЏΰྠࡉࡏ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ᝯ ࣋ࣝࢾ᮲lj࠾ࡼࡧ ៰៥ ༠ᐃ࠾ࡅࡿ ࠊࡑࡢȆᯝࠊไးࡣ⊃ࡃॾจࡉࢀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࡇࠊࡀ♧ࡉࢀࡓࠋ ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢᶵЏࡣࠊࡑࡢ᮲௳പྜࡋ࡞࠸ไးࢆ ุ࣒ᡤࡣࡲࡓࠊࡇࡢॾจࡀࠊไးࢆࠕ ᮲↷ࡽࡋ࡚ॾจࡍࡿࠖ ᑟධࡍࡿྛᅜࡢWἲ͵ࡢᶒးࢆᢚไࡍࡿࡇ࠶ࡿᝯ ሗ♫ᣦ௧ ᚲोᛶࡼࡗ࡚ᨭᣢࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᙇࡍࡿᝯ ࡇࡢॾจࡣࠊ୍ൺࡢຍ┕ ᮲ࡶ࡙ࡅࡤࠊࡇࡢᙺࡣุ࣒ᐁࡀࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆ‶ࡓࡉ࡞࠸᪉ἲ ᅜࡀఏțⓗ᥇⏝ࡋ࡚ࡁࡓไးࢆ⊃ࡃॾจࡍࡿཎ๎ࢆ୍ӑࡋࠊࡑࡢȆ ࡛ࠊไးࢆࠕപ⏝ࡍࡿࠖࡢࢆာṆࡍࡿࡇࡲ࡛ᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓ࠸࠺એਭ ᯝࠊ᫂ࡽ࡞ၥᆏࢆᥦୣࡍࡿࠋࡲࡎࠊᇶᮏⓗ࡞ၥᆏࡋ࡚ࠊ؝సᶒἲࡢ ࡶ࠶ࡾ࠺ࡿᝯ ࡶࢃࡽࡎࠊࡇࡢᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓᙺ࠾࠸࡚ࡶࠊࡑࡢ ฌो࡞ഃჳࢆࠊᣦ௧Ҝయྵࡲࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡶࢃࡽࡎᐦਚᩚࡍ ᶵЏࡣࠊไးࢆ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵᭷ॾจࡍࡿሙྜࠊุ࣒ᡤ̿ົ࡙ ࡿࡇࡣࠊẸ̿ࡍࡿࠋ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ୍ൺࡢᅜ࡛ࡣࠊ⌧ᅾࡲ࡛ࠊ ࡅࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ⊃̿ॾจࡢཎ๎ྠࡌ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸ ࡲࡗࡓࡃ␗࡞ࡿॾจࡀࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓᝯ ࡇࢀࡽࡢᡭȶⓗ࡞ၥᆏຍ࠼࡚ࠊ ࢫࢺࠖࡢࡢࣂ࣮ࢪࣙࣥࡢ֑సᡂࡶࠊࢸࢫࢺࡇࡢᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓᙺ ࡇࡢุỴࡣᐇែⓗ࡞ᑐࡶከ࠸ࠋไးࡀ࣮ࣘࢨ࣮ࡲࡓࡣᕷẸࡢᇶᮏⓗ ࢆࡑ࠺ࡋࡓࡍࡿᣦࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ ᶒ ࡓ࠼ࡤࠊࢽ࣮ࣗࢫሗഘࠊࣃࣟࢹ࣮ࡲࡓࡣᘬ⏝ ࡶ࡙࠸࡚ ࠸ࡿሙྜࠊ⊃̿ࡢॾจࡣപษࡣᛮࢃࢀ࡞࠸ࡍࡿᑐ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ࡋ Infopaq ุỴࡣࠊ⊃̿ॾจࡢ࣮ࣝࣝࢆযᐃࡋࡓࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊᮏਭᩥ ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡼࡾ୍ӑⓗࡣࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓᩍ᮲ⓗ࡞ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡣବ࡛᫂࠶ࡿ ࡢ᭱ึᴫ५ࡋࡓᅔႤࢆቑᖜࡉࡏࡓࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿᝯ ࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ ࡣᛮࢃࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ؝సᶒἲࡀ॔ไࡍࡿ≧ἣࡣከᵝ࡛࠶ࡾࠊẁၥⓗ࡞ॾỴ ྰᐃⓗ࡞ᙳᅚࡣࡑࢀࡲࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࣅ࿌ࡀసရࡢࠕൺࡲࡓࡣ୍ൺࠖ ·ࡀᚲो࡛࠶ࡿࠋఏțⓗ࡞⎔ቃࡢࡶ࡛ࡣࠊᗘࡢసᛶࢆᙇࡍࡿ؝ ࢆࣽࣷࡋࡓ࠺ࢆỴࡵࡿപษ࡞᪉ἲࡘ࠸࡚ࡢุ࣒ᡤࡢุ᩿ࡣࠊࣚ ͵ࡢ┈ࡣ୍ӑⓗᨭᣢࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡑ࠺ࡋࡓ≧ἣୗ࡛࿔Ⓨࡉࢀࡓ॔๎ ࣮ࣟࢵࣃࡢ؝సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ṧࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡓᰂమᛶࢆࡶ၆ཤࡋ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ ࡣࠊᶒࡀᣑᩓࡋࠊฌࣽࡍࡿ⌧ᅾࡢ≧ἣୗ࡛ࡣࠊപษ࡞ࡶࡢࡣᛮࢃࢀ ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢⅬࡘ࠸ุ࡚࣒ᡤࡣḟࡢࡼ࠺ࡿᜨ ࡞࠸ࠋࠕ؝స͵ே᱁ᶒࠖࡢఏțࢆᣢࡘᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡢุỴ࡛ࡶࠊࡇࡢȆਭ ࡀ৶ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ᢏ≧ἣࡀᛴ೯ኚࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ⌧≧࠾࠸࡚ࠊ࠸ ࠕಖઔࡉࢀࡓసရࢆᢤŻࡋ࡚ࣽࣷࡍࡿࡇࡣࠊᢤŻൺศࡀ͵؝Ҝఏࡢ▱ ࡞ࡿ≧ἣ࠾࠸࡚ࡶࠊǞதࡢ୍᪉ᙜ͵᭷࡞≧ἣࢆ࠶ࡽࡌࡵస ࡾฟࡍࡇࡣ↓ੋᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ R Hilty, “Declaration on the ‘Three-Step Test’: Where do we go from here?” [2010] 1 JIPITEC 83. Berne Convention, Art 9(2); TRIPS Agreement, Art 13. [2009] ECDR 16, para 56. For discussion, see J Griffiths, “The ‘Three-Step Test’ in European Copyright Law – Ibid, para 58. Problems & Solutions” [2009] IPQ 428. See, for example, Pro Sieben Media v. Carlton UK Television [1999] FSR 610 (CA, ࡋࡓࡇࡀࠊḢᕞุ࣒ᡤࡀ᥇⏝ࡋࡓॾจᩚྜࡍࡿ࠺ࡣၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋSee, for United Kingdom). ࡇࡢ५Ⅼࡽࡍࡿࠊ≉ᐃࡢࢣ࣮ࢫ࠾࠸࡚ࠊྛᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀไးࢆᰂమപ⏝ C Geiger, “Implementing an international instrument for interpreting copyright limita- example, Re the Supply of Phtocopies of Newspaper Articles by a Public Library [2000] tions and exceptions” [2009] IIC 627. ECC 237(Supreme Court, Germany); ProLitteris v. Aargauer Zeitung AG [2008] 39 IIC 990 (Federal Court, Switzerland); Buren [2005] IIC 869 (Supreme Court, France); Dior v. Evora See, for example, Bild-Kunst v. Focus [2005] ECDR 6 (BGH, Federal Supreme Court, Germany), para 10. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" [1996] NJ 682 (Supreme Court, Netherlands). 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ⓗసࢆࢢ⌧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿሙྜࡣࠊᣦ௧ ᮲ពࡍࡿൺศⓗࣽ ֑ࡋ┤ࡍࡇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋṧᛕ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡇࡢࣉࣟࢪ࢙ࢡࢺࡣ᫂ࡽ࡞ၰᐖ ࣷࢆᵓᡂࡍࡿ͐ ࠖ ࡀከࡃᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋ୍ࠊࡇࡢศญࡢWἲഓ⛬ࡣᭀ࡛ࠊࡘഌ࠸ࡢ࡛ ᭷ྡ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࠊຍ┕ᅜࡢከࡃࡣࠊࡸࡗ᭱ಶ࡞ࡗ࡚ࠊሗ♫ ࣽࣷࡣಖઔࡉࢀࡓసⓗ࡞ोǢࢆྵࡴሙྜࡢࡳᐖ࡞ࡿࠋࢢჳⓗ ᣦ௧ࡢोồࢆᅜෆἲࡋࡓࡤࡾ࡞ࡢ࡛ࠊࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢฌो࡞॒┤ࡋ ࡣࠊࡇࢀࡣ؝సᶒᑓ࿋ᘚઔኈࡗ࡚એਭࡢవᆅࡀ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺ࡳ࠼ ᗘ ᴟⓗྲྀࡾǼࡴࡣͳ࠼ࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ୕ࠊȵȶⓗ࡞ᢏṌ┤ ࡿᝯ ჳࡋ࡚ࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓͳᐹࡢࣉࣟࢭࢫࡣᐃᮇⓗˎࡾಹࡉࢀࡿᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ స͵ࡼࡿࠕࣥࣉࢵࢺࠖࣅ࿌ࡼࡿࠕዣྲྀtakingࠖࡢ ಀࡢ᳨খࡣࠊࡍ࡚ࡢຍ┕ᅜ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᐖศᯒࡢఏțⓗ࡞ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳ ࡢ୍⎔࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿྍЏᛶࡣ࡞ࡾࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡇ ࢩࢫࢸ࣒ᆒ࢞ࢆᅇࡉࡏࡿࡑࡢࡢᥦࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࡢᥦࡣࠊ ࡢุỴࡀࠊൺศⓗ࡞ᐖࡀⓎ⏕ࡋࡓྰࢆỴᐃࡍࡿၯࡢࠊ၏୍ࡢപษ ◳┤ࡋࡓ ១៱ូἲయDŽࡢᑡ࡞ࡃࡶ୍ഃჳࡢॾỴࡣࡳ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ ࡞ᇶ‽࡛࠶ࡿॾจࡉࢀࡿሙྜࡣࠊฌ࡞Ȇᯝࢆᣍࡃ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ ࡤࠊከࡃࡢຍ┕ᅜ࡛ࠊዎljࡼࡗ࡚ไးࡀኚ᭦ྍЏ࡞ࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࡶࡓ ࢻࢶࡢุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊ ࠕࣇ࣮࣭࣮ࣜࣘࢫࠖࡢ᮲ᅟࢆപ⏝ࡍࡿၯᝲ ࣅ࿌ࡀ ࡽࡉࢀࡿࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢᆒ࢞ࢆࠊไးࡢ୍ൺࡶࡋࡃࡣൺࢆࠊኚ᭦ྍЏ ࠕዣྲྀࠖࡋࡓࠖࢺࢵࣉࣥࠕࡢ͵؝ฎࡢࡳ࡛࡞ࡃࠊࣅ࿌ࡀసရࠕຍࠖ ࡞ࡶࡢࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚ॾỴࡋࡼ࠺ࡍࡿᥦ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ྠᵝࠊไ ࡋࡓฎࡶͳ៖ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋInfopaq ௳ࡢุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊᐖᑐࡋ࡚ࠊࡇࡢ းࢆᢏⓗᡭẁࡼࡗ࡚ᅇഺࡍࡿࡇᑐࡍࡿࠊࡼࡾຠᯝⓗ࡞ဥᚚ·ࡢ ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ┤᥋᥇⏝ࡋ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞࠸ࡀࠊࡇࡢุỴࢻࢶࡢุ࣒ᡤࡢ᥇ ᥦࡶࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ࡲࡓ ᮲᮲ᩥࡉࢀࡓࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵ ⏝ࡍࡿཎ๎ࡣਚࡋ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋࡇࡢศᯒࡀṇࡋࡅࢀࡤࠊ ࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆࠊࡼࡾࠕࣂࣛࣥࢫࡢࢀࡓࠖॾจࢆࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ Infopaq ุỴࡣࠊḢᕞ؝సᶒไᗘࡢࠕ୰᰾ไᗘࠖࢆࡉࡽ◳┤ࡋ࡚ࡋ Senftleben ࡀᣦࡋࡓࠕ᭱ᝏࡢࢩࢼࣜ࢜ࠖࢆᅇഺࡋࡼ࠺ࡍࡿᥦࡶ࠶ ࡲ࠺ࠋ ࡿᝯ ᜰྍЏ࡞ॾỴ·࣮୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమូ ࠺ࡍࢀࡤࠊḢᕞࡢ؝సᶒไးࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࠕᆒ࢞ᰂమᛶࢆᅇ࡛ ࡁࡿࡔࢁ࠺ᜭ ᫂☜࡞᪉ἲࡢ୍ࡘࡣࠊ᪤Ꮡࡢไးࣜࢫࢺࢆᑂᰝࡋࠊୣ logue: Remarks on the Concept of Balance in Copyright Law” [2009] Journal of Corporation Law 991. [2009] ECDR 16, para 48. ࡓࡔࡋࠊసရࡢ≉ᐃ࡞ഃჳࠕసᛶࠖࢆ৶ࡵࡿ࠸࠺ͳ࠼ࡣၥࢆᢪࡃਭ͵ See, for example, M van Eechoud et al, Harmonizing European Copyright Law – the Challenges of Better Lawmaking (Kluwer Law International, 2009) 106-109. See, for example, M-C Janssens, “The Issue of Exceptions: Reshaping the Keys to the Gates in the Territory of Literary, Musical and Artistic Creation” in Research Handbook on the Future of EU copyright, P Torremans ed (Edward Elgar, 2009) 340-344. ࡶ࠸ࡿࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡓ࠼ࡤࠊՕᅜଇ᪘၄House of Lords, লὀᜨ᭱ྖἲᶵࡢᙺࡶྜࢃࡏᣢࡗ ‘Three-Step Test’ in Copyright Law” [2008] 39 IIC 707; see also C Geiger, J Griffiths & R ࡚࠸ࡿࡣࠊDesigners Guild Ltd v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2000] 1 WLR 2416 Hilty, “Towards a Balanced Interpretation of the ‘Three-Step Test’ in Copyright Law” ௳࡛ࠊࡇࡇ࡛᫂ࡋࡓࡢࡲࡗࡓࡃఝ೫ࡗࡓࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡓࠋ [2008] EIPR 489. Declaration ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣ௨ୗࡶએਭࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋH He, “Seeking a C Geiger, J Griffiths & R Hilty, “Declaration on a Balanced Interpretation of the Copyright Act 1965, Art 24. Balanced Interpretation of the Three-Step Test: an Adjusted Structure in View of Divergent ▱ⓗ⏘ἲࡢࠕࣂࣛࣥࢫࠖࡢẚ႘ᑐࡍࡿᢈุࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊsee G Dinwoodie, “The Approaches” [2009] IIC 274; R Wright, “The ‘Three-Step Test’ and the Wider Public Inter- WIPO Copyright Treaty: Transition to the Future of International Copyright Lawmaking?” est: Towards a More Inclusive Interpretation” [2009] Journal of World Intellectual Prop- [2007] Case Western Reserve Law Review 751; A Drassinower, “From Distribution to Dia- erty 600; W Patry, “The Declaration on the Three-Step Test” The Patry Copyright Blog, ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࡤᐜࡉࢀࡿࠋೳࡋࡓไးᑐᛂࡋࡓो௳ࢆ‶ࡓࡍࡇࠊࡑࡢ⏝ࡀ ௨ୖࡢᥦࡣࡍ࡚ࠊୖঠࡢࢩࢫࢸ࣒యࢆ◳┤ࡉࡏ࡚࠸ࡿಶูࡢ ၥᆏᑐࡍࡿᑐ·࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ؝సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࢆࡼࡾɢྜⓗ సရࡢ೫ᖖࡢ⏝ࡋ࡞࠸ࡇࠊ୕͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞┈ࢆͳ៖ࡋ࡚ࠊ ਚᩚࡍࡿᥦࡶᩘከࡃ࡞ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊἲᚊࡣ⏝͵ࡸ୍ӑ ؝ࡣࡓࡲ͵؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢྜ⌮ⓗ࡞┈ࢆᙜᦆ࡞ࢃ࡞࠸ࡇࠊࡀࡑ ࢇࡢᇶᮏⓗ࡞ᶒࢆ৶ࡵࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࡍࡿᥦ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ᭱ಶࡢᶒ ࡢो௳࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ͵↔Ⅼࢆᙜ࡚ࡓᒎ࿔ᑐᢠࡍࡿࡓࡵࠊࢢ⌧ࡢҜ⏤ࡸሗ࠾ࡼࡧࣉࣛ ࣂࢩ࣮ࡢҜ⏤ࡢᶒࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࠊᙉຊ࡞ᶒࢆ৶ࡵࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࡍࡿ ᙇ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ไးࡀࠊϸ ⌧ࢌἲࡢไးപྜࡍࡿሙྜࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊϹ ୣ֑ࡉ ࢀࡓࡼࡾไးࡢɶࡸ࡞ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖപྜࡍࡿሙྜࠊ ࡇࢀࡽࡣࠊฌोࡘ౯್࠶ࡿᥦ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ ࠸ࡎࢀࡶᰂమᛶࡢḞዴ࠸࠺ᵓⓗ࡞ၥᆏᑐࡍࡿࠊɢྜⓗ࡞ॾỴ·ࢆ Wἲ͵᪂ࡓ࡞ไး᮲ᅟࢆຍࡍࡿࡇࢆ৶ࡵࡿᥦ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ௨ୗࡣ ᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋᇶᮏⓗ࡞ᶒࡢᑟධࡶࠊ؝సᶒἲࡢപ⏝ࡘ࠸ ࡑࡢ᰿ᣐ࡛࠶ࡿᜨ ࡚ࠊ᪂ࡋ࠸ၥᆏࡀⓎ⏕ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿศญᑐࡍࡿ࢞ࢲࣥࢫࢆᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡶࡢ ࠕไးࢆ॔ᐃࡍࡿ᮲ᅟࡢfࡣࠊไးࡀ࣮࢜ࣉ࣭࢚ࣥࣥࢻࡢࢥ࣭࣮ࣔࣥࣟ ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ ᆺࠊไးࢆవࡍࡇࢁ࡞ࡃิᣲࡍࡿᡂᩥἲᆺࢆǼࡳྜࢃࡏ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ୍ ࡋࡋࠊᵓࣞ࣋ࣝ࠾ࡅࡿኚ᭦ࡢᥦࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊWittem ᪉࡛ࠊྠ✀ࡢ⏝ࡢᣑࡣࠊไးࢆṇᙜ࡛ࡁࡿ≧ἣࢆࡍ࡚ண ࡍ Group ࡣࠊᑗ᮶࠾ࡅࡿਚࡢࢽࢩࢸࣈ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣཧ ࡿࡇࡣྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿ࠸࠺ᐇ↷ࡽࡍࠊࢩࢫࢸ࣒ྍḞ࡞ᰂమ ࡇࡢ֑ ᛶࢆ࠼ࡿࠋ᪉ࠊྍЏ࡞ᰂమᛶࡣࡘࡢ᪉ἲ࡛⊃ࡵࡽࢀࡿࠋ୍ࠊ ࡛ࡣࠊୣ֑ࡉࢀࡓࡑࡋ࡚ᙉไⓗ࡞ಶูࡢไးࡢࣜࢫࢺࡀᥦࡉࢀ ᣑࡣ᫂♧ⓗิᣲࡉࢀࡓไးྠ✀ࡢ⏝းࡽࢀࡿ͐ࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ ͳࢶ࣮ࣝࡋ࡚ࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ؝సᶒἲࡢ֑ࢆබࢢࡋࡓᝯ ࡓᝯ ิᣲࡉࢀࡓไးᑐࡋ࡚॔úⓗ࡞ຠᯝࡀᤵࡉࢀࡿ͐ ࠊࡑ࠺ࡋ ࠸ࡃࡘࡢไးࡣࠊྖἲᗓࡀኚࡍࡿ≧ἣᰂమᑐᛂ࡛ࡁࡿࡼ ֑ࡣࡲࡓࠊ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺ ࡓྠ✀ࡢ⏝ࡣࠊసရࡢ೫ᖖࡢ⏝┦ࡏࡎࠊࡲࡓ୕͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞ ࡞࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ࠕᢳᗘࢆࡵࡓไးࠖMETA Exception ࡶྵࢇ࡛࠸ࡿᜨ ┈ࡶͳ៖ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ؝ࡣࡓࡲ͵؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞┈ࢆᙜ ࠺ࠊẚుⓗ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᙧ࡛ୣ֑ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ᦆ࡞ࢃ࡞࠸ᝯ ࠕิᣲࡉࢀࡓ⏝▩┪ࡋ࡞࠸࠶ࡽࡺࡿࡢ⏝ࡣ͐ḟࡢो௳ࢆ‶ࡓࡏ ࡑ࠺ࡋࡓ॔ᐃࡢᑟධࡣࠊࡑࢀࡼࡗ࡚ቑࡍᰂమᛶࡀࠊኚࡍࡿ≧ἣ 23rd July 2008, http://william-patry.blogspot.com/2008/07/declaration-on-three-step-test. ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊẚుⓗ೯ࡸ࡛ࠊพࡾྜ࠸ࡢࢀࡓᑐᛂࢆ৶ࡵࡿⅬ࡛ព̿ࡀ࠶ html; see M Ficsor, “The ‘Three-Step Test’ – De Lege Lata – De Lege Ferenda”, paper ࡿࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ॔ᐃࡀຍ┕ᅜ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣḢᕞೳྜࣞ࣋ࣝࡢWἲ͵ࡢࡳ delivered at the Fordham International Intellectual Property Law and Policy Conference, ྥࡅࡽࢀࡓሙྜࡣࠊࡑࡢᰂమᛶࡣࠊࡁࡃᦆ࡞ࢃࢀࡿࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊ Cambridge 2009, http://iplj.net/blog/page /2; A Lucas, “For a Reasonable Interpretation of ⏝͵ࡣ౫↛ࡋ࡚ࠊືࡁࡀഌࡃࣟࣅ࣮άືࡢ⃭ࡋ࠸Wἲഓ⛬౫Ꮡࡏ the Three-Step Test” [2010] EIPR 277. ࡊࡿࢆᚓ࡞࠸ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ See, for example, C Geiger, “Fundamental Rights, a Safeguard for the Coherence of Intellectual Property Law” [2004] IIC 268. Ḣᕞೳྜࡢ؝࡞ྡ؝సᶒᏛ͵ࡢࢢ࣮ࣝࣉࠋ www.copyrightcode.eu. See Chapter 5. Art 5.5. See, notably, Art 5.4. The Wittem Project, European Copyright Code 19, n 48. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ؝సᶒᏛ͵ࡢ୰ࡣࡉࡽளࡳࡇࢇ࡛ࠊWἲᗓࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊྖἲᗓ ↷ࡼࡿࡁࡔᙇࡍࡿࠋࡑࢀࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ ࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢᶵЏࢆྰᐃ ࡶᰂమ࡞ᑐᛂࢆồࡵࡿ͵ࡶ࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊ⌧ࢌࡢไးࡼࡗ࡚࢝ࣂ ⓗ࡞ไljࡽࠊϟᐃⓗ࡞࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ಟṇࡋࠊᝰࢸࢫࢺࡢ᮲௳ᑐWࡋ ࣮ࡉࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡞؝స≀ࡢ⏝ࢆྍࡍࡿᶒးࢆࠊุ࣒ᐁࡶ࠼ ࡞࠸ࡍ࡚ࡢ⏝ࢆ৶ࡵࡼ࠺ࡍࡿࠋ ࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࡍࡿᙇ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ࡛ࡣࠊMartin Senftleben ࡣ ୗঠࡢᥦࢆࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᜨ ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖ᪉ᘧࢆࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙧ࡛ࠊ᥇⏝ࡍࡿࡇ ࡣ᫂ࡽ࡞Ⅼࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࢸࢫࢺࡢो௳ࡣᅜၯⓗ৶ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࣚ ࠕ᪂ࡋ࠸ࣥࢱ࣮ࢿࢵࢺ⏘ᴗࡀⓎᒎࡋࠊࡑࡢȂ῭ⓗྍЏᛶࢆ᭷ຠά⏝ࡍ ࣮ࣟࢵࣃ࡛ࡣࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࡼࡾࡶᨻⓗཷࡅධࢀ ࡿࡓࡵࡣࠊ؝సᶒไးࡢ୰༑ศ࡞ᜥᢤࡁࡢవᆅࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇࡀᚲ ࡽࢀ᫆࠸ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋࠊ©͵ࡀูࡢሙ࡛ਭࡌࡓࡼ࠺ᝲ ࡇ࠺ ोྍḞ࡛࠶ࡿ͐ࡇ࠺ࡋࡓၥᆏࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿࠊࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫ ࡋࡓᙧ࡛പ⏝ࡍࡿࡢࡣၥᆏࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࢸࢫࢺࡢඖ᮶ࡢᶵЏࡣไး࡛࠶ࡾࠊ ࢺࡢᘓযⓗ࡞⏝┠ࢆྥࡅࡿᶵࡣ⇍ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺ࡳ࠼ࡿࠋಶ௦؝స ؝స≀ࡢҜ⏤࡞⏝ࢆไးࡍࡿᙺࢆᯝࡓࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࢀ ᶒἲࡣࢸࢫࢺࢆࠊไးࢆɮࡵࡘࡅࡿࡓࡵ⏝ࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊಶࠎࡢ ࡣࠊࠕࣂࣛࣥࢫࠖࡢࢀࡓᙧ࡛പษॾจࡉࢀࡓࡋ࡚ࡶࠊḢᕞࡢ؝స ࢣ࣮ࢫࡢಶูࡢ≧ἣᑐᛂࡋ࡚ࠊไးࢆไljࡋࡓࡾࠊᣑࡋࡓࡾࡍࡿὙ ᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࠊࡼࡾ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᰂమᛶࢆᑟධࡍࡿ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ ɾࡉࢀࡓẚుͳฎࢸࢫࢺࡋ࡚ࠊ⏝ࡍࡿࡇࢆ᥎ࡍࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡉࡽࠊࡑࢀࡣ॔úⓗ࡞࢞ࢲࣥࢫࢆࢇᥦ౪ࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖ Wἲⓗᚰࡢྜ⌮࡞೫॒ṇ॔࡞⏝ࡢ┦ඞᑐࡍࡿࠊᰂమᛶࡢ ࡣࠊ☜Wࡉࢀࡓពࢆᣢࡘࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊྛᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀപ⏝ࡍࡿሙྜ ࠶ࡿ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᇶ‽ࡶ࡙࠸ࡓࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᝳࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢ᥇⏝ࡣࠊ ࠊࡢᡭẁࡼࡗ࡚฿ങࡋࡓȆਭࢆᚋⓗṇᙜࡍࡿᙺࡋᯝࡓ ࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢࡼࡾᰂమ࡛ࠊࣂࣛࣥࢫࡢࢀࡓപ⏝ࡢഘ ࡋ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗࡓࠋ ࢆ࿔ࡃᝯ ࡇ࠺ࡋࡓ≧ἣୗ࡛ࠊਭ͵ങࡀ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ؝సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࢆࡼࡾᰂమ ࡑ࠺ࡋࡓࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᆺࡢ᮲ᅟࡣࠊ࠸࡞ࡃ᪤Ꮡࡢࢩࢫࢸ࣒ᰂమ ࡞ࡶࡢࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢ௦᭰ࠊලయⓗࡣůᅜࣔࢹࣝࢆ࣮࣋ࢫࡋࡓࠊो ᛶࢆ࠼ࡿࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊSenftleben ࠾ࡼࡧྠᵝࡢͳ࠼ࢆᥦࡍࡿேࠎ Ǣࡶ࡙࠸ࡓࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ⌮ਭࡢ᥇⏝ࢆࠊ┿᥈ồࡋ࡚ࡇ࡞ࡗ ࡣࠊᰂమᛶᑐࡍࡿ॔úⓗ࡞ไljࡣࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ⌮ਭࡢࡼ࠺ ࡓࡢࡣᛮએ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡣࠊ౯್࠶ࡿᩍছࢆྵࢇ࡛࠸ࡿࡇ ोǢࡢࣜࢫࢺࡼࡿࡼࡾࡶࠊࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ᮲௳ ࡀࡋࡤࡋࡤᣦࡉࢀ࡚࠾ࡾᝲ ࠸ࡃࡘࡢᅜࡢWἲ͵ࡣࠊ᭱ಶࡇࡢࣔ ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᑡ࡞ࡃࡶࢸࢫࢺࡢ ࠾ࡼࡧ ोǢࠊলὀᜨঠ ࡢলὀཧ ࢹࣝࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡘࡘ࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊਭ͵ങࡣ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࣇ࢙࣭ ࣮ࣘࢫ⌮ਭࢆჳⓗᑟධࡍࡿࡇࢆ᫂ࡽഺࡅ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ࡇࡢ௹ ࡇࢀࡣẚుⓗးᐃࡉࢀࡓúᅖ࡛ࠊᶒࡢ⏝⌮ਭࢆᙉࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ ࡣṇᙜࡉࢀࡿࡔࢁ࠺ᜭ ᇶᮏⓗᶒࡣࡼࡾᑛฌࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠊᙇࡍࡿᏛ͵ᅛ᭷ࡢख़Ⅼ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ M Senftleben, “Fair Use in the Netherlands – a Renaissance?” [2009] AMI 1, 7. See also, A Christie, “Fine-tuning the System: the Role of Limitations”, paper delivered at ATRIP J Griffiths, “The ‘Three-Step Test’ in European Copyright Law – Problems & Solutions” Congress, 21st-23rd July, 2008; D Gervais, “Towards a New Core International Copyright [2009] IPQ 428. Norm: the Reverse Three-Step Test” [2005] 9 Marquette Ip Law Review 1, 32. Most recent- See, for example, K J Koelman, “Fixing the Three-Step Test” [2006] EIPR 407, 410. ly, see M Senftleben, “Overprotection and Protection Overlaps in Intellectual Property Law See, for example, M-C Janssens, “The Issue of Exceptions: Reshaping the Keys to the – the Need for Horizontal Fair Use Defences” in Horizontal Issues in Intellectual Property Gates in the Territory of Literary, Musical and Artistic Creation” in Research Handbook on Law: Uncovering the Matrix, ed A Kur (Edward Elgar, 2010). the Future of EU Copyright, P Torremans ed (Edward Elgar, 2009) 338. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ᜱࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᝳࣔࢹ࣮ࣝண ᅔႤᛶࡢၥᆏូ ोǢࢆཧͳࡋ࡚Ỵᐃࡉࢀࡿࠋิᣲࡉࢀࡓࣜࢫࢺࡑࡢࡶࡢࡶࡑࢀࡽး ࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡲࡓࠊᵝࠎ࡞ोǢࡢ┦ᑐⓗ࡞࢙࢘ࢺࡶ࠶ࡽࡌࡵ ůᅜ؝సᶒἲࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡣࡼࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᜨ Ỵࡵࡽࢀ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢ᮲ࡢ॔ᐃࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣ≉ᐃࡢ ᮲؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ؝స≀ᑐࡍࡿⓗᶒ࠾ࡼࡧᜯ᮲୍ ≧ἣୗ࠾ࡅࡿᐇࢆͳ៖ࡋ࡚ࠊಶูࡢ௳࠾ࡅࡿᐖࢆപษࣂࣛ ᐃࡢ؝స͵ࡢẶྡࢢ♧࠾ࡼࡧྠ୍ᛶಖᣢࡢᶒࡢ॔ᐃࢃࡽࡎࠊ ࣥࢫࡍࡿࡇࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡇࡢᶒးࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࠊůᅜ؝సᶒἲࡣⓎᒎࡍ ᢈোࠊॾࠊࢽ࣮ࣗࢫሗഘࠊᩍᤵᩍᐊ࠾ࡅࡿࣽᩘࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࢆసᡂࡍ ࡿᢏⓗ≧ἣࢆͳ៖ධࢀ࡚ಟṇࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡑࡢȆᯝࠊḢᕞ؝సᶒἲ ࡿࢌⅭࢆྵࡴࠊ◊"ࡲࡓࡣਚᰝ¬ࢆ┠ⓗࡍࡿ؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ؝స≀ࡢ ไࢆᝎࡲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ௦ഌࢀࡢ≧ἣࢆᅇഺࡋ࡚ࡁࡓᝯ ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࢥࣆ࣮ࡲࡓࡣࣞࢥ࣮ࢻࡢࣽࣷࡑࡢ᮲ᐃࡵ ࡿᡭẁࡼࡿ⏝ࢆྵࡴࡣࠊ؝సᶒࡢᐖ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋ؝స≀ࡢ⏝ ࡶࡕࢁࢇࠊࡇࡢᰂమᛶࡑࡢࡶࡢࡣၥᆏࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ोǢࢆ࣋ ࣮ࢫࡋࡓᑂᰝࡣࠊุ࣒ᐁ༑ศ᫂☜࡞࢞ࢲࣥࢫࢆ࠼ࡎࠊࡑࡢȆᯝࠊ ࡀࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡞ࡿྰࢆุ᩿ࡍࡿሙྜͳ៖ࡍࡁोǢࡣࠊ௨ ५ⓗ࡞Ỵᐃࢆṇᙜࡍࡿࡢ࡚ࡋ࠸ڨᶵЏࡋᯝࡓࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡢ ୗࡢࡶࡢࢆྵࡴࠋ ᣦࡶ࠶ࡿᜨ ϸ ⏝ࡢ┠ⓗ࠾ࡼࡧᛶ⏝ࡀၟᴗᛶࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࡲࡓࡣჰႠⓗ ࠕุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊࡲࡎ⏝ࡀබṇ࡛࠶ࡿྰࡢ᭱Ǻⓗ࡞ุᐃࢆୗࡋࠊࡑࡢ ᩍϡ┠ⓗࢆྵࡴ ᚋ ोǢࢆྍЏ࡞းࡾȆਭപྜࡍࡿࡼ࠺ਚᩚࡍࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ ᇶᮏⓗࡣࠊ ोǢࡣศᯒࢆಁࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡴࡋࢁࠊࡍ࡛࠶ࡿ Ϲ ؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ؝స≀ࡢᛶ Ȇਭࢆࡅࡿࡓࡵࡢ౽࡞ตࡢᙺࢆᯝࡓࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ Ϻ ؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ؝స≀యࡢೳ࠾ࡅࡿ⏝ࡉࢀࡓൺศࡢฎ࠾ ࡇ࠺ࡋࡓពᛮỴᐃࡢࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡣࠊ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢண ᅔႤᛶࢆ⏕ࡳฟࡋࠊ ࡼࡧᐇᛶ ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᶒࢆ༴ၔࡉࡽࡍࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊ⏝͵ࡢᢠᘚࡢ᭷ຠᛶ ࡶᦆ࡞࠺ࡢព॒ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋ⏝͵ࡣࡑࡢ⏝ࡀබṇ࡛࠶ࡿ࠺☜ಙ ϻ ؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ؝స≀ࡢ₯ᅾⓗᕷሙࡲࡓࡣ౯್ᑐࡍࡿ⏝ࡢᙳᅚ ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ሙྜࠊ؝సᶒᐖতࡢࣜࢫࢡࢆࡽ࡞࠸ྍЏᛶࡶ࠶ࡿࡽ࡛ ࠶ࡿᜨ ୖঠࡢࡍ࡚ࡢोǢࢆͳ៖ࡋ࡚බṇ⏝ࡀ৶ᐃࡉࢀࡓሙྜࠊ؝స≀ࡀᮍ Ⓨࢌ࡛࠶ࡿ࠸࠺ᐇҜయࡣࠊࡿ৶ᐃࢆጉࡆ࡞࠸ᝯ ࠕࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢ᭕ࡉࡽࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡣ࡞ࡾਭ ᮏ᮲ࡣࠊุ࣒ᐁࡀసࡾฟࡋࡓ᪤Ꮡࡢཎ๎ࢆ᮲ᩥࡋࡓࡶࡢ࡛ࠊࡢ᫂ ☜॔ᐃࡉࢀࡓࠊࠕࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ࠖไး୪Ꮡࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ᭱ࡶฌो࡞≉ᚩ ࡓࡔࡋࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣิᣲࡉࢀࡓ ोǢ௨እࡢोǢࡣฌख़ࡋ࡞࠸ഴྥࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ ࡣࠊࡑࡢࠕ࣮࢜ࣉࣥࡉࠖ࠶ࡿࠋ॔ᐃৡᙜࡍࡿ⏝ࡣࠊవࡍࡇࢁ࡞ For notable examples, see Sega Enters Ltd v. Accolade Inc 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir, ࡃิᣲࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ⏝ࡢබṇࡉ࡞ࡣิঠࡉࢀࡓ≉ᐃࡢ 1992); Field v. Google Inc 412 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (D Nev, 2006); Perfect 10 v. Amazon, Inc ࡇࡢ᭱ᚋࡢࣃࣛࢢࣛࣇࡣᖺຍࡉࢀࡓࠋSee Fair Use of Unpublished Works 487 F.3d 701 (9th Cir, 2007). Act, Pub L No. 102-492, 106 Stat 3145 (1992); HR Rep No. 102-836, at 8 (1992). ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO D Nimmer, “Fairest of them All and Other Fairy Tales of Fair Use” [2003] 66 Law & Contemp Probs 263, 281. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ◚ྍЏ࡛ࠊࡘࡋࡤࡋࡤ⌮ਭୖࡢᢠᘚࡍࡂ࡞࠸͐࠼ࡽࢀࡿࣜࢫࢡࠊ ࡇࡢࠕᨭපⓗ࡞ព॒ࠖࡣࡲࡓࠊḟࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᣦࡼࡗ࡚ᨭᣢࡉࢀࡿࡇ ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ࠼ࡽࢀࡓሙྜத࠺ࣜࢫࢡࢆࡿࠊȂ῭ຊࡢ࡞࠸ಶேࡸჰၟ ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡀண ᅔႤ࡛࠶ࡿࡇࡣࠊᶒࡑࡢࡶࡢၥ ᴗⓗ࡞؝స≀⏝͵ࡗ࡚ࡣ≉ࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡋࠊࡑࢀࡣࠊࢢ⌧ ᆏࡀ࠶ࡿࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢࠕ≉ู࡞ሙྜ ͵ࡢ୍ӑࢇᑐࡍࡿ࿋ᡞࡢᙺࢆᯝࡓࡍฟ∧♫ࠊࢫࢱࢪ࢜ࠊᨺೖᒁࠊ ࡘ࠸࡚ ࡢ᮲௳লὀᜨঠ ࡢলὀཧ↷ࢆ‶ࡓࡍࡇࢆጉࡆࠊࣇ࢙࣭ ࠾ࡼࡧࣞࢥ࣮ࢻ♫ࡀࠊࣜࢫࢡᅇഺࡿሙྜࡶᙜ࡚ࡣࡲࡿࠋ؝సᶒ ࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࢆᅜၯ؝సᶒἲࡢᯟእ࠸ࡸࡗ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ࡍࡿᣦ࡛ ࡢᏳᘚࡋ࡚ࡢࢢ⌧ࡢҜ⏤ࡀࠊᜏᖖⓗ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃண ᅔႤ࡛࠶ࡿࡇࡀࠊ ᆐ࡞ত⏝┦ࡲࡗ࡚ࠕࢆᚓࡿ๐၆ࡍࡿࠖᩥࢆ⏕ࡳฟࡋ࡚ ࠸ࡿࠋࡇ࠺ࡋࡓᩥࡢ୰࡛ࡣࠊ࿋ᡞࡋ࡚ᶵЏࡍࡿ௰͵̿࠾ࡼࡧᙼࡽ tory of Literary, Musical and Artistic Creation” in Research Handbook on the Future of EU Copyright, P Torremans ed (Edward Elgar, 2009) 338 [footnotes omitted]. ࡢച࠸ࠊ࡞ࡽࡧಖၔᥦ౪͵ࡢ↓ख़̿ࡣࠊ؝సᶒࢆᐖࡋ࡞࠸ሙྜࡶ ྵࡵࠊၥᆏⓎ⏕ࡢ࠾ࡑࢀࡢ࠶ࡿ࠶ࡽࡺࡿ⏝ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊ⏝͵ࡀ⏝ Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 75, 116-30; H Cohen Jehoram, “Restrictions on ྍࢆྲྀᚓࡍࡿࡇࢆᙇࡍࡿᝯ ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲࡢࡇࡢഃჳࡇࡑࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᆺࣔࢹࣝࡢḢᕞ ࡢᑟධᑐࡍࡿ᭱ࡢᑐ⌮⏤࡛࠶ࡿࠋMarie-Christine Janssens ࡣ᭱ಶ ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺ঠࡋࡓᜨ See, for example, R Okediji, “Toward an International Fair Use Doctrine” [2000] 39 Copyright and Their Abuse” [2005] EIPR 359 ᝰ௬ůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡀ ៰៥᠏ ࡢ ࣃࢿ࡛ࣝதࢃࢀࡓࡋࡓࡽࠊ⚾ࡣᑒ༳ࡉࢀࡿᛮ࠺ࠋࠖ; G Dworkin, “Copyright, The Public Interest and Freedom of Speech: A UK Copyright Lawyer’s Perspective” in Copyright and Free Speech, J Griffiths & U Suthersanen eds, (OUP, 2005) 153, 162 ᝰ͐೫ ᖖࡣࣇ࣮࣭࣮ࣜࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࢆពࡍࡿࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡀࠊ؝సᶒ͵ࡢṇᙜ࡞ ᶒ࢚*ࡋ࡞࠸ࢣ࣮ࢫࡣͳ࠼ࡃ࠸ᝯ; R Burrell & A Coleman, Copyright Exceptions: The Digital Impact (Cambridge University Press, 2005); J Reichman, “Universal ࠕࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ไးࢆవࡍࡇࢁ࡞ࡃิᣲࡍࡿࢩࢫࢸ࣒௦ࢃࡿ᫂☜࡞ࢩ Minimum Standards of Intellectual Property Protection under the TRIPS Component of the ࢫࢸ࣒ࡣࠊࠗࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࠘ࢩࢫࢸ࣒ྠ✀ࡢ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞പ⏝ᇶ‽ࢆ WTO Agreement” [1995] 29(2) International Lawyer 345, 369; S Ricketson, WIPO Study ᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࠊ؝సᶒᐖᑐࡋᰂమ࡞ᢠᘚࢆᥦ౪ࡋࠊ ࢃW࡚ad hocࡢไးࢆ৶ࡵࠊࡢලయⓗ࡞≧ἣࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿ వᆅࢆ࠼ࡿࠋࡉࡽฌो࡞ࡢࡣࠊࡑࢀࡣ᪂ࡋ࠸ ண ࡛ࡁ࡞ࡗࡓ ࡶപ⏝࡛ࡁࡿࠋࠕࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖࡣ͐ ៥ូᑓ࿋ᐙ࡛ࡉ࠼ॾỴᅔႤ on Limitations and Exceptions of Copyright and Related Rights in the Digital Environment (Geneva: WIPO, 2003); S Ricketson, The three-step test, deemed quantities, libraries and closed exceptions (Centre for Copyright Studies, 2003), 147-154; T Newby, “What’s Fair Here is not Fair Everywhere: Does the American Fair Use Doctrine Violate International Copyright Law?” [1999] Stanford Law Review 1633; P Geller “Can the GATT Incorporate ࡞ࣽ႗࡞ᴫᛕ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡶࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢोǢࡣ༢࡞ࡿ࢞ࢻ࡛ࣛࣥ࠶ Berne Whole?” [1990] EIPR 423. ůᅜࡀ ៰៥ ຍ┕ࡋࡓⅬ࡛ࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ ࡾࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣࢣ࣮ࢫ࣭ࣂ࣭ࢣ࣮ࢫ࡛Ҝ⏤᥇⏝࡛ࡁࡿࠋɢᣓࡍࡿࠊ ୧Wࡍࡿ࠸࠺ࡢࡀůᅜᨻᗓࡢ॒ॾࡔࡗࡓ >ᝰ>៰៥᠏@ ࡢ᮲ࡣࠊ࣋ࣝࢾ᮲ljࡢ ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࣭ࢩࢫࢸ࣒࠾࠸࡚ࠊ⏝͵ࡣࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ࢩࢫࢸ࣒௨ୖ ࠊࡢࡼ࠺࡞⏝࡞ࡽࡉࢀࡿࡢࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ᪉ྥࢆ॒ኻࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ ࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊଦᡂὴࡀˎࡾಹࡋᙇࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡶࢃࡽࡎᨭපⓗ ࡞ព॒ࡣࠊǗŻ࡞ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᴫᛕࡢ᥇⏝ᑐ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊ©͵ࡣࡑ ࢀࡀᖾ࡛࠶ࡿࡣᛮࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ᝯ ᮲ࡢപ⏝úᅖࢆࠊ؝సᶒ࠾ࡼࡧೳࡍࡿᶒᑐࡍࡿࡍ࡚ࡢไးᣑࡍࡿ ࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ៳៰ ຍ┕ᅜࡀࡍࡿไး࠾ࡼࡧး⏺ࢆಎ࠺ࡌ࡚ᅇഺࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢ ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡣ؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿసရࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡍࡿůᅜ؝సᶒἲ᮲୍ Ҥࡍࡿࠋ ࠖUruguay Round Agreements Act, Statements of Administrative Action in Relation to Intellectual Property Rights. H R Doc 103-316, 103 Cong 2d Sess 656).@ࠋࣇ࢙࣭ ࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡀोồࡍࡿࣂࣛࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࢆ೫ࡌ࡚ࠊůᅜἲࡀࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ ࢸࢫࢺࢆലᏲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡍࡿਭ͵ࡶ࠸ࡿࠋDan L Burk and Julie E Cohen, “Fair Use N Netanel, Copyright’s Paradox (Oxford University Press, 2008) 66 (footnote omitted). Infrastructure for Rights Management Systems” [2001] 15 Harvard Journal of Law and M-C Janssens, “The Issue of Exceptions: Reshaping the Keys to the Gates in the Terri- Technology. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࠶ࡿᝯ ᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿࠋᑐ͵ࡣࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢ࣮ࣝࣝࢆᣄྰࡍࡿၯࠊࡋࡤࡋ ࡤ᮲ᩥࡑࡢࡶࡢࡢ᮲௳ࢆ୨࠼ࡓએਭࡣࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊุ࣒ᐁࡣࠊ ᜲ೫ᛕᑐࡍࡿၥូ ᮲ࢆപ⏝ࡍࡿၯࠊ↓ไး࡞Ҝ⏤ࢆாཷࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸Ⅼ ࢆ⌮ॾࡍࡿࡇࡣฌो࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࿇ᖺࢃࡓࡗ࡚ࠊࣽ႗࡞ุయDŽࡀ ࡳ ண ᅔႤࡢၥᆏࡣࠊ᫂ࡽ࡞Ⅼࡢ࠶ࡿࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᑐࡋ࡚ࠊࣚ ฌ࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊೳൕุ࣒᭱ᡤࡢุỴࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࠊᮍබࢢ ࣮ࣟࢵࣃࡀ௹ࡍࡿ᭱ࡢ⌮⏤࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇ࠺ࡋࡓ௹ࡣࡇࡲ࡛ṇᙜ ࡢసရᑐࡋ࡚ࡣࠊබࢢ῭ࡳࡢసရᑐࡋ࡚ࡼࡾࡶࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢ৶ ࡛ࡁࡿࡔࢁ࠺ᜭ ᐃࡀႤࡋࡃᝲ ࡞ᢈোࡀ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᕷሙᝏᙳᅚࢆཬࡰࡋࡓ ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊࡑࢀࡣࠊ᮲ࡢ ोǢ ؝స≀ࡢᕷሙࡲࡓࡣ౯್ᑐࡍࡿ ⏝ࡢᙳᅚ ࢆ᳨খࡍࡿၯࠊ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵᭷ࡣാ࡞࠸ᝯ ࡇࡢၥᆏࢆͳ࠼ࡿ࠶ࡓࡗ࡚࡞ࡢࡣࠊࡲࡎࠊ࡞ᰂమᛶࢆᣢࡕࠊ ྠண ྍЏ࡞ཎ๎ࢆ᥈ồࡍࡿࡳࡣࠊኻᩋǺࢃࡿⅬࢆ৶ઁ ࡍࡿࡇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢਭᩥࡢෑᅼ࡛᫂ࡋࡓ◳┤ྲྀࡾǼࡶ࠺ࡍࢀ ᐇၯࠊůᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊ ोǢࢆศᯒࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡼࡾᰂమ ࡤࠊ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢண ᅔႤᛶࢆᐜࡍࡿࡇࡣഺࡅࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡉࡽࠊࣇ ᛶࡢ࡞࠸ไး॔ᐃࢆ᥇⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿከࡃࡢᅜࠎ࠾࠸࡚ࠊྠࡌၥᆏࢆॾỴ ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࢆࠕ᭱ࡶၥᆏࡢከ࠸ཎ๎ ࡍࡿỴࡲࡾᩥྃࡶὀពࡍࡿ ࡍࡿࡓࡵ⏝ࡉࢀࡿࢶ࣮ࣝẚࡿࠊƝᐦࡘৢǭ࡞୍ೳࡢḟⓗ ोǢࢆ࿔Ⓨࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊࣅ࿌ࡼࡿ⏝ࡀᕷሙ࠾ࡼࡧ౯್ ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࠊࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࡀ᫂ࡽोồࡍࡿࡇࡢࡣࠊࡑࡢ ࠼ࡿᙳᅚࢆো౯ࡍࡿၯࠊᜏஂⓗⓎ⏕ࡍࡿᚠ⎔ਭἲࡢၥᆏࡣࠊůᅜࡢ ࡢɝᙇಀࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡣࠊ؝స≀ࡀࠕ೫ᖖࡢ⏝ ุ࣒ᡤࡀࡇࡢोǢࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࠊ࿇ᖺࢃࡓࡗ࡚Ὑɾࡋ࡚ࡁࡓപษ࡞ ࡍࡿࠖࡼ࠺࡞≧ἣࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ؝స͵ࡢࠕྜἲⓗ࡞┈ࢆᙜᦆ࡞࠺ࠖ≧ἣ࠾ ၥࡼࡗ࡚ᅇഺ࡛ࡁࡿᜨ ࡅࡿ⏝ࢆචࡍࡿຊࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢȆᯝࠊ ࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ ࠾ࡼࡧ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ ࢫ ࢸࢵࣉചࡍࡿ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊ៳៰ ࣃࢿࣝࡢ ࢫࢸࢵࣉࡢॾจ ࡼࢀࡤࠊไးࡀ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡽࣛࢭࣥࢫྍЏ࡞ᕷሙࢆዣ࠺ሙྜࡣࠊ ࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖ ࠕࢃࢀࢃࢀࡣ₯ᅾⓗ࡞⏝ᩱධࡢ႙ኻࡀࠊ ोǢࡢ᳨খȆᯝࢆཎ࿌ ᭷ࡍࡿྰࢆͳᐹࡍࡿၯ࠾ࡕ࠸ࡿᚠ⎔ਭἲࢆ৶ઁࡋࡓ͐ၥᆏ ചࡍࡿࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡶࡋࡇࢀࡀṇࡋ࠸ࡍࡿࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢ࠶ࡿ ࡣࣽࣷࡀࣥൾ࡛ࡁࡿྰ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࣛࢭࣥࢫධࢆཷࡅࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࡇ ✀ࡢപ⏝ࡣၥࡀ⏕ࡎࡿࠋࠕ؝సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ؝స≀ࡢ₯ᅾⓗᕷሙࡲࡓࡣ౯್ᑐࡍ ࡿ⏝ࡢᙳᅚࠖࡣࠊ᮲ࡼࡗ࡚ोồࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࣂࣛࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢჰᖖฌ ࡣࠊཎ࿌ࢆ᭷ࡍࡿỴᐃⓗ࡞ोᅉ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡾ࠼࡞࠸͐ࢃࢀࢃࢀࡣࠊ₯ ो࡞ोǢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࡑࢀࡣ᭱ฌो࡞ͳᐹ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࡓ࠼ࡤࠊྜࢇᅜ ᅾⓗ࡞ᕷሙࡢᙳᅚࡢၥᆏࢆͳᐹࡍࡿၯࠊࠗఏțⓗ࡛ྜ⌮ⓗ࡞ࠊࡲࡓ ࣒᭱ࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡍࡿ┤ಶࡢุỴ Campbell v. Acuff-Music Inc 510 US 569 ࡣⓎᒎࡢྍЏᛶࡢ࠶ࡿᕷሙࡢࡳ࠘ࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚ᝏᚠ⎔ࢆ᩿ࡕ (1994) ࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊࣅ࿌ࡢ⏝ࡀ؝సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᕷሙ࠼ࡿᝏᙳᅚࡣࠊࡑࡢ⏝ ษࡗ࡚ࡁࡓᝯ ࡀࣇ࢙࡛࡞࠸᥎ᐃࡉࡏࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡇࡀᙉਚࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡉࡽࠊࠕࢫࣜ ࣮࣭ࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ࠶ࡿ∧࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊ؝స͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞┈ࢆᙜᦆ࡞ লὀᜨḟ⏝͵ࡣ೫ᖖࠊ⏝ᩱࢆᨭᡶࢃ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࠊ؝సᶒ͵ࡀ႙ኻࡋࡓ₯ ࢃ࡞࠸࠸࠺ไးࡶᏑᅾࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢ┈ࡢ୰ࡣȂ῭ⓗ࡞┈࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ே᱁ᶒࡶྵ ᅾⓗ⏝ᩱධࢆᆐͳ៖ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠊ ोǢࡣཎ࿌᭷ࡋാ࡞ ࡲࢀࡿࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎࡛ࡣࠊసရࡢȂ῭ⓗᶒಖ᭷͵ษࡾ Ⴃࡉࢀࡓࡢ͵؝┈ࡣࠊ᮲ࡶ࡙࠸࡚ࢌࢃࢀࡿ౯್ࡢࣂࣛࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢ ၯࡣࡲࡗࡓࡃͳ៖ࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࠋSee, further, S Ricketson, The three-step test, deemed See Harper & Row, Publishers Inc v. Nation Enters 471 US 539 (1985). quantities, libraries and closed exceptions (Centre for Copyright Studies, 2003) 147-154. Campbell v. Acuff Rose Music Inc 510 US 569 (1994). Ringgold v. Black Entertainment Television Inc 126 F.3d 70 (1997) para 49. Dellar v. Samuel Goldwyn Inc 104 F.2d 661, 662 (2d Cir. 1930). ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࠸ࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣࠕఏțⓗ࡛ྜ⌮ⓗ࡞ࠊࡲࡓࡣⓎᒎࡢྍЏᛶࡢ࠶ࡿᕷ ࡋ࡚ࠊุ࣒ᐁࡀ๓ỴࡵࡓȆਭࢆṇᙜࡍࡿࡓࡵࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘ ሙࡢࡳࠖࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿุࢆⓎᒎࡉࡏ࡚ࡁࡓࠋ ࢫࡢोǢࢆപ⏝ࡍࡿഴྥࡣ࡞࠸ࡇࢆহ᫂ࡋࡓᝯ ᙼࡢӑⓗ࡞Ȇਭ ࡣᜨ ࡉࡽࠊࡇࡢၥᆏࡢͳᐹࡀࠊ≉ᐃࡢ࠾ࡅࡿࣅ࿌ࡢලయⓗ࡞ࢌື ࢆো౯ࡍࡿࡇࡼࡗ࡚࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࣅ࿌ࡢ⏝ࡀᗈúᅖࢃࡓࡿሙྜ ࠕ☜ࢹ࣮ࢱࡣࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࢆᦆ࡞࠺ከࡃࡢ୍ӑⓗ࡞័ࢌࢆ ࡣࠊཎ࿌ࡢᕷሙ࠼ࡿᙳᅚࢆো౯ࡍࡿࡇࡼࡿࡇࡀࠊุࡢ ᭀგࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋุ࣒ᡤࡣोǢࢆᶵᲔⓗപ⏝ࡍࡿഴྥࡀ࠶ࡾࠊࡲࡓ ࡼࡗ࡚☜Wࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋබṇࡉࡣࠊǗŻᙜ͵ࡔࡅ࡛ͳ៖ࡍࡁ࡛ ࡣ┦ࡍࡿุỴࢆ౽ᐅⓗ⏝ࡍࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࡣࠊಟṇࡍࡿᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿไ ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡼࡾᗈ࠸♫ⓗ࡞Ϭᬒࡶͳ៖ࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺Ὑɾࡉ ᗘⓗ࡞Ḟ၇࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊయⓗࡳࢀࡤࠊከࡃࡢඛᑟⓗ࡛࡞ ࢀࡓࣽ႗࡞ḟⓗ॔๎࠾ࡼࡧḟⓗोǢࡢႏᡂࡀࠊůᅜࡢุࢆࡢ ࠸ࢣ࣮ࢫࡣࠊࡑࢀҜఏඛࡋ࡚⏝ࡍࡿ౯್ࢆᣢࡘࡇࡀহ᫂ࡉࢀ ࡓᝯ ࡼࡾ☜ᐃࡋࡓไးࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࢆᣢࡘᅜࠎࡼࡾࡶࢇࡔࡶࡢࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ᐇၯࠊఱேࡢůᅜࡢ؝సᶒᏛ͵ࡣࠊഓᗘࡢண ᅔႤᛶࡶ࡙ࡃࣇ Beebe ࡢὀព῝ࡃ⌮⏤࡙ࡅࡽࢀࡓȆਭࡣࠊPamela Samuelson ࡼࡿ᭱ ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ᑐࡍࡿᢈุࡣࠊ࡞ࡾ৲ᙇࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿⅬࢆᣦࡋ࡚ ಶࡢ؝సࡼࡗ࡚ࡶᨭᣢࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ“Unbundling Fair Use” ࠾࠸࡚ᝲ ࠸ࡿࠋBarton Beebe ࡣࠊ“An Empirical Study of US Copyright Fair Use Samuelson ࡣࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫุࢆ࠸ࡃࡘࡢ࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜศᆞࡋ࡚࠸ Opinions, 1978-2005”লὀᜨࡇࡢਭᩥࡢলࡘ࠸࡚ࡣᮏ৵ྕྕೳ ࡿࠋࡓ࠼ࡤࠊྜࢇᅜ᠇ἲಟṇ ᮲ࡢࢢ⌧ࡢҜ⏤ೳࡍࡿࢣ࣮ࢫࠊ ࡢࠕůᅜ؝సᶒἲࣇ࢙࣮ࣘࢫุỴᖺࡢᐇহⓗ◊"ࠖᇛᡤᒾ⏕ল ▱ઁࡢᅪᕸࢆ᥎ࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢ؝సᶒࡢ⏝ೳࡍࡿࢣ࣮ࢫࠊ࠾ ཧ↷ ࠾࠸࡚ࠊᖺůᅜ؝సᶒἲࡢⓎຠᚋࡢࡍ࡚ࡢฌो࡞ࣇ࢙ ࡼࡧએࡀᖺ؝సᶒἲࢆWἲࡋࡓၯண ࡛ࡁ࡞ࡗࡓࡼ࠺࡞ ࣭࣮ࣘࢫุỴࡢțওⓗ࡞ศᯒȆᯝࢆⓎࢢࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ Beebe ࡢศᯒȆ ⏝ࡍࡿࢣ࣮ࢫࠊࡀྵࡲࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺యDŽⓗ࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜศ ᯝࡣࠊ᮲ࡢപ⏝ࡘ࠸୍࡚ӑⓗ࡞⌮ॾࡣࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡓ ࡅࡋ࡚ࡳࡿࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫุࡣண ᅔႤ࡛࠶ࡿࡍࡿከࡃࡢᢈุ ࠼ࡤࠊၥࡀᮏ᮶ⓗ५ⓗ࡞ഃჳࢆᣢࡘȆᯝࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫุỴ ࡣ᰿ᣐࡀ࡞࠸ Samuelson ࡣᙇࡍࡿࠋ≉ᐃࡢࠕࢢ࣮ࣝࣉࠖෆࡣࠊ ࡀࠊ᥍ุ࣒ᡤࡼࡗ्࡚ࡉࢀࡿᩘࡣพࡾྜ࠸࡞࠸ᝯ ࡋࡋࠊ ពᛮỴᐃࢆࡍࡿၯࡢ᫂☜࡞ࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋȆਭࡋ࡚ࠊSamuelson Beebe ࡣࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓయุỴ࠾ࡼࡧయุỴࡀⓎ⏕ࡋࡓᑡᩘࡢ᭷ྡ࡞ ࡣ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺᥎ዡࡍࡿᜨ ࢣ࣮ࢫࢆ၆ࡅࡤࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢุἲࡣพࡾྜ࠸࡞ࡢయഴ ྥࡣ♧ࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡇࢆহ᫂ࡋࡓᝯ Beebe ࡣࠊᣦᑟⓗ࡞ਭ͵ࡢព॒ ࠕุ࣒͐ᐁ࠾ࡼࡧਭ͵ࡣࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲࡀ࠸ၥᆏ࠶ࡿࢆᙉਚ ࡍࡿࡇࢆࡸࡵ࡚ࠊ௦ࢃࡾࠊࡼࡾண ྍЏ࡞୍ೳࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲ ࢆᙧᡂࡍࡿᇶ┙࡞ࡿඹ೫ࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࢆࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫุἲࡢ୰ࡽ ࡓ࠼ࡤࠊՕᅜࡢ࠸ࡃࡘࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀ᥇⏝ࡍࡿẚుⓗ॔ᚊࡢ࡞࠸ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࠊ ᥈ࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋྠࡌ᪉บࡢࢢ࣮ࣝࣉෆ࡛ࠊ௨๓ฟࡉࢀࡓุỴ↷ࡽ ០៝ូ៍៕។។ ࡢࡼࡾไးⓗ࡞ࠕࣇ࢙࣭ࢹ࣮ࣜࣥࢢࠖ᮲ᅟࢆẚుࡏࡼࠋSee J Griffiths, ࡋ࡚ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࢆศᯒࡍࡿࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡣࠊᗈú࡞≧ἣ࠾ “Comparative advertising and celebrity photographs: fair dealing under the CDPA 1988” [2006] JIPLP 515. [2008] University of Pennsylvania L Rev 549. Ibid, 582-591. Ibid, 574. Ibid, 622. Ibid, 574-5. [2009] 77 Fordham Law Review 2537. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࡅࡿᗈú࡞ᐖࢆࣂࣛࣥࢫࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢࠊᰂమ࡞ᇶ‽ࡋ࡚ࡢ⏝౯್ࢆ ᜳȆਭូ ኻ࠺ࡇ࡞ࡃࠊࡼࡾ॔๎ⓗ࡞ࡶࡢࡍࡿࡇࡀ࡛ࡁࡿᝯ ůᅜἲ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃἲࢆ༊ศࡍࡿၯࡣࠊᅛᐃ५ᛕࢆഺࡅࡿࡇࡀฌ ᭱ಶࡢࡇࡢ◊"↷ࡽࡏࡤࠊഓᗘ☜ᐇ࡛࠶ࡿࡍࡿࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘ ो࡛࠶ࡿࠋไးᑐࡋ࡚᫂ࡽࠕࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ࠖࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡿ ࢫ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࡢఏțⓗ࡞࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢᢠࡣࠊͳࡍࡿᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿࡼ࠺ ᅜ࠾࠸࡚ࡉ࠼ࠊฌो࡞ᰂమᛶࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋࡑࢀࡽࡣࠊůᅜἲࡢࣇ࢙࣭ ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ ࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡣᗈࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞࠸ࡋࠊࡘࠊůᅜἲ࠾࠸࡚ࣇ࢙ ࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡀ༨ࡵࡿࡼ࠺࡞୰᰾॔ᐃࢆᵓᡂࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡶ࡞࠸ࠋ ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡣᅜၯἲചࡍࡿ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿ࠸࠺ᢈุࡶࠊࡋࡤ ࡋࡋࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢ୰࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢᰂమᛶࢆǼࡳನࡴྍЏ ࡋࡤᣦࡉࢀࡿ⛬ࡢᚓຊࡣᣢࡓ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢཎ๎ࡣࠊ࣋ࣝࢾએࡲࡓࡣ ᛶࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿၯࡣ॒ࡏ࡞࠸ࠋ᮲࠾࠸࡚ͳ៖ࡉࢀࡿोǢࡣ ៰៥ ༠ᐃࡀ⏝ពࡍࡿ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ࢆ೫ࡌࡓṇᘧ࡞ᣮᡓࢆཷࡅ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋ ≉␗ਭࡣ࡞࠸ࠋୡ⏺୰ࡢከࡃࡢᅜࡢ؝సᶒἲไᗘ࠾࠸࡚ࠊ؝సᶒࡢ ࠸ࡎࢀࡏࡼࠊůᅜࡢ࣋ࣝࢾએࡢཧຍࡼࡗ࡚ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ ไးࢆṇᙜࡍࡿၯࠊࡲࡉಀࡍࡿͳ࠼ࡽࢀࡿ✀ᆞࡢͳᐹࡔࡽ ࡣᏲࡽࢀࡓ࠸࠺ᙇࡶ࠶ࡿᝯ ࡇࡢཎ๎ࡣࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫ ࡛࠶ࡿࠋůᅜἲࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢᇶ┙࠶ࡿ౯್५ࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵ ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫᝰࢫࣜ ࣃ؝సᶒἲࡢᇶ┙ࡢࡣࠊฌो࡞ᩥⓗ࡞┦ചࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇࡣ ࣮࣭ࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢᩚྜᛶࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡇࡢએਭࡣࠊᏛ"ⓗ࡞ ച࠸࡞࠸ࠋ᮲ࡀ̿ົ࡙ࡅࡿᐇࡶ࡙࠸ࡓุᑟࡢྖἲᑂᰝ એਭࢆ୨࠼ࡿࡶࡢࡶՍᖸ࠶ࡿᑐࡍࡿଦᡂਭࡸᑐਭࡢ࣓ࣜࢵࢺࡀࠊ ࡣࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢఏțⓗ࡞ྖἲࡣ┦ᐜࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡉࡽࠊůᅜࡀ᥇⏝ࡋ ࠸࡞ࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡏࡼࠊ୍▐WࡕṆࡲࡗ࡚ࡇࡢၥᆏᑐࡍࡿख़Ⅼࢆ ࡚࠸ࡿᙧ࡛ࡢࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᰂమᛶ⌧ᐇ̿ࡣࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢᅜࠎ ࢺࠖࡢोồࡶਚ࡛ࡁࡿࡍࡿਭ͵ࡶ࠸ࡿᝯ ྲྀࡾᡠࡍ౯್ࡣ࠶ࡿࠋ᮲ࡼࡗ࡚ៅฌࡋࠊǭൺࡲ᳨࡛হࡉ ࡛ࡣ᰿ᮏⓗ࡞ࡶࡢͳ࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠊ࠸ࣞ࣋ࣝࡢࡢ͵؝ಖઔࢆ☜ಖ࡛ ࢀࡓ୍ೳࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡀࠊពᅗⓗ᫂░࡞ᨻⓗ࡞ጇ༠ࡼ ࡁ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࠸࠺ᠱᛕࡶ⌧ᐇᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋከࡃࡢ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ ࡗ࡚⏕ࡲࢀࠊࡑࡢពࡸो௳ࡀࡲࡗࡓࡃࡗ࡚ࡼ࠸᫂☜࡞᪉ᘧ ᅜࡢἲᚊࡣࠊࡢࡑ͵؝సရࡢࡢȵȶⓗ࡞ಀ̿ⓗࡘȂ῭ⓗ ࠊྲྀࡗ࡚௦ࢃࡽࢀࡿࡁ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ᜭࡶࡋࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊച࠸࡞ࡃ ࡞̿ࢆ৶ࡵࠊಖઔࡍࡿࡇࢆ┠ᶆᙧᡂࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡇࡢಀࡢಖઔࡣࠊ ࡑࢀࡣኚ࡞⓶χ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᛶ᱁ୣᅉ ůᅜࡢ؝సᶒἲ࡛ࡣᙅࡃࠊࡲࡓࠊ᮲ࡼࡿࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᑂᰝ ࡍࡿ࠸࡞ࡿண ᅔႤᛶࡶࠊᝰࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺ᪉ᘧࡢ☜ᐇ ၯࡋ࡚ࡣࠊࢇࡑࡢᙺࢆᯝࡓࡉ࡞࠸ࠋ ࡞ࣥࣃࢡࢺୣᅉࡍࡿண ᅔႤᛶẚࢀࡤࠊࡣࡿᑠࡉ࠸ࡽ࡛ ࠶ࡿࠋ ࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲไࢆࠊᐇࢆ࣮࣋ࢫ ࡋࡓࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃ᭩ࡁᨵࡵࡿࠊࡘࡲࡾࠕ᭱ᝏࡢሙྜࡢࢩࢼࣜ࢜ࠖ ࡽᢤࡅฟࡋ࡚ࠊࠕࡘࡢୡ⏺ࡢ᭱ၿࡢࡶࡢࠖࡍࡿၯࠊୖঠࡢฌ Ibid, 2621. For discussion, see R Okediji, “Toward an International Fair Use Doctrine” [2000] 39 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 75. ࡞ႣࢆͳᐹࡍࡿࡇࡀྍЏྰͳᐹࡍࡿ౯್ࡣ࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣ ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ©͵ࡀࡇࡇ࡛ࡑࢀྲྀࡾǼࡴពᅗࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡋᑡ࡞ࡃࡶࠊ See M Senftleben, Copyright, Limitations and the Three-Step Test: an Analysis of the ࡑ࠺ࡋࡓࠕ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖཎ๎ࡀࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘ Three-Step Test in International and EC Copyright Law (Kluwer Law International, 2004) ࢫ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࡢಟṇ∧ࢆ࣮࣋ࢫࡍࡿࡇࡣྍЏᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ᮲ࡢ 167-8 and “Declaration on a Balanced Interpretation of the ‘Three-Step Test’ in Copyright ẚుⓗ␗ਭࡢ࡞࠸ोǢࢆࣥࡍࡿࡇࡣྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡢࡢोǢࡶࠊ Law” [2008] 39 IIC 702-3. ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ࡛ࡣ᰿ᮏⓗͳ࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿၥᆏࠕ؝స͵ࡢே᱁ⓗ┈࠾ ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ೳȶ⏬ ୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ̿Ḣᕞ؝సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏ ࡼࡧȂ῭ⓗ┈ࠖᑐฎࡍࡿࡇࡣྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࣭ ࢁ࠺ᝯ ࡋࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ཎ๎ࡢ࿔Ⓨࡘ࠸࡚ਚᰝࡍࡿ౯್ࡣ ࣮ࣘࢫศᯒࡢṔྐࢆ᭷ຠά⏝ࡋ࡚ࠊࡢฌो࡞ၥᆏ࠾ࡑࡽࡃࠊࠕᢏ ࠶ࡿࠋࣉࣟࢪ࢙ࢡࢺᑐࡍࡿࢇ࡞ၰᐖࡶࠊϬᬒ࠶ࡿ⌧ᅾࢃࢀࢃࢀࡀ ࡢⓎᒎࢆಁࡍࡿࡇࡢฌोᛶࠖࡲࡓࡣࠕḟⓗᕷሙ࠾ࡅࡿwதಁ ̘ࢀࡓཝࡋ࠸≧ἣᑐࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡳ࡞ࡍࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ ࡢᚲोᛶࠖᑐฎࡍࡿࡇࡶ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࠕ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙ ࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖ॔ᐃࡣࠊᇶᮏⓗᶒಀࡋࡓ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ॔ú୧Wࡍ ࡿ᪉ἲ࡛᥇⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡇࢆࠊ᫂☜ࢢ᫂ࡍࡿࡇࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊุ࣒ ᡤࡣᚲो৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿሙྜࡣࠊ؝ࡣࡓࡲ͵؝సᶒಖ᭷͵പษ࡞ሗ ࢆᨭᡶ࠺ࡇࡼࡗ࡚ࠊసရࡢ⏝ࢆྍ࡛ࡁࡿࡇࢆ᫂☜ࢢ᫂ࡍࡿ ࡇࡶ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡑ࠺ࡋࡓཎ๎ࡢⓎᒎࡣࠊ⌧ᅾ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ؝సᶒࢩࢫࢸ ࣒ࢆᨭපࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᰂమᛶࡢḞዴࢆɶࡍࡿࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ ཎ๎ࡀůᅜࡶࡓࡽࡍࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃᑐࡍࡿwதୖࡢඃࢆʠᑠࡋᝲ ୡ⏺୰࡛ቑຍഴྥࢆ♧ࡍࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃ᥇⏝ᅜࡢਚࡶ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘ ಖহ࡛ࡁࡿᝯ ࡇࡇ࡛ᥦࡋࡓͳ࠼ࡣ᫂ࡽ࡞ᅔႤࡀక࠺ࠋࡑࡢከࡃࡣࡍ࡛Dz ࡋࡓࠋ ࠕ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖ᮲ᅟࢆಟṇࡍࡿ࠸࡞ࡿ΅ࡶࠊ ࡞ࡾ␗ਭࡀ࠶ࡿࡶࡢ᥎ ࡉࢀࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞౯್࠶ࡿഘලࢆ ุ࣒ᐁᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡇࡣࠊInfopaq ุ࣒ࡢࡼ࠺ࠊุ࣒ᡤࡀἲᚊᑐࡋ ࡚ཝ᱁࡞ᯟǼࡳࢆപ⏝ࡋࡼ࠺ࡍࡿሙྜࡣࠊᡭຓࡅࡣ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸࡛࠶ ៣᠋᠋᠃᠈᠁ ࡀࡑࡢάືࢆ᧦ઔࡍࡿࡓࡵࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ౫Ꮡࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࡣࠊࡇࡢ ཎ๎ࡀჹ᪂ⓗ࡞ࣅࢪࢿࢫᝳࣔࢹࣝࢆϡ࡚ࡿྍЏᛶࢆ⛎ࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࡇࢆ♧ࡍᐇ࡛࠶ ࡿࠋ ᭱ಶࠊࢩ࣏࣮ࣥ࢞ࣝ see N Loon, “Exploring Flexibilities within the Global IP Standards” [2009] IPQ 162 ࠾ࡼࡧࢫ࢚ࣛࣝ see OF Afori, “An Open Standard ‘Fair Use’ Doctrine: A Welcome Israeli Initiative” [2008] EIPR 85 ࡛ࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡀ᥇ ⏝ࡉࢀࡓࠋ᪥ᮏ࠾ࡼࡧᅁᅜ࡛ࡣ⌧ᅾࠕࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖᆺࡢWἲࡀ᳨খࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ See Y Chang, “Debates on Introduction of ‘Fair Use’ to the Copyright Act of Japan & Korea. Do Japan and Korea need Fair Use?” [2010] 3 Quarterly Review of Corporation Law & Society 282; T Ueno, “Rethinking the Provisions on Limitations of Rights in the Japanese Copyright Act – Towards a Japanese-style ‘Fair Use’ Clause” AIPPI Journal, July 2009, ࡋࡲ࠺ࡍࡿએਭࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊsee R Burrell & A Coleman, Copyright Exceptions: The 159. Digital Impact (Cambridge University Press, 2005) 249-275. ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO ุ࣒ᡤᅛ᭷࡞ಖᏲ̿ࡣࠊࣇ࢙࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡢእ॒ⓗ࡞ᰂమᛶࢆᗁࡋ࡚ ▱ⓗ⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊" 9RO
© Copyright 2024 ExpyDoc
