컴퓨터프로그램 저작물에 관한 저작권보호를 위한 적절한 손해배상액 산정방안 = A Study on How to Calculate Damages for the Copyright Protection of Computer Program Works

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The judgment of Seoul High Court rendered on April 10th, 2013 (Case No. 2012 Na 68393) is the landmark case which, for the first time, held that the defendant`s profits consist of the total amount where resale price of each pirated software copy is multiplied by the number of illicit copies duplicated by the defendant. This judgment derailed the former judgment of the Korean Supreme Court which had sticked to the strict margin theory, which means that the infringer`s profits consist of his/her gross revenue subtracted by the deductible costs and expenses incurred by him/her. Software piracy can be divided into the following types: (i) commercial piracy, (ii) corporate piracy, and (iii) softlifting. Commercial piracy can be defined as the illegal duplication of software for the purpose of distribution and sale. Corporate piracy refers to the illicit duplication of software for the purpose of corporate use. The corporate piracy encompasses the activities of not only corporations and businesses, but also educational institutions, governmental agencies, and municipalities. The last type of software piracy is softlifting. Softlifting refers to software piracy for the purpose of personal use. When one duplicates a friends software package, or brings a backup copy home from work for personal use, or borrows a program from the library and makes a copy of it, these acts will be called as softlifting. In commercial piracy context, profits are determined by taking the value of each pirated copy and subtracting the cost of reproduction (e.g., PC resale store case in Japan) whereas the amount equivalent to ordinary license fees need to be calculated by the resale price of each pirated copy multiplied by the number of the pirated copies from the normative perspective. In corporate piracy context such as LEC case in Japan and Microsoft Corp., v. JSJ Tech. in Korea, both profits and the amount equivalent to ordinary license fees are assessed by the resale price of each pirated copy multiplied by the number of the pirated copies from the normative perspective. I agree with this approach in this context. Finally, in softlifting context, I propose that both profits and the amount equivalent to ordinary license fees be assessed by the resale price of each pirated copy multiplied by the number of the pirated copies from the normative perspective.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 정재훈, "저작권침해에 대한 손해배상-입법론을 중심으로" 99-, 1997
• 2 이규호, "저작권법" 진원사 921-, 2014
• 3 이해완, "저작권법" 박영사 877-, 2012
• 4 畑郁夫, "馬瀬文夫先生古稀記念「判例特許侵害法」"
• 5 田村善之, "著作權法槪說" 有斐閣 2001
• 6 田村善之, "知的財産権と損害賠償" 弘文堂 2004
• 7 加藤雅信, "知的所有権侵害と規範的損害論" 1074 (1074):
• 8 松本重敏, "知的所有権をめぐる損害賠償の実務" NBL
• 9 "牛木理一, プログラム複製翻案事件: 広島地裁 平成9(ﾜ)1716号.平成12年10月 11日判決"
• 10 "村本武志, コンピュータ・プログラム違法コピーをめぐる問題"
• 11 知的所有權問題硏究會, "最新 著作權關係判例 實務" 民事法硏究會 2007
• 12 小松陽一郎, "新審判決紹介１４７〔純利益や粗利益等ではなく正規品小売価格相当額を損害額と認定した裁判例〕"
• 13 高松宏之, "損害(2)ー特許法 102条2項․3３項"
• 14 三山峻司, "コンピュータ・プログラムの企業内無許諾複製による損害額" 51 (51): 1731
• 15 Ayen, "Why You Shouldn't Pirate Software"
• 16 Kristina N. Spencer, "Using Copyright Remedies to Promote Efficiency in the Open Source Regime in Wake of Jacobsen v. Katzer" 6 (6): 80-, 2009
• 17 "Thou Shalt Not Dupe; So Says a Vendor of Software--is Anyone Listening?"
• 18 Ralph S. Brown, "The Operation of the Damage Provisions of the Copyright Law:An Exploratory Study" 2Studies on Copyr 1958
• 19 Munish Mehra, "Software Cases and the Grant of Damages in India" 15 (15): 131-, 2009
• 20 John M. Conley, "Revisiting Section 117 of the Copyright Act:An Economic Approach"
• 21 Dane S. Ciolino, "Reconsidering Restitution in Copyright" 48 (48): 1999
• 22 Anthony Ciolli, "Lowering the Stakes: Toward a Model of Effective Copyright Dispute Resolution" 110 (110): 1004-, 2008
• 23 Alice Bredin, "How to Spot Bogus Software"
• 24 Cary H. Sherman, "How to Avoid the Software Police and What to do When They Knock on Your Door" 1 (1): 528-547, 1993
• 25 Orit Fischman Afori, "Flexible Remedies as a Means to Counteract Failures in Copyright Law" 29 (29): 35-36, 2011
• 26 Paul W. Goldstein, "Copyright: Principles"
• 27 Ralph S. Brown, "Copyright, Unfair Competition, And Related Topics Bearing on the Protection of Works of Authorship 611" 2005
• 28 Pamela Samuelson, "Computer Programs and Copyright's Fair Use Doctrine"
• 29 David M. Hornik, "Combating Software Piracy: the Softlifting Problem" 7 (7): 378-, 1994
• 30 "20 Am. Jur. Proof of Facts 3d 431"
• 31 "18 Am. Jur. 2d, Copyright and Literary Property § 206"