ɶఋСࡇƷ௩᠂҄഑߸ᓸ˺ೌඥƷ᧏્

ೳȶ௻⏬ᜨḢᕞ࠿ࡽࡳࡓࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢἲ⌮ࡢᚓኻ ࡑࡢᜟ
ɶఋСࡇƷ௩᠂҄̿഑߸ᓸ˺ೌඥƷ᧏્
Jonathan GRIFFITHS
ᇛᡤ
ᒾ⏕ল
ोljᜨ ‫؝‬సᶒࡢး⏺࡜ไးࡢศญ࡟࠾ࡅࡿḢᕞೳྜࡢWἲⓗ࢖ࢽࢩ࢔ࢸ࢕ࣈ࡟ࡼ
ࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࢀࡲ࡛ຍ┕ᅜ࡟୚࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓᨻ·ୖࡢҜ⏤ᗘࡀ኱ᖜ࡟ไljࡉࢀ࡚ࡋࡲࡗ
ࡓࠋ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡣࠊҜ⏤࡟৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿࢌⅭࡢúᅖࢆᣑᙇࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊࡲࡍࡲࡍႤࡋࡃ
࡞ࡗ࡚ࡁ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓᣑᙇࡀࠊ♫఍ⓗࠊᢏ࢑ⓗ࡞≧ἣࡢኚ໬࡟ᑐࡍࡿപษ࡞ᑐ
ᛂ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞ሙྜ࡛ࡍࡽࠊᣑᙇࢆ৶ࡵ࡞࠸ഴྥ࡟࠶ࡿࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࡑ
ࡢཎᅉࢆᴫ५ࡋࠊॾỴ·ࢆᥦ᱌ࡍࡿࠋ୍ࡘࡢॾỴ᱌ࡣࠊྜࢇᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲ˜᮲࡟
ᆞఝࡋࡓࠊ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࠿ࡘोǢ࣮࣋ࢫࡢࣔࢹࣝࡢ᥇⏝࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࡶࡗ࡜┿๢࡟᳨
খࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊ᳨খࡉࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢࣃ
ࣛࢲ࢖࣒ࡣࠊഓᗘ࡟ண ୙ྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠊᅜၯἲ࡟ച཯ࡍࡿࠊࡲࡓ᜝࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᩥ໬ⓗ
࡟␗଱࡛࠶ࡿࠊ࡜ࡢ⌮⏤࡛ᣄྰࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࠊ┤ಶࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ◊"
࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢḞⅬࡀ৲ᙇࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࣭
ࣔࢹࣝ࿔ⓎࡢࡶࡓࡽࡍྍЏᛶࡣ᳨খ࡟್ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࠊࢆᣦ᦬ࡍࡿࠋ
࣮࣮࢟࣡ࢻᜨ ‫؝‬సᶒࠊไးࠊး⏺ࠊࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠊ
Wittem ࢢ࣮ࣝࣉ
© ࢪࣙࢼࢧ࣭ࣥࢢࣜࣇ࢕ࢫ
ᮏਭᩥࡣ Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL) ࡢ᮲௳࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ႱᏊⓗ࡟ᅪᕸࡋࠊ
ࢲ࣮࢘ࣥࣟࢻ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࣛ࢖ࢭࣥࢫࡉࢀࡓਭᩥࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࡣ 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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
ࡣࡌࡵ࡟ូ
ᜯ᜜ၥᆏ࣮୰᰾ไᗘࡢ◳┤໬ូ
ᮏਭᩥࡣࠊࠕࢥࣔࣥࢬࠊ࣮ࣘࢨ࣮ࠊࢧ࣮ࣅࢫ࣭ࣉࣟࣂ࢖ࢲ࣮ࠖ఍એ࡛
࢔࣭࢟ࢥ࣑ࣗࣀࢸ࣮ࣝ᜖the acquis communautaire লὀᜨ១៱ ἲయDŽࡢ
ɢయ᜗࡟ࡼࡗ࡚☜Wࡉࢀࡓไးࢩࢫࢸ࣒ ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡣࠊከࡃࡢᢈุࡀ࠶
ࡢⓎࢢਭᩥࢆࡶ࡜࡟ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋJournal of Intellectual Property Information
ࠕไးᜨ
Technology and e-Commerce ࡀ๰หࡉࢀࡓ఍એ࡛࠶ࡿࠋਭᩥࡣࠊ
ࡿࠋ᝟ሗ♫఍ᣦ௧ Information Society Directive ࡢ୰࡟᮲ᩥ໬ࡉࢀࡓ
‫؝‬సᶒࡢ୰᰾॔ᐃࡢ◳┤໬ࠖ࡜࠸࠺ࢱ࢖ࢺ࡛ࣝⓎࢢࡉࢀࡓࠋࡇࡢ࢚ᧁⓗ
ἲᚊ࡟ࡣࠊ≉࡟ᙉ࠸ᢈุࡀ࠶ࡿࠋᣦ௧ࡣࡼࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊ୍ೳ
࡞࢖࣓࣮ࢪࡣࠊ௨๓࡟ࡣ༑ศ࡞₶⁥Ἔࡢാࡁ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊҜ⏤࡟⛣ືࡋ࡚
ࡢᗈ̿࡟ᐃ̿ࡉࢀࡓᶒ฼ ࢆযᐃࡋࠊࡑࢀࡽࡢᶒ฼ࢆไး࡛ࡁࡿሙྜࢆ
࠸ࡓᖹ࢞Ʉᣢࡢ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ࡀࠊ⌧ᅾ࡛ࡣ೵Ṇࡋࠊ୍Ðᡤ࡟ᅛᐃࡉࢀ࡚ࡋ
ิᣲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋไးࡣᩘࡇࡑከ࠸ࡀࠊ࢜ࣉࢩࣙࢼ࡛ࣝࠊไးࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡿ
ࡲࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࢆ♧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┕ᅜ࡟৶ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓᰂమᛶࡀ‫ࡃࡋ؝‬ไးࡉࢀࠊ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡀҜ⏤࡟঱
grams, Arts 5, 6; Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and
ᐜࡉࢀࡿࢌⅭࡢúᅖࢆᑡࡋ࡛ࡶᣑᙇࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡍࡽႤࡋࡃ࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑ
on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property (codified by Di-
࠺ࡋࡓᣑᙇࡀ♫఍ⓗ࣭ᢏ࢑ⓗ࡞ኚ໬࡟ᑐᛂࡍࡿࡢ࡟പᙜ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ͳ࠼ࡽ
rective 2006/115/EC) Art 10; Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the
ࢀࡿሙྜ࡛ࡶࠊ୙ྍЏ࡟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࠊࡇࡢၥᆏ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊᗈ
ࡃ৶ઁࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿཎᅉࢆᴫ५ࡋࠊ࠸ࡃࡘ࠿ࡢॾỴ·ࢆᥦ᱌ࡍࡿࠋ୍ࡘࡢ
ॾỴ·ࡣࠊྜࢇᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲ˜᮲࡟ᆞఝࡋࡓࠊ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࠿ࡘोǢ࣮࣋
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࡜┿๢࡟᳨খࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡟
exceptions ࠖࠊࠕ း ⏺ limitations ࠖࠊࠕ ঱ ྍ ࡉ ࢀ ࡓ ࢌ Ⅽ permitted acts ࠖࠊࠕ ᢠ ᘚ
ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊ᳨খࡉࢀ࡚ࡇ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢࣃࣛࢲ࢖࣒ࡣࠊ
defensesࠖ࡞࡝ࡢᵝࠎ࡞॔ᐃࢆᣦࡍࠋࡇࡢ⏝ਂࡢവᢥ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ
ࠕไးࠖࢆࠊసᐙ
ഓᗘ࡟ண ୙ྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠊᅜၯἲ࡟ച཯ࡍࡿࠊࡲࡓ᜝࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᩥ໬ⓗ࡟
␗଱࡛࠶ࡿࠊ࡜ࡢ⌮⏤࡛ᣄྰࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋᮏਭᩥࡣࡇࢀࡽࡢḞⅬࡀ৲ᙇ
ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆᣦ᦬ࡍࡿࠋ
ࡸ‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᶒ฼࡟ᑐࡍࡿཝᐦ࡟းᐃࡉࢀࡓࠕไးⓗ࡞ࠖ౵ධincursions࡛࠶
ࡿ࡜ॾจࡍࡿ࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆവዲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ♧ࡍពᅗࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢⅬ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ
࿨ྡ័ࢌ࠾ࡼࡧᨻ἞ຊᏛࡢએਭ࡟࿥ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊsee 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
লὀᜨཎᩥࡣྛᅜἲ࡛౑ࢃࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ exceptions, limitations, permitted acts, de-
Series No. 08-04 (available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1317707).
fenses ࡜࠸࠺⏝ਂࢆ exceptions ࡛௦ࢢࡉࡏ࡚࠸ࡿ᜖ὀ ཧ↷᜗ࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊ
exceptions ࡀᆆฟࡍࡿࡀࠊlimitations ࡶࡲࢀ࡟౑ࢃࢀ࡚࠸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”).
࠸࠺঍ؕࡣ౑ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊ
ࠕ౛እࠖ࡜࠸࠺঍ؕࡣ౑ࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊ࿴
লࡣ᪥ᮏἲ࡟ྜࢃࡏ࡚ࠊexception ࢆ᜖
ࠕ౛እ࡛ࠖࡣ࡞ࡃ᜗
ࠕไးࠖ
ࠊlimitation ࢆ
“Billowing White Goo” [2008] Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 587; M Senftleben,
ࠕး⏺ࠖ࡜ࡋࡓࠋ
᤼௚ⓗᶒ฼ࡢúᅖࡀᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓ࡜ࡢព॒࡟ࡘ࠸࡚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. ࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
࡟ࡣࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆ‶ࡓࡍᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿᝯ ࡉࡽ࡟ࠊไ
പ⏝ࡣࠊྛᅜࡢWἲ͵ࡢࡳ࡟ྥࡅࡽࢀࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ॾจࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࠊࡀ
းࢆ⚗Ṇࡍࡿዎlj࠾ࡼࡧ᜝࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᢏ࢑ⓗ᪉ἲࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ
ͳ࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊInfopaq International A/S v. Danske Dagblades ุỴ
࡚ࠊไးࢆ↓ຠ࡟ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡶ࡛ࡁࡿࠋLucie Guibault ࡣࠊ៦៥៬៥៰១៟ ࡢᮏྕ
ࡣࠊ೛࡟Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ୰᰾॔ᐃࢆࡇࢀࡲ࡛௨ୖ࡟◳┤໬ࡉࡏࡿ᪉ྥ࡟
ᥖ౅ࡢਭᩥ࡛ࠊ᝟ሗ♫఍ᣦ௧ࡢ·ᐃഓ⛬࡛ࠊWἲ͵ࡀୗࡋࡓุ᩿ࡀࡶࡓ
୞ࡽࡏ࡚ࡋࡲࡗࡓࡼ࠺࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࡽࡍྰᐃⓗ࡞ᙳᅚࢆ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋGuibault ࡣ≉࡟ࠊ
ࠕ࿒ཀⓗ࡞ࠖไ
းࢆవࡍ࡜ࡇࢁ࡞ࡃิᣲࡋࡓȆᯝࠊ၎й໬ࡍࡿഴྥࡀഺࡅࡽࢀ࡞࠸࡜ࡋ
Infopaq ஦௳࡛ࡣࠊࣅ࿌ࡢ࣓ࢹ࢕࢔࣭ࣔࢽࢱ࣮௦⌮ᗑࡣࠊࢹ࣐࣮ࣥࢡ
࡚࠸ࡿᝯ Martin Senftleben ࡣࠊຍ┕ᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭
ࡢ᪂Ϊ࠿ࡽവࢇࡔঠ஦ࢆोljࡋ࡚ࠊᆣᐈ࡟ᥦ౪ࡋࡓࠋ௦⌮ᗑࡣࠊവࢇࡔ
ࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆ┤᥋പ⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡇࡢࢫ࣮࣒࢟ࡢྰᐃⓗ࡞ഃჳࡀ
ঠ஦඲యࢆࢫ࢟ࣕࣥࡋ୍࡚᫬ⓗ࡟ಖᏑࡋࠊঠ஦ࡢ୍ൺ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣᜏஂⓗ
ᙉਚࡉࢀࠊᰂమᛶࡶἲⓗᏳᐃᛶࡶ࡞࠸‫؝‬సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࠊsⓗ࡟঍࠼ࡤࠊ
࡟ಖᏑࡍࡿࣉࣟࢭࢫࢆҜື໬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࠋุ࣒ᡤࡀ᳨খࡋࡓ୺࡞ਭⅬࡣᜩ
ࠕ᭱ᝏࡢࢣ࣮ࢫࠖࢆ⏕ࡳฟࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜ᣦ᦬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ
ϸࠕ඲యࡲࡓࡣ୍ൺࡢࣽࣷࠖ
᜖˜ ᮲᜗ࡢᴫᛕࢆ࡝࠺ॾจࡍࡿ࠿ࠊϹ
‫؝‬స≀ࡢ୍᫬ⓗࣽࣷࡢᢠᘚࡀࣅ࿌࡟പ⏝࡛ࡁࡿ࠿࡝࠺࠿ࠊ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋุ
লὀᜨ࣋ࣝࢾ᮲lj˜ ᮲˜ ᅟࡣࠊࣽࣷᶒ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸ
Ỵࡣ‫؝‬సᶒἲᑓ࿋ᘚઔኈ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࠊฌो࡞ព࿡ࢆᣢࡕࠊࡇࡢ஧ࡘࡢਭⅬ
ࢫࢺ࡜࿧ࡤࢀࡿ ो௳᜖≉ูࡢሙྜ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊ‫؝‬స≀ࡢ೫ᖖࡢ฼⏝ࢆጉࡆࡎࠊ
ࢆ୨࠼ࡓ࢖ࣥࣃࢡࢺࢆᣢࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ࠶ࡽࡺࡿᙧែࡢ‫؝‬స≀࡟പ⏝ࡉࢀࡿ
ࡑࡢ‫؝‬స͵ࡢṇᙜ࡞฼┈ࢆ୙ᙜ࡟ᐖࡋ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜᜗ࢆ‶ࡓࡏࡤࠊᅜෆἲ௧࡛ไ
ࠕ๰సᛶࠖࡢᇶ‽࡜ࠊุỴࢆ࿛᥋ⓗ࡟࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡟ਚ࿴ࡍࡿ࠿࡟࿥ᚰࡀႏ
း॔ᐃࢆᐃࡵࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ৶ࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
ࡲࡗࡓᝯ ࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࢃࢀࢃࢀࡀࡇࡇ࡛ᠱᛕࡍࡿࡢࡣࠊϸ ˜ ᮲
ࡇࢀࡣཝࡋ࠸⌧ᐇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊ஦ែࡣࡉࡽ࡟ᝏ໬ࡋ࡚࠸
࡟॔ᐃࡉࢀࡓไး࡜း⏺ࢆ࡝࠺ॾจࡍࡿ࠿ࠊ࠾ࡼࡧࠊϹࠕ୍ൺࡢࣽ
ࡿࠋ⌮᝿ⓗ࡟ࡣࠊุ࣒ᡤࡀࡇࡢWἲࡢ₯ᅾⓗ࡞▷ᡤࢆɶ࿴ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡶͳ
ࣷࠖ࡟ᙜࡓࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࡀᣦ௧࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡟ุ᩿ࡉࢀࡿ࠿ࠊ࡟ࡘ
࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊḢᕞೳྜࡢἲไᗘࡢࡶ࡜࡛঱ࡉࢀࡿไးࡣࠊപᙜ
࠸ุ࡚࣒ᡤࡀ☜Wࡋࡓ୍ӑⓗ࡞࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ
࡜৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿሙྜ᜖ࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊ࣮ࣘࢨ࣮ࡢᇶᮏⓗ࡞ᶒ฼ࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿሙྜࠊ
࠾ࡼࡧ᜝࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᢏ࢑ࡢⓎᒎࢆಁ೽ࡍࡿሙྜ᜗࡟ࡣᗈ̿࡟ॾจࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࠊ
ไး࡟࿥ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺࡟೉࡭ࡿᜨ
࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠊᣦ௧˜ ᮲࡟ࡶ࡜࡙ࡃࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ
ࠕ͐ᣦ௧ࡀᐃࡵࡓ୍ӑཎ๎࠿ࡽഃЪࡍࡿᣦ௧ࡢ᮲ᅟࡣࠊཝ᱁࡟ॾจࡉࢀ
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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸͐᝱
ุ࣒ᡤࡀࠊࡇࡢุỴࢆᨭᣢࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖ
࡟౫ᣐࡋࡓࡢࡣਇࡾ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࠊἲไᗘࡢ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ࢆ኱ࡁࡃ␗࡞
ࡇࡢ஦௳࡛ࡣࠊᣦ௧࡟ࡼࡾ৶ࡵࡽࢀࡓᶒ฼ࡣࠕ୍ӑⓗཎ๎࡛ࠖ࠶ࡿࡇ
ࡿᶵЏ࡜ΰྠࡉࡏ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ᝯ ࣋ࣝࢾ᮲lj࠾ࡼࡧ ៰៮៥៬៯ ༠ᐃ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ
࡜ࠊࡑࡢȆᯝࠊไးࡣ⊃ࡃॾจࡉࢀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࠊࡀ♧ࡉࢀࡓࠋ
ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢᶵЏࡣࠊࡑࡢ᮲௳࡟പྜࡋ࡞࠸ไးࢆ
ุ࣒ᡤࡣࡲࡓࠊࡇࡢॾจࡀࠊไးࢆࠕ˜ ᮲࡟↷ࡽࡋ࡚ॾจࡍࡿࠖ
ᑟධࡍࡿྛᅜࡢWἲ͵ࡢᶒးࢆᢚไࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟࠶ࡿᝯ ᝟ሗ♫఍ᣦ௧˜
ᚲोᛶ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᨭᣢࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜୺ᙇࡍࡿᝯ ࡇࡢॾจࡣࠊ୍ൺࡢຍ┕
᮲࡟ࡶ࡜࡙ࡅࡤࠊࡇࡢᙺ๭ࡣุ࣒ᐁࡀࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆ‶ࡓࡉ࡞࠸᪉ἲ
ᅜࡀఏțⓗ࡟᥇⏝ࡋ࡚ࡁࡓไးࢆ⊃ࡃॾจࡍࡿཎ๎ࢆ୍ӑ໬ࡋࠊࡑࡢȆ
࡛ࠊไးࢆࠕപ⏝ࡍࡿࠖࡢࢆာṆࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡲ࡛ᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓ࡜࠸࠺એਭ
ᯝࠊ᫂ࡽ࠿࡞ၥᆏࢆᥦୣࡍࡿࠋࡲࡎࠊᇶᮏⓗ࡞ၥᆏ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ
ࡶ࠶ࡾ࠺ࡿᝯ ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊࡇࡢᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓᙺ๭࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡶࠊࡑࡢ
ฌो࡞ഃჳࢆࠊᣦ௧Ҝయ࡟ྵࡲࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎᐦ࠿࡟ਚᩚࡍ
ᶵЏࡣࠊไးࢆ‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵࡟᭷฼࡟ॾจࡍࡿሙྜ࡟ࠊุ࣒ᡤ࡟̿ົ࡙
ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊẸ୺୺̿࡟཯ࡍࡿࠋ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ୍ൺࡢᅜ࡛ࡣࠊ⌧ᅾࡲ࡛ࠊ
ࡅࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ⊃̿ॾจࡢཎ๎࡜ྠࡌ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸ
ࡲࡗࡓࡃ␗࡞ࡿॾจࡀࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓᝯ
ࡇࢀࡽࡢᡭȶⓗ࡞ၥᆏ࡟ຍ࠼࡚ࠊ
ࢫࢺࠖࡢ࡝ࡢࣂ࣮ࢪࣙࣥࡢ֑᱌సᡂ᫬࡟ࡶࠊࢸࢫࢺ࡟ࡇࡢᣑᙇࡉࢀࡓᙺ
ࡇࡢุỴ࡟ࡣᐇែⓗ࡞཯ᑐࡶከ࠸ࠋไးࡀ࣮ࣘࢨ࣮ࡲࡓࡣᕷẸࡢᇶᮏⓗ
๭ࢆ਒ࡑ࠺࡜ࡋࡓ࡜ࡍࡿᣦ᦬ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ
ᶒ฼ ࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊࢽ࣮ࣗࢫሗഘࠊࣃࣟࢹ࢕࣮ࡲࡓࡣᘬ⏝ ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚
࠸ࡿሙྜࠊ⊃̿ࡢॾจࡣപษ࡜ࡣᛮࢃࢀ࡞࠸࡜ࡍࡿ཯ᑐ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ࡋ࠿
Infopaq ุỴࡣࠊ⊃̿ॾจࡢ࣮ࣝࣝࢆযᐃࡋࡓࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊᮏਭᩥ
ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡼࡾ୍ӑⓗ࡟ࡣࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓᩍ᮲ⓗ࡞࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡣବ࡛᫂࠶ࡿ
ࡢ᭱ึ࡟ᴫ५ࡋࡓᅔႤࢆቑᖜࡉࡏࡓࡼ࠺࡟ᛮࢃࢀࡿᝯ ࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ
࡜ࡣᛮࢃࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡀ॔ไࡍࡿ≧ἣࡣከᵝ࡛࠶ࡾࠊẁၥⓗ࡞ॾỴ
ྰᐃⓗ࡞ᙳᅚࡣࡑࢀ࡟࡜࡝ࡲࡽ࡞࠸ࠋࣅ࿌ࡀసရࡢࠕ඲ൺࡲࡓࡣ୍ൺࠖ
·ࡀᚲो࡛࠶ࡿࠋఏțⓗ࡞⎔ቃࡢࡶ࡜࡛ࡣࠊ዇ᗘࡢ๰సᛶࢆ୺ᙇࡍࡿ‫؝‬
ࢆࣽࣷࡋࡓ࠿࡝࠺࠿ࢆỴࡵࡿപษ࡞᪉ἲ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢุ࣒ᡤࡢุ᩿ࡣࠊࣚ
͵ࡢ฼┈ࡣ୍ӑⓗ࡟ᨭᣢࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࠋࡑ࠺ࡋࡓ≧ἣୗ࡛࿔Ⓨࡉࢀࡓ॔๎
࣮ࣟࢵࣃࡢ‫؝‬సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟ṧࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡓᰂమᛶࢆࡶ၆ཤࡋ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺
ࡣࠊᶒ฼ࡀᣑᩓࡋࠊฌࣽࡍࡿ⌧ᅾࡢ≧ἣୗ࡛ࡣࠊപษ࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ࡣᛮࢃࢀ
࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢⅬ࡟ࡘ࠸ุ࡚࣒ᡤࡣḟࡢࡼ࠺࡟೉࡭ࡿᜨ
࡞࠸ࠋࠕ‫؝‬స͵ே᱁ᶒࠖࡢఏțࢆᣢࡘᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡢุỴ࡛ࡶࠊࡇࡢȆਭ
ࡀ৶ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ᢏ࢑≧ἣࡀᛴ೯࡟ኚ໬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ⌧≧࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ࠸
ࠕಖઔࡉࢀࡓసရࢆᢤŻࡋ࡚ࣽࣷࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊᢤŻൺศࡀ‫͵؝‬Ҝఏࡢ▱
࠿࡞ࡿ≧ἣ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡶࠊǞதࡢ୍᪉ᙜ஦͵࡟᭷฼࡞≧ἣࢆ࠶ࡽ࠿ࡌࡵస
ࡾฟࡍࡇ࡜ࡣ↓ੋ࡟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,
ࡋࡓࡇ࡜ࡀࠊḢᕞุ࣒ᡤࡀ᥇⏝ࡋࡓॾจ࡜ᩚྜࡍࡿ࠿࡝࠺࠿ࡣ␲ၥ࡛࠶ࡿࠋSee, for
United Kingdom).
ࡇࡢ५Ⅼ࠿ࡽࡍࡿ࡜ࠊ≉ᐃࡢࢣ࣮ࢫ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊྛᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀไးࢆᰂమ࡟പ⏝
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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
ⓗ๰సࢆࢢ⌧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿሙྜࡣࠊᣦ௧˜ ᮲࡟ព࿡ࡍࡿൺศⓗࣽ
֑ࡋ┤ࡍࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋṧᛕ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡇࡢࣉࣟࢪ࢙ࢡࢺ࡟ࡣ᫂ࡽ࠿࡞ၰᐖ
ࣷࢆᵓᡂࡍࡿ͐ ࠖ
ࡀከࡃᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋ˜୍࡟ࠊࡇࡢศญࡢWἲഓ⛬ࡣ஘ᭀ࡛ࠊ࠿ࡘഌ࠸ࡢ࡛
᭷ྡ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ˜஧࡟ࠊຍ┕ᅜࡢከࡃࡣࠊࡸࡗ࡜᭱ಶ࡟࡞ࡗ࡚ࠊ᝟ሗ♫఍
ࣽࣷࡣಖઔࡉࢀࡓ๰సⓗ࡞ोǢࢆྵࡴሙྜ࡟ࡢࡳ౵ᐖ࡜࡞ࡿࠋࢢჳⓗ
ᣦ௧ࡢोồࢆᅜෆἲ໬ࡋࡓࡤ࠿ࡾ࡞ࡢ࡛ࠊࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢฌो࡞॒┤ࡋ࡟෌
࡟ࡣࠊࡇࢀࡣ‫؝‬సᶒᑓ࿋ᘚઔኈ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚એਭࡢవᆅࡀ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡟ࡳ࠼
ᗘ
ᴟⓗ࡟ྲྀࡾǼࡴ࡜ࡣͳ࠼ࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ˜୕࡟ࠊȵȶⓗ࡞ᢏ࢑೽Ṍ࡟┤
ࡿᝯ
ჳࡋ࡚ࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓ෌ͳᐹࡢࣉࣟࢭࢫࡣᐃᮇⓗ࡟ˎࡾಹࡉࢀࡿᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ
๰స͵࡟ࡼࡿࠕ࢖ࣥࣉࢵࢺࠖ࡜ࣅ࿌࡟ࡼࡿࠕዣྲྀtakingࠖ࡜ࡢ࿥
ಀࡢ᳨খࡣࠊࡍ࡭࡚ࡢຍ┕ᅜ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ౵ᐖศᯒࡢఏțⓗ࡞࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳ
ࡢ୍⎔࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿྍЏᛶࡣ࠿࡞ࡾ዇ࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡇ
ࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟ᆒ࢞ࢆᅇ᚟ࡉࡏࡿࡑࡢ௚ࡢᥦ᱌ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࡢᥦ᱌ࡣࠊ
ࡢุỴࡀࠊൺศⓗ࡞౵ᐖࡀⓎ⏕ࡋࡓ࠿ྰ࠿ࢆỴᐃࡍࡿၯࡢࠊ၏୍ࡢപษ
◳┤໬ࡋࡓ ១៱ូἲయDŽࡢᑡ࡞ࡃ࡜ࡶ୍ഃჳࡢॾỴࡣ৘ࡳ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼
࡞ᇶ‽࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ॾจࡉࢀࡿሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊฌ኱࡞Ȇᯝࢆᣍࡃ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ
ࡤࠊከࡃࡢຍ┕ᅜ࡛ࠊዎlj࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ไးࡀኚ᭦ྍЏ࡞ࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡶࡓ
ࢻ࢖ࢶࡢุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊ
ࠕࣇ࣮࣭࣮ࣜࣘࢫࠖࡢ᮲ᅟࢆപ⏝ࡍࡿၯ࡟ᝲ
ࣅ࿌ࡀ
ࡽࡉࢀࡿࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢ୙ᆒ࢞ࢆࠊไးࡢ୍ൺࡶࡋࡃࡣ඲ൺࢆࠊኚ᭦୙ྍЏ
ࠕዣྲྀࠖࡋࡓ‫ࠖࢺࢵࣉࣥ࢖ࠕࡢ͵؝‬ฎࡢࡳ࡛࡞ࡃࠊࣅ࿌ࡀసရ࡟ࠕ೓ຍࠖ
࡞ࡶࡢ࡟ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ॾỴࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿᥦ᱌࡛࠶ࡿᝯ ྠᵝ࡟ࠊไ
ࡋࡓฎࡶͳ៖ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋInfopaq ஦௳ࡢุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊ౵ᐖ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊࡇࡢ
းࢆᢏ࢑ⓗᡭẁ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᅇഺࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ᑐࡍࡿࠊࡼࡾຠᯝⓗ࡞ဥᚚ·ࡢ
࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ┤᥋᥇⏝ࡋ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞࠸ࡀࠊࡇࡢุỴ࡜ࢻ࢖ࢶࡢุ࣒ᡤࡢ᥇
ᥦ᱌ࡶࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ࡲࡓ˜ ᮲࡟᮲ᩥ໬ࡉࢀࡓࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵ
⏝ࡍࡿཎ๎࡜ࡣਚ࿴ࡋ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡟ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋࡇࡢศᯒࡀṇࡋࡅࢀࡤࠊ
ࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࢆࠊࡼࡾࠕࣂࣛࣥࢫࡢ࡜ࢀࡓࠖॾจࢆࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ
Infopaq ุỴࡣࠊḢᕞ‫؝‬సᶒไᗘࡢࠕ୰᰾ไᗘࠖࢆࡉࡽ࡟◳┤໬ࡋ࡚ࡋ
Senftleben ࡀᣦ᦬ࡋࡓࠕ᭱ᝏࡢࢩࢼࣜ࢜ࠖࢆᅇഺࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿᥦ᱌ࡶ࠶
ࡲ࠺ࠋ
ࡿᝯ
ᜰ᜜ྍЏ࡞ॾỴ·࣮୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬ូ
࡝࠺ࡍࢀࡤࠊḢᕞࡢ‫؝‬సᶒไးࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟ࠕᆒ࢞᝱࡜ᰂమᛶࢆᅇ᚟࡛
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࡞ഃჳ࡟ࠕ๰సᛶࠖࢆ৶ࡵࡿ࡜࠸࠺ͳ࠼࡟ࡣ␲ၥࢆᢪࡃਭ͵
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࠸ࡿ࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ
ࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊՕᅜଇ᪘၄᜖House of Lords, লὀᜨ᭱዇ྖἲᶵ࿥ࡢᙺ๭ࡶྜࢃࡏᣢࡗ
‘Three-Step Test’ in Copyright Law” [2008] 39 IIC 707; see also C Geiger, J Griffiths & R
࡚࠸ࡿ᜗ࡣࠊDesigners Guild Ltd v. Russell Williams (Textiles) Ltd [2000] 1 WLR 2416 ஦
Hilty, “Towards a Balanced Interpretation of the ‘Three-Step Test’ in Copyright Law”
௳࡛ࠊࡇࡇ࡛਍᫂ࡋࡓࡢ࡜ࡲࡗࡓࡃఝ೫ࡗࡓ࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡓࠋ
[2008] EIPR 489. Declaration ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣ௨ୗ࡟ࡶએਭࡉࢀ࡚࠸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
▱ⓗ૸⏘ἲࡢࠕࣂࣛࣥࢫࠖࡢẚ႘࡟ᑐࡍࡿᢈุ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
ࡤ঱ᐜࡉࢀࡿࠋ࿥ೳࡋࡓไး࡟ᑐᛂࡋࡓो௳ࢆ‶ࡓࡍࡇ࡜ࠊࡑࡢ౑⏝ࡀ
௨ୖࡢᥦ᱌ࡣࡍ࡭࡚ࠊୖঠࡢࢩࢫࢸ࣒඲యࢆ◳┤໬ࡉࡏ࡚࠸ࡿಶูࡢ
ၥᆏ࡟ᑐࡍࡿᑐ·࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ‫؝‬సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࢆࡼࡾɢྜⓗ࡟
సရࡢ೫ᖖࡢ౑⏝࡟཯ࡋ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࠊ˜୕͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞฼┈ࢆͳ៖ࡋ࡚ࠊ
෌ਚᩚࡍࡿᥦ᱌ࡶᩘከࡃ࡞ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊἲᚊࡣ฼⏝͵ࡸ୍ӑ
‫؝ࡣࡓࡲ͵؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢྜ⌮ⓗ࡞฼┈ࢆ୙ᙜ࡟ᦆ࡞ࢃ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࠊࡀࡑ
኱ࢇࡢᇶᮏⓗ࡞ᶒ฼ࢆ৶ࡵࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍࡿᥦ᱌࡛࠶ࡿࠋ᭱ಶࡢᶒ฼
ࡢो௳࡛࠶ࡿᝯ᝱
͵࡟↔Ⅼࢆᙜ࡚ࡓᒎ࿔࡟ᑐᢠࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊࢢ⌧ࡢҜ⏤ࡸ᝟ሗ࠾ࡼࡧࣉࣛ
࢖ࣂࢩ࣮ࡢҜ⏤ࡢᶒ฼ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࠊᙉຊ࡞ᶒ฼ࢆ৶ࡵࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍࡿ
୺ᙇ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ
ไးࡀࠊϸ ⌧ࢌἲࡢไး࡟പྜࡍࡿሙྜࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࠊϹ ෌ୣ֑ࡉ
ࢀࡓࡼࡾไးࡢɶࡸ࠿࡞ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖ࡟പྜࡍࡿሙྜࠊ
ࡇࢀࡽࡣࠊฌो࠿ࡘ౯್࠶ࡿᥦ᱌࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ
࠸ࡎࢀࡶᰂమᛶࡢḞዴ࡜࠸࠺ᵓ೰ⓗ࡞ၥᆏ࡟ᑐࡍࡿࠊɢྜⓗ࡞ॾỴ·ࢆ
࡟Wἲ͵࡟᪂ࡓ࡞ไး᮲ᅟࢆ೓ຍࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ৶ࡵࡿᥦ᱌࡛࠶ࡿࠋ௨ୗࡣ
ᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋᇶᮏⓗ࡞ᶒ฼ࡢᑟධࡶࠊ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢപ⏝࡟ࡘ࠸
ࡑࡢ᰿ᣐ࡛࠶ࡿᜨ
࡚ࠊ᪂ࡋ࠸ၥᆏࡀⓎ⏕ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿศญ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ࢞࢖ࢲࣥࢫࢆᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡶࡢ
ࠕไးࢆ॔ᐃࡍࡿ᮲ᅟࡢfࡣࠊไးࡀ࣮࢜ࣉ࣭࢚ࣥࣥࢻࡢࢥ࣭࣮ࣔࣥࣟ
࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ
ᆺ࡜ࠊไးࢆవࡍ࡜ࡇࢁ࡞ࡃิᣲࡍࡿᡂᩥἲᆺࢆǼࡳྜࢃࡏ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ୍
ࡋ࠿ࡋࠊᵓ೰ࣞ࣋ࣝ࡟࠾ࡅࡿኚ᭦ࡢᥦ᱌ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊWittem
᪉࡛ࠊྠ✀ࡢ౑⏝࡬ࡢᣑ኱ࡣࠊไးࢆṇᙜ໬࡛ࡁࡿ≧ἣࢆࡍ࡭࡚ண ࡍ
Group ࡣࠊᑗ᮶࡟࠾ࡅࡿਚ࿴ࡢ࢖ࢽࢩ࢔ࢸ࢕ࣈ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣཧ
ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣ୙ྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺஦ᐇ࡟↷ࡽࡍ࡜ࠊࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟୙ྍḞ࡞ᰂమ
ࡇࡢ֑᱌
ᛶࢆ୚࠼ࡿࠋ௚᪉ࠊྍЏ࡞ᰂమᛶࡣ஧ࡘࡢ᪉ἲ࡛⊃ࡵࡽࢀࡿࠋ˜୍࡟ࠊ
࡛ࡣࠊ෌ୣ֑ࡉࢀࡓ᜖ࡑࡋ࡚ᙉไⓗ࡞᜗ಶูࡢไးࡢࣜࢫࢺࡀᥦ᱌ࡉࢀ
ᣑ኱ࡣ᫂♧ⓗ࡟ิᣲࡉࢀࡓไး࡜ྠ✀ࡢ౑⏝࡟းࡽࢀࡿ͐ࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ
ͳࢶ࣮ࣝ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ‫؝‬సᶒἲ඾ࡢ֑᱌ࢆබࢢࡋࡓᝯ
ࡓᝯ
ิᣲࡉࢀࡓไး࡟ᑐࡋ࡚॔úⓗ࡞ຠᯝࡀᤵ୚ࡉࢀࡿ͐ ˜஧࡟ࠊࡑ࠺ࡋ
࠸ࡃࡘ࠿ࡢไးࡣࠊྖἲᗓࡀኚ໬ࡍࡿ≧ἣ࡟ᰂమ࡟ᑐᛂ࡛ࡁࡿࡼ
֑᱌ࡣࡲࡓࠊ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺
ࡓྠ✀ࡢ౑⏝ࡣࠊసရࡢ೫ᖖࡢ౑⏝࡜┦཯ࡏࡎࠊࡲࡓ˜୕͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞
࡞࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ࠕᢳ૏ᗘࢆ዇ࡵࡓไးࠖMETA Exception ࡶྵࢇ࡛࠸ࡿᜨ
฼┈ࡶͳ៖ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ‫؝ࡣࡓࡲ͵؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞฼┈ࢆ୙ᙜ࡟
࠺ࠊẚుⓗ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᙧ࡛ୣ֑ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ
ᦆ࡞ࢃ࡞࠸ᝯ᝱
ࠕิᣲࡉࢀࡓ౑⏝࡜▩┪ࡋ࡞࠸࠶ࡽࡺࡿ௚ࡢ౑⏝ࡣ͐ḟࡢो௳ࢆ‶ࡓࡏ
ࡑ࠺ࡋࡓ॔ᐃࡢᑟධࡣࠊࡑࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ቑࡍᰂమᛶࡀࠊኚ໬ࡍࡿ≧ἣ࡟
23rd July 2008, http://william-patry.blogspot.com/2008/07/declaration-on-three-step-test.
ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊẚుⓗ೯ࡸ࠿࡛ࠊพࡾྜ࠸ࡢ࡜ࢀࡓᑐᛂࢆ৶ࡵࡿⅬ࡛ព̿ࡀ࠶
html; see M Ficsor, “The ‘Three-Step Test’ – De Lege Lata – De Lege Ferenda”, paper
ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ॔ᐃࡀຍ┕ᅜ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣḢᕞೳྜࣞ࣋ࣝࡢWἲ͵ࡢࡳ
delivered at the Fordham International Intellectual Property Law and Policy Conference,
࡟ྥࡅࡽࢀࡓሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊࡑࡢᰂమᛶࡣࠊ኱ࡁࡃᦆ࡞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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
‫؝‬సᶒᏛ͵ࡢ୰࡟ࡣࡉࡽ࡟ளࡳࡇࢇ࡛ࠊWἲᗓࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊྖἲᗓ
↷᜗࡟ࡼࡿ࡭ࡁࡔ࡜୺ᙇࡍࡿࠋࡑࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ
ࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢᶵЏࢆྰᐃ
࡟ࡶᰂమ࡞ᑐᛂࢆồࡵࡿ͵ࡶ࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊ⌧ࢌࡢไး࡟ࡼࡗ࡚࢝ࣂ
ⓗ࡞ไlj࠿ࡽࠊϟᐃⓗ࡞࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒࡟ಟṇࡋࠊᝰࢸࢫࢺ᝱ࡢ᮲௳࡜ᑐWࡋ
࣮ࡉࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡞‫؝‬స≀ࡢ౑⏝ࢆ঱ྍࡍࡿᶒးࢆࠊุ࣒ᐁ࡟ࡶ୚࠼
࡞࠸ࡍ࡭࡚ࡢ౑⏝ࢆ৶ࡵࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿࠋ
ࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍࡿ୺ᙇ࡛࠶ࡿᝯ
࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ࡛ࡣࠊMartin Senftleben ࡣ
ୗঠࡢᥦ᱌ࢆࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᜨ
ࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖ᪉ᘧࢆࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙧ࡛ࠊ᥇⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜
࡟ࡣ᫂ࡽ࠿࡞฼Ⅼࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࢸࢫࢺࡢो௳ࡣᅜၯⓗ࡟৶ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࣚ
ࠕ᪂ࡋ࠸࢖ࣥࢱ࣮ࢿࢵࢺ⏘ᴗࡀⓎᒎࡋࠊࡑࡢȂ῭ⓗྍЏᛶࢆ᭷ຠά⏝ࡍ
࣮ࣟࢵࣃ࡛ࡣࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࡼࡾࡶᨻ἞ⓗ࡟ཷࡅධࢀ
ࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࡣࠊ‫؝‬సᶒไးࡢ୰࡟༑ศ࡞ᜥᢤࡁࡢవᆅࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀᚲ
ࡽࢀ᫆࠸࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ©͵ࡀูࡢሙ࡛ਭࡌࡓࡼ࠺࡟ᝲ ࡇ࠺
ो୙ྍḞ࡛࠶ࡿ͐ࡇ࠺ࡋࡓၥᆏࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿ࡜ࠊࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫ
ࡋࡓᙧ࡛പ⏝ࡍࡿࡢࡣၥᆏࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࢸࢫࢺࡢඖ᮶ࡢᶵЏࡣไး࡛࠶ࡾࠊ
ࢺࡢᘓযⓗ࡞౑⏝࡟┠ࢆྥࡅࡿᶵࡣ⇍ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࡳ࠼ࡿࠋಶ௦‫؝‬స
‫؝‬స≀ࡢҜ⏤࡞౑⏝ࢆไးࡍࡿᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࢀ
ᶒἲࡣࢸࢫࢺࢆࠊไးࢆɮࡵࡘࡅࡿࡓࡵ࡟౑⏝ࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊಶࠎࡢ
ࡣࠊࠕࣂࣛࣥࢫࠖࡢ࡜ࢀࡓᙧ࡛പษ࡟ॾจࡉࢀࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊḢᕞࡢ‫؝‬స
ࢣ࣮ࢫࡢಶูࡢ≧ἣ࡟ᑐᛂࡋ࡚ࠊไးࢆไljࡋࡓࡾࠊᣑ኱ࡋࡓࡾࡍࡿὙ
ᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟ࠊࡼࡾ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᰂమᛶࢆᑟධࡍࡿ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ
ɾࡉࢀࡓẚుͳฎࢸࢫࢺ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ౑⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ᥎೽ࡍࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࡉࡽ࡟ࠊࡑࢀࡣ॔úⓗ࡞࢞࢖ࢲࣥࢫࢆ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝ᥦ౪ࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖ
Wἲⓗ࿥ᚰ࡬ࡢ୙ྜ⌮࡞೫॒࡜ṇ॔࡞౑⏝࡜ࡢ┦ඞ࡟ᑐࡍࡿࠊᰂమᛶࡢ
ࡣࠊ☜Wࡉࢀࡓព࿡ࢆᣢࡘࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊྛᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀപ⏝ࡍࡿሙྜ
࠶ࡿ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᇶ‽࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸ࡓࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫᝳࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢ᥇⏝ࡣࠊ
࡟ࠊ௚ࡢᡭẁ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚฿ങࡋࡓȆਭࢆ஦ᚋⓗ࡟ṇᙜ໬ࡍࡿᙺ๭ࡋ࠿ᯝࡓ
ࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢࡼࡾᰂమ࡛ࠊࣂࣛࣥࢫࡢ࡜ࢀࡓപ⏝࡬ࡢഘ
ࡋ࡚ࡇ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋ
ࢆ࿔ࡃᝯ᝱
ࡇ࠺ࡋࡓ≧ἣୗ࡛ࠊਭ͵ങࡀ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ‫؝‬సᶒࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࢆࡼࡾᰂమ
ࡑ࠺ࡋࡓࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫᆺࡢ᮲ᅟࡣࠊ␲࠸࡞ࡃ᪤Ꮡࡢࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟ᰂమ
࡞ࡶࡢ࡟ࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢ௦᭰᱌ࠊලయⓗ࡟ࡣůᅜࣔࢹࣝࢆ࣮࣋ࢫ࡟ࡋࡓࠊो
ᛶࢆ୚࠼ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊSenftleben ࠾ࡼࡧྠᵝࡢͳ࠼ࢆᥦ᱌ࡍࡿேࠎ
Ǣ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸ࡓࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ⌮ਭࡢ᥇⏝ࢆࠊ┿๢࡟᥈ồࡋ࡚ࡇ࡞࠿ࡗ
ࡣࠊᰂమᛶ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ॔úⓗ࡞ไljࡣࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ⌮ਭࡢࡼ࠺
ࡓࡢࡣ୙ᛮએ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡣࠊ౯್࠶ࡿᩍছࢆྵࢇ࡛࠸ࡿࡇ
࡟ोǢࡢࣜࢫࢺ໬࡟ࡼࡿࡼࡾࡶࠊࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ᮲௳
࡜ࡀࡋࡤࡋࡤᣦ᦬ࡉࢀ࡚࠾ࡾᝲ ࠸ࡃࡘ࠿ࡢᅜࡢWἲ͵ࡣࠊ᭱ಶࡇࡢࣔ
᜖࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᑡ࡞ࡃ࡜ࡶࢸࢫࢺࡢ˜ ࠾ࡼࡧ˜ ोǢࠊলὀᜨঠ ࡢলὀཧ
ࢹࣝࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࡘࡘ࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊਭ͵ങࡣ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ࡟ࣇ࢙࢔࣭
࣮ࣘࢫ⌮ਭࢆ඲ჳⓗ࡟ᑟධࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ഺࡅ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ ࡇࡢ௻௹
ࡇࢀࡣẚుⓗးᐃࡉࢀࡓúᅖ࡛ࠊᶒ฼ࡢ஘⏝⌮ਭࢆᙉ໬ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ
ࡣṇᙜ໬ࡉࢀࡿࡔࢁ࠺࠿ᜭ
ᇶᮏⓗᶒ฼ࡣࡼࡾᑛฌࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠊ࡜୺ᙇࡍࡿᏛ͵࡟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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
ᜱ᜜ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫᝳࣔࢹ࣮ࣝண ᅔႤᛶࡢၥᆏូ
ोǢࢆཧͳ࡟ࡋ࡚Ỵᐃࡉࢀࡿࠋิᣲࡉࢀࡓࣜࢫࢺࡑࡢࡶࡢࡶࡑࢀࡽ࡟း
ࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡲࡓࠊᵝࠎ࡞ोǢࡢ┦ᑐⓗ࡞࢙࢘࢖ࢺࡶ࠶ࡽ࠿ࡌࡵ
ůᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡣࡼࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿᜨ
Ỵࡵࡽࢀ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢ᮲ࡢ॔ᐃ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣ≉ᐃࡢ
˜᮲᜖‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ‫؝‬స≀࡟ᑐࡍࡿ᤼௚ⓗᶒ฼᜗࠾ࡼࡧ˜ᜯ᮲᜖୍
≧ἣୗ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ஦ᐇࢆͳ៖ࡋ࡚ࠊಶูࡢ஦௳࡟࠾ࡅࡿ฼ᐖࢆപษ࡟ࣂࣛ
ᐃࡢ‫؝‬స͵ࡢẶྡࢢ♧࠾ࡼࡧྠ୍ᛶಖᣢࡢᶒ฼᜗ࡢ॔ᐃ࡟࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊ
ࣥࢫࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡇࡢᶒး࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ࠊůᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡣⓎᒎࡍ
ᢈোࠊॾ਍ࠊࢽ࣮ࣗࢫሗഘࠊᩍᤵ᜖ᩍᐊ࡟࠾ࡅࡿࣽᩘࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࢆసᡂࡍ
ࡿᢏ࢑ⓗ≧ἣࢆͳ៖࡟ධࢀ࡚ಟṇࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡑࡢȆᯝࠊḢᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲ
ࡿࢌⅭࢆྵࡴ᜗ࠊ◊"ࡲࡓࡣਚᰝ¬ࢆ┠ⓗ࡜ࡍࡿ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ‫؝‬స≀ࡢ
ไࢆᝎࡲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ᫬௦ഌࢀࡢ≧ἣࢆᅇഺࡋ࡚ࡁࡓᝯ
ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ᜖ࢥࣆ࣮ࡲࡓࡣࣞࢥ࣮ࢻ࡬ࡢࣽࣷࡑࡢ௚˜᮲࡟ᐃࡵ
ࡿᡭẁ࡟ࡼࡿ౑⏝ࢆྵࡴ᜗ࡣࠊ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ౵ᐖ࡜࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋ‫؝‬స≀ࡢ౑⏝
ࡶࡕࢁࢇࠊࡇࡢᰂమᛶࡑࡢࡶࡢ࡟ࡣၥᆏࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ोǢࢆ࣋
࣮ࢫ࡟ࡋࡓᑂᰝࡣࠊุ࣒ᐁ࡟༑ศ᫂☜࡞࢞࢖ࢲࣥࢫࢆ୚࠼ࡎࠊࡑࡢȆᯝࠊ
ࡀࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡜࡞ࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࢆุ᩿ࡍࡿሙྜ࡟ͳ៖ࡍ࡭ࡁोǢࡣࠊ௨
୺५ⓗ࡞Ỵᐃࢆṇᙜ໬ࡍࡿ‫ࡢ࡚ࡋ࡜࠸ڨ‬ᶵЏࡋ࠿ᯝࡓࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸࡜ࡢ
ୗࡢࡶࡢࢆྵࡴࠋ
ᣦ᦬ࡶ࠶ࡿᜨ
ϸ ౑⏝ࡢ┠ⓗ࠾ࡼࡧᛶ଱᜖౑⏝ࡀၟᴗᛶࢆ᭷ࡍࡿ࠿ࡲࡓࡣჰႠ฼ⓗ
ࠕุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊࡲࡎ౑⏝ࡀබṇ࡛࠶ࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࡢ᭱Ǻⓗ࡞ุᐃࢆୗࡋࠊࡑࡢ
ᩍϡ┠ⓗࢆྵࡴ᜗
ᚋ࡟ ोǢࢆྍЏ࡞းࡾȆਭ࡟പྜࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡟ਚᩚࡍࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ
ᇶᮏⓗ࡟ࡣࠊ ोǢࡣศᯒࢆಁ೽ࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡴࡋࢁࠊࡍ࡛࡟࠶ࡿ
Ϲ ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ‫؝‬స≀ࡢᛶ଱
Ȇਭࢆ᥃ࡅࡿࡓࡵࡢ౽฼࡞ตࡢᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ᝱
Ϻ ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ‫؝‬స≀඲య࡜ࡢ࿥ೳ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ౑⏝ࡉࢀࡓൺศࡢฎ࠾
ࡇ࠺ࡋࡓពᛮỴᐃࡢ࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡣࠊ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢண ᅔႤᛶࢆ⏕ࡳฟࡋࠊ
ࡼࡧᐇ଱ᛶ
‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᶒ฼ࢆ༴ၔ࡟ࡉࡽࡍࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊ฼⏝͵ࡢᢠᘚࡢ᭷ຠᛶ
ࡶᦆ࡞࠺࡜ࡢព॒ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋ฼⏝͵ࡣࡑࡢ౑⏝ࡀබṇ࡛࠶ࡿ࠿࡝࠺࠿☜ಙ
ϻ ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ‫؝‬స≀ࡢ₯ᅾⓗᕷሙࡲࡓࡣ౯್࡟ᑐࡍࡿ౑⏝ࡢᙳᅚ
࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ሙྜࠊ‫؝‬సᶒ౵ᐖ঳তࡢࣜࢫࢡࢆ࡜ࡽ࡞࠸ྍЏᛶࡶ࠶ࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛
࠶ࡿᜨ
ୖঠࡢࡍ࡭࡚ࡢोǢࢆͳ៖ࡋ࡚බṇ౑⏝ࡀ৶ᐃࡉࢀࡓሙྜࠊ‫؝‬స≀ࡀᮍ
Ⓨࢌ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺஦ᐇҜయࡣࠊ࠿࠿ࡿ৶ᐃࢆጉࡆ࡞࠸ᝯ
ࠕࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢ᭕᫕ࡉ࠿ࡽࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡣ࠿࡞ࡾਭ
ᮏ᮲ࡣࠊุ࣒ᐁࡀసࡾฟࡋࡓ᪤Ꮡࡢཎ๎ࢆ᮲ᩥ໬ࡋࡓࡶࡢ࡛ࠊ௚ࡢ᫂
☜࡟॔ᐃࡉࢀࡓࠊࠕࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ࠖไး࡜୪Ꮡࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ᭱ࡶฌो࡞≉ᚩ
ࡓࡔࡋࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣิᣲࡉࢀࡓ ोǢ௨እࡢोǢࡣฌख़ࡋ࡞࠸ഴྥࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ
ࡣࠊࡑࡢࠕ࣮࢜ࣉࣥࡉࠖ࡟࠶ࡿࠋ॔ᐃ࡟ৡᙜࡍࡿ౑⏝ࡣࠊవࡍ࡜ࡇࢁ࡞
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
ࡇࡢ᭱ᚋࡢࣃࣛࢢࣛࣇࡣᖺ࡟೓ຍࡉࢀࡓࠋSee 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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
◚ྍЏ࡛ࠊ࠿ࡘࡋࡤࡋࡤ⌮ਭୖࡢᢠᘚ࡟ࡍࡂ࡞࠸͐঳࠼ࡽࢀࡿࣜࢫࢡࠊ
ࡇࡢࠕᨭපⓗ࡞ព॒ࠖࡣࡲࡓࠊḟࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᣦ᦬࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᨭᣢࡉࢀࡿࡇ
࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ঳࠼ࡽࢀࡓሙྜ࡟த࠺ࣜࢫࢡࢆ࡜ࡿࠊȂ῭ຊࡢ࡞࠸ಶேࡸჰၟ
࡜ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡀண ᅔႤ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊᶒ฼ࡑࡢࡶࡢ࡟ၥ
ᴗⓗ࡞‫؝‬స≀฼⏝͵࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࡣ≉࡟ࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊࡑࢀࡣࠊࢢ⌧
ᆏࡀ࠶ࡿࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢࠕ≉ู࡞ሙྜ
͵ࡢ୍ӑ኱ࢇ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ࿋ᡞࡢᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡍฟ∧♫ࠊࢫࢱࢪ࢜ࠊᨺೖᒁࠊ
࡟ࡘ࠸࡚᝱ ࡢ᮲௳᜖লὀᜨঠ ࡢলὀཧ↷᜗ࢆ‶ࡓࡍࡇ࡜ࢆጉࡆࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭
࠾ࡼࡧࣞࢥ࣮ࢻ఍♫ࡀࠊࣜࢫࢡᅇഺ࡟୞ࡿሙྜ࡟ࡶᙜ࡚ࡣࡲࡿࠋ‫؝‬సᶒ
࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࢆᅜၯ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢᯟእ࡟೓࠸ࡸࡗ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺࡜ࡍࡿᣦ᦬࡛
ࡢᏳ඲ᘚ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢࢢ⌧ࡢҜ⏤ࡀࠊᜏᖖⓗ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃண ᅔႤ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊ
዇ᆐ࡞঳ত଍⏝࡜┦ࡲࡗ࡚ࠕ঱੉ࢆᚓࡿ࠿๐၆ࡍࡿࠖᩥ໬ࢆ⏕ࡳฟࡋ࡚
࠸ࡿࠋࡇ࠺ࡋࡓᩥ໬ࡢ୰࡛ࡣࠊ࿋ᡞ࡜ࡋ࡚ᶵЏࡍࡿ௰௓͵̿࠾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].
ࡢ࿛ച࠸ࠊ࡞ࡽࡧ࡟ಖၔᥦ౪͵ࡢ↓ख़̿ࡣࠊ‫؝‬సᶒࢆ౵ᐖࡋ࡞࠸ሙྜࡶ
ྵࡵࠊၥᆏⓎ⏕ࡢ࠾ࡑࢀࡢ࠶ࡿ࠶ࡽࡺࡿ౑⏝࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊ฼⏝͵ࡀ౑⏝঱
Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 75, 116-30; H Cohen Jehoram, “Restrictions on
ྍࢆྲྀᚓࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ୺ᙇࡍࡿᝯ᝱
ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲࡢࡇࡢഃჳࡇࡑࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫᆺࣔࢹࣝࡢḢᕞ࡬
ࡢᑟධ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ᭱኱ࡢ཯ᑐ⌮⏤࡛࠶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 ᝰ௬࡟ůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡀ ៰៮៥៬᠏ ࡢ
ࣃࢿ࡛ࣝதࢃࢀࡓ࡜ࡋࡓࡽࠊ⚾ࡣᑒ༳ࡉࢀࡿ࡜ᛮ࠺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
ᖖࡣࣇ࣮࣭࣮ࣜࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࢆព࿡ࡍࡿࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡀࠊ‫؝‬సᶒ͵ࡢṇᙜ࡞
ᶒ฼࡜࢚*ࡋ࡞࠸ࢣ࣮ࢫࡣͳ࠼࡟ࡃ࠸ᝯ᝱; R Burrell & A Coleman, Copyright Exceptions: The Digital Impact (Cambridge University Press, 2005); J Reichman, “Universal
ࠕࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ไးࢆవࡍ࡜ࡇࢁ࡞ࡃิᣲࡍࡿࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟௦ࢃࡿ᫂☜࡞ࢩ
Minimum Standards of Intellectual Property Protection under the TRIPS Component of the
ࢫࢸ࣒ࡣࠊࠗࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࠘ࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡜ྠ✀ࡢ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞പ⏝ᇶ‽ࢆ
WTO Agreement” [1995] 29(2) International Lawyer 345, 369; S Ricketson, WIPO Study
ᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࠊ‫؝‬సᶒ౵ᐖ࡟ᑐࡋᰂమ࡞ᢠᘚࢆᥦ౪ࡋࠊ
࡟ࢃ࠿௙W࡚᜖ad hoc᜗ࡢไးࢆ৶ࡵࠊ஦᱌ࡢලయⓗ࡞≧ἣࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿ
వᆅࢆ୚࠼ࡿࠋࡉࡽ࡟ฌो࡞ࡢࡣࠊࡑࢀࡣ᪂ࡋ࠸ ண ࡛ࡁ࡞࠿ࡗࡓ
೽໬࡟ࡶപ⏝࡛ࡁࡿࠋࠕࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖࡣ͐ ៥៬ូᑓ࿋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࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡶࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢोǢࡣ༢࡞ࡿ࢞࢖ࢻࣛ࢖࡛ࣥ࠶
Berne Whole?” [1990] EIPR 423. ůᅜࡀ ៰៮៥៬៯ ࡟ຍ┕ࡋࡓ᫬Ⅼ࡛ࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡜
ࡾࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣࢣ࣮ࢫ࣭ࣂ࢖࣭ࢣ࣮ࢫ࡛Ҝ⏤࡟᥇⏝࡛ࡁࡿࠋɢᣓࡍࡿ࡜ࠊ
୧Wࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡢࡀůᅜᨻᗓࡢ॒ॾࡔࡗࡓ >ᝰ>៰៮៥៬᠏@ ࡢ˜᮲ࡣࠊ࣋ࣝࢾ᮲ljࡢ˜
ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࣭ࢩࢫࢸ࣒࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ฼⏝͵ࡣࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ࢩࢫࢸ࣒௨ୖ
࡟ࠊ࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡞౑⏝࡞ࡽ঱ࡉࢀࡿࡢ࠿࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ᪉ྥࢆ॒ኻࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ
ࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ᜖ଦᡂὴࡀˎࡾಹࡋ୺ᙇࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎ᜗ᨭපⓗ
࡞ព॒ࡣࠊǗŻ࡞ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫᴫᛕࡢ᥇⏝࡟཯ᑐ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊ©͵ࡣࡑ
ࢀࡀ୙ᖾ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡣᛮࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸ᝯ᝱
᮲ࡢപ⏝úᅖࢆࠊ‫؝‬సᶒ࠾ࡼࡧ࿥ೳࡍࡿᶒ฼࡟ᑐࡍࡿࡍ࡭࡚ࡢไး࡟ᣑ኱ࡍࡿ
ࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ៳៰៫ ຍ┕ᅜࡀ਒ࡍࡿไး࠾ࡼࡧး⏺ࢆಎ࠺ࡌ࡚ᅇഺࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢ࢔
ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࡣ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿసရࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡟࿥ࡍࡿůᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲ˜᮲࡜୍
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)[email protected]ࠋࣇ࢙࢔࣭
࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡀोồࡍࡿࣂࣛࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࢆ೫ࡌ࡚ࠊůᅜἲࡀࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭
ࢸࢫࢺࢆലᏲࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜ࡍࡿਭ͵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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
࠶ࡿᝯ
ᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ཯ᑐ͵ࡣࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢ࣮ࣝࣝࢆᣄྰࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊࡋࡤࡋ
ࡤ᮲ᩥࡑࡢࡶࡢࡢ᮲௳ࢆ୨࠼ࡓએਭࡣࡋ࡞࠸ࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊุ࣒ᐁࡣࠊ
ᜲ᜜೫ᛕ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ␲ၥូ
˜᮲ࢆപ⏝ࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊ↓ไး࡞Ҝ⏤ࢆாཷࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸Ⅼ
ࢆ⌮ॾࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣฌो࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࿇ᖺ࡟ࢃࡓࡗ࡚ࠊࣽ႗࡞ุ౛యDŽࡀ
ࡳ
ண ᅔႤࡢၥᆏࡣࠊ᫂ࡽ࠿࡞฼Ⅼࡢ࠶ࡿࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊࣚ
ฌ࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊೳൕ᭱዇ุ࣒ᡤࡢุỴ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ࠊᮍබࢢ
࣮ࣟࢵࣃࡀ௻௹ࡍࡿ᭱኱ࡢ⌮⏤࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇ࠺ࡋࡓ௻௹ࡣ࡝ࡇࡲ࡛ṇᙜ໬
ࡢసရ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡣࠊබࢢ῭ࡳࡢసရ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡼࡾࡶࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢ৶
࡛ࡁࡿࡔࢁ࠺࠿ᜭ
ᐃࡀႤࡋࡃᝲ ୙฼࡞ᢈোࡀ‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᕷሙ࡟ᝏᙳᅚࢆཬࡰࡋࡓ࡜
ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊࡑࢀࡣࠊ˜᮲ࡢ˜ ोǢ ‫؝‬స≀ࡢᕷሙࡲࡓࡣ౯್࡟ᑐࡍࡿ
౑⏝ࡢᙳᅚ ࢆ᳨খࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊ‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵࡟᭷฼࡟ࡣാ࠿࡞࠸ᝯ
ࡇࡢၥᆏࢆͳ࠼ࡿ࡟࠶ࡓࡗ࡚኱஦࡞ࡢࡣࠊࡲࡎࠊ᏶඲࡞ᰂమᛶࢆᣢࡕࠊ
ྠ᫬࡟᏶඲࡟ண ྍЏ࡞ཎ๎ࢆ᥈ồࡍࡿ৘ࡳࡣࠊኻᩋ࡟ǺࢃࡿⅬࢆ৶ઁ
ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢਭᩥࡢෑᅼ࡛਍᫂ࡋࡓ◳┤⑕࡟ྲྀࡾǼࡶ࠺࡜ࡍࢀ
ᐇၯࠊůᅜࡢุ࣒ᡤࡣࠊ˜ ोǢࢆศᯒࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊࡼࡾᰂమ
ࡤࠊ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢண ᅔႤᛶࢆ঱ᐜࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣഺࡅࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡉࡽ࡟ࠊࣇ
ᛶࡢ࡞࠸ไး॔ᐃࢆ᥇⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿከࡃࡢᅜࠎ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊྠࡌၥᆏࢆॾỴ
࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࢆࠕ᭱ࡶၥᆏࡢከ࠸ཎ๎᝱ ࡜ࡍࡿỴࡲࡾᩥྃ࡟ࡶὀពࡍࡿ
ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟౑⏝ࡉࢀࡿࢶ࣮ࣝ࡟ẚ࡭ࡿ࡜ࠊƝᐦ࠿ࡘৢǭ࡞୍ೳࡢ๪ḟⓗ
ोǢࢆ࿔Ⓨࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊࣅ࿌࡟ࡼࡿ౑⏝ࡀᕷሙ࠾ࡼࡧ౯್࡟୚
ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎࡜ࠊࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࡀ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ोồࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡜ࡢ࿛࡟ࡣࠊࡑࡢ௚
࠼ࡿᙳᅚࢆো౯ࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊᜏஂⓗ࡟Ⓨ⏕ࡍࡿᚠ⎔ਭἲࡢၥᆏࡣࠊůᅜࡢ
ࡢɝᙇ࿥ಀࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᢠᘚࡣࠊ‫؝‬స≀ࡀࠕ೫ᖖࡢ౑⏝࡟
ุ࣒ᡤࡀࡇࡢोǢ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ࠊ࿇ᖺ࡟ࢃࡓࡗ࡚Ὑɾࡋ࡚ࡁࡓപษ࡞଱
཯ࡍࡿࠖࡼ࠺࡞≧ἣࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ‫؝‬స͵ࡢࠕྜἲⓗ࡞฼┈ࢆ୙ᙜ࡟ᦆ࡞࠺ࠖ≧ἣ࡟࠾
ၥ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᅇഺ࡛ࡁࡿᜨ
ࡅࡿ౑⏝ࢆච଀ࡍࡿຊࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢȆᯝࠊ
ࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ˜ ࠾ࡼࡧ᜝࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ˜ ࢫ
ࢸࢵࣉ࡟ച཯ࡍࡿ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊ៳៰៫ ࣃࢿࣝࡢ˜ ࢫࢸࢵࣉࡢॾจ࡟
ࡼࢀࡤࠊไးࡀ‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵࠿ࡽࣛ࢖ࢭࣥࢫྍЏ࡞ᕷሙࢆዣ࠺ሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊ
ࠕࢸࢫࢺࠖ
ࠕࢃࢀࢃࢀࡣ₯ᅾⓗ࡞౑⏝ᩱ཰ධࡢ႙ኻࡀࠊ˜ ोǢࡢ᳨খȆᯝࢆཎ࿌࡟
᭷฼࡟ࡍࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࢆͳᐹࡍࡿၯ࡟࠾ࡕ࠸ࡿᚠ⎔ਭἲࢆ৶ઁࡋࡓ͐ၥᆏ
࡟ച཯ࡍࡿ࡜ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡶࡋࡇࢀࡀṇࡋ࠸࡜ࡍࡿ࡜ࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢ࠶ࡿ
ࡣࣽࣷࡀࣥൾ࡛ࡁࡿ࠿ྰ࠿࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࣛ࢖ࢭࣥࢫ཰ධࢆཷࡅࡽࢀ࡞࠸ࡇ
✀ࡢപ⏝࡟ࡣ␲ၥࡀ⏕ࡎࡿࠋࠕ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ࠶ࡿ‫؝‬స≀ࡢ₯ᅾⓗᕷሙࡲࡓࡣ౯್࡟ᑐࡍ
ࡿ౑⏝ࡢᙳᅚࠖࡣࠊ˜᮲࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ोồࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࣂࣛࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢჰᖖ࡟ฌ
࡜ࡣࠊཎ࿌ࢆ᭷฼࡟ࡍࡿỴᐃⓗ࡞ोᅉ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡾ࠼࡞࠸͐ࢃࢀࢃࢀࡣࠊ₯
ो࡞ोǢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࡑࢀࡣ᭱ฌो࡞ͳᐹ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊྜࢇᅜ
ᅾⓗ࡞ᕷሙ࡬ࡢᙳᅚࡢၥᆏࢆͳᐹࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊࠗఏțⓗ࡛ྜ⌮ⓗ࡞ࠊࡲࡓ
᭱዇࣒ࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡟࿥ࡍࡿ┤ಶࡢุỴ Campbell v. Acuff-Music Inc 510 US 569
ࡣⓎᒎࡢྍЏᛶࡢ࠶ࡿᕷሙࡢࡳ࠘ࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᝏᚠ⎔ࢆ᩿ࡕ
(1994) ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊࣅ࿌ࡢ౑⏝ࡀ‫؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵ࡢᕷሙ࡟୚࠼ࡿᝏᙳᅚࡣࠊࡑࡢ౑⏝
ษࡗ࡚ࡁࡓᝯ᝱
ࡀࣇ࢙࢔࡛࡞࠸࡜᥎ᐃࡉࡏࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࡀᙉਚࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡉࡽ࡟ࠊࠕࢫࣜ
࣮࣭ࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࠖࡢ࠶ࡿ∧࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊ‫؝‬స͵ࡢྜἲⓗ࡞฼┈ࢆ୙ᙜ࡟ᦆ࡞
লὀᜨ஧ḟ฼⏝͵ࡣ೫ᖖࠊ౑⏝ᩱࢆᨭᡶࢃ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࠊ‫؝‬సᶒ͵ࡀ႙ኻࡋࡓ₯
ࢃ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ไးࡶᏑᅾࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢ฼┈ࡢ୰࡟ࡣȂ῭ⓗ࡞฼┈࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ே᱁ᶒࡶྵ
ᅾⓗ౑⏝ᩱ཰ධࢆ඲ᆐͳ៖ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜ࠊ˜ ोǢࡣཎ࿌࡟᭷฼࡟ࡋ࠿ാ࠿࡞
ࡲࢀࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎࡛ࡣࠊసရࡢȂ῭ⓗᶒ฼ಖ᭷͵࡜ษࡾ
Ⴃࡉࢀࡓ‫ࡢ͵؝‬฼┈ࡣࠊ˜᮲࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸࡚ࢌࢃࢀࡿ౯್ࡢࣂࣛࣥࢫ࣭ࢸࢫࢺࡢ
ၯ࡟ࡣࡲࡗࡓࡃͳ៖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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
࠸ࠋࡇࡢࡓࡵࠊุ࣒ᡤࡣࠕఏțⓗ࡛ྜ⌮ⓗ࡞ࠊࡲࡓࡣⓎᒎࡢྍЏᛶࡢ࠶ࡿᕷ
཯ࡋ࡚ࠊุ࣒ᐁࡀ஦๓࡟ỴࡵࡓȆਭࢆṇᙜ໬ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘ
ሙࡢࡳࠖࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿุ౛ࢆⓎᒎࡉࡏ࡚ࡁࡓࠋ
ࢫࡢोǢࢆപ⏝ࡍࡿഴྥࡣ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࢆহ᫂ࡋࡓᝯ ᙼࡢ඲ӑⓗ࡞Ȇਭ
ࡣᜨ
ࡉࡽ࡟ࠊࡇࡢၥᆏࡢͳᐹࡀࠊ≉ᐃࡢ஦౛࡟࠾ࡅࡿࣅ࿌ࡢලయⓗ࡞ࢌື
ࢆো౯ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࣅ࿌ࡢ౑⏝ࡀᗈúᅖ࡟ࢃࡓࡿሙྜ࡟
ࠕ☜࠿࡟ࢹ࣮ࢱࡣࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࢆᦆ࡞࠺ከࡃࡢ୍ӑⓗ࡞័ࢌࢆ
ࡣࠊཎ࿌ࡢᕷሙ࡟୚࠼ࡿᙳᅚࢆো౯ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊุ౛ࡢ೽໬
ᭀგࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋุ࣒ᡤࡣोǢࢆᶵᲔⓗ࡟പ⏝ࡍࡿഴྥࡀ࠶ࡾࠊࡲࡓ᫬࡟
࡟ࡼࡗ࡚☜Wࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋබṇࡉࡣࠊǗŻ࡟ᙜ஦͵࿛ࡔࡅ࡛ͳ៖ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛
ࡣ┦཯ࡍࡿุỴࢆ౽ᐅⓗ࡟౑⏝ࡍࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࡣࠊಟṇࡍࡿᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿไ
ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡼࡾᗈ࠸♫఍ⓗ࡞Ϭᬒࡶͳ៖ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟Ὑɾࡉ
ᗘⓗ࡞Ḟ၇࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ඲యⓗ࡟ࡳࢀࡤࠊከࡃࡢඛᑟⓗ࡛࡞
ࢀࡓࣽ႗࡞๪ḟⓗ॔๎࠾ࡼࡧ๪ḟⓗोǢࡢႏ኱ᡂࡀࠊůᅜࡢุ౛ࢆ௚ࡢ
࠸ࢣ࣮ࢫࡣࠊࡑࢀҜఏඛ౛࡜ࡋ࡚౑⏝ࡍࡿ౯್ࢆᣢࡘࡇ࡜ࡀহ᫂ࡉࢀ
ࡓᝯ᝱
ࡼࡾ☜ᐃࡋࡓไးࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࢆᣢࡘᅜࠎࡼࡾࡶ೽ࢇࡔࡶࡢ࡟ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ
ᐇၯࠊఱே࠿ࡢůᅜࡢ‫؝‬సᶒᏛ͵ࡣࠊഓᗘࡢண ᅔႤᛶ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙ࡃࣇ
Beebe ࡢὀព῝ࡃ⌮⏤࡙ࡅࡽࢀࡓȆਭࡣࠊPamela Samuelson ࡟ࡼࡿ᭱
࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎࡟ᑐࡍࡿᢈุࡣࠊ࠿࡞ࡾ৲ᙇࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿⅬࢆᣦ᦬ࡋ࡚
ಶࡢ‫؝‬స࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡶᨭᣢࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ“Unbundling Fair Use” ࡟࠾࠸࡚ᝲ
࠸ࡿࠋBarton Beebe ࡣࠊ“An Empirical Study of US Copyright Fair Use
Samuelson ࡣࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫุ౛ࢆ࠸ࡃࡘ࠿ࡢ࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜ࡟ศᆞࡋ࡚࠸
Opinions, 1978-2005”᜖লὀᜨࡇࡢਭᩥࡢ࿴ল࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣᮏ৵ྕྕ࡟ೳ౅
ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊྜࢇᅜ᠇ἲಟṇ˜ ᮲ࡢࢢ⌧ࡢҜ⏤࡟࿥ೳࡍࡿࢣ࣮ࢫࠊ
ࡢࠕůᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲࣇ࢙࢔࣮ࣘࢫุỴᖺࡢᐇহⓗ◊"ࠖᇛᡤᒾ⏕ল
▱ઁࡢ๰೰࡜ᅪᕸࢆ᥎೽ࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ౑⏝࡟࿥ೳࡍࡿࢣ࣮ࢫࠊ࠾
ཧ↷ ᜗࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊᖺůᅜ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢⓎຠᚋࡢࡍ࡭࡚ࡢฌो࡞ࣇ࢙
ࡼࡧએ఍ࡀᖺ‫؝‬సᶒἲࢆWἲࡋࡓၯ࡟ண ࡛ࡁ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡼ࠺࡞౑
࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫุỴࡢțওⓗ࡞ศᯒȆᯝࢆⓎࢢࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᝯ Beebe ࡢศᯒȆ
⏝࡟࿥ࡍࡿࢣ࣮ࢫࠊࡀྵࡲࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟యDŽⓗ࡟࢝ࢸࢦ࣮ࣜศ
ᯝࡣࠊ˜᮲ࡢപ⏝࡟ࡘ࠸୍࡚ӑⓗ࡞⌮ॾ࡜ࡣ཯ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡓ
ࡅࡋ࡚ࡳࡿ࡜ࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫุ౛ࡣண ᅔႤ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍࡿከࡃࡢᢈุ
࡜࠼ࡤࠊ଱ၥࡀᮏ᮶ⓗ࡟୺५ⓗ࡞ഃჳࢆᣢࡘȆᯝࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫุỴ
࡟ࡣ᰿ᣐࡀ࡞࠸࡜ Samuelson ࡣ୺ᙇࡍࡿࠋ≉ᐃࡢࠕࢢ࣮ࣝࣉࠖෆ࡟ࡣࠊ
ࡀࠊ᥍঳ุ࣒ᡤ࡟ࡼࡗ्࡚ࡉࢀࡿᩘࡣ୙พࡾྜ࠸࡞࡯࡝዇࠸ᝯ ࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ
ពᛮỴᐃࢆࡍࡿၯࡢ᫂☜࡞ࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋȆਭ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊSamuelson
Beebe ࡣࠊࡑ࠺ࡋࡓ೛యุỴ࠾ࡼࡧ෌೛యุỴࡀⓎ⏕ࡋࡓᑡᩘࡢ᭷ྡ࡞
ࡣ௨ୗࡢࡼ࠺࡟᥎ዡࡍࡿᜨ
ࢣ࣮ࢫࢆ၆ࡅࡤࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢุ౛ἲࡣ୙พࡾྜ࠸࡞࡯࡝ࡢ೛యഴ
ྥࡣ♧ࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࢆহ᫂ࡋࡓᝯ Beebe ࡣࠊᣦᑟⓗ࡞ਭ͵ࡢព॒࡟
ࠕุ࣒͐ᐁ࠾ࡼࡧਭ͵ࡣࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲࡀ࠸࠿࡟ၥᆏ࠶ࡿ࠿ࢆᙉਚ
ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆࡸࡵ࡚ࠊ௦ࢃࡾ࡟ࠊࡼࡾண ྍЏ࡞୍ೳࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲ
ࢆᙧᡂࡍࡿᇶ┙࡜࡞ࡿඹ೫ࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࢆࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫุ౛ἲࡢ୰࠿ࡽ
ࡓ࡜࠼ࡤࠊՕᅜࡢ࠸ࡃࡘ࠿ࡢุ࣒ᡤࡀ᥇⏝ࡍࡿẚుⓗ॔ᚊࡢ࡞࠸࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳ࡜ࠊ
᥈ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋྠࡌ᪉บࡢࢢ࣮ࣝࣉෆ࡛ࠊ௨๓࡟ฟࡉࢀࡓุỴ࡟↷ࡽ
៟០៬៝ូ៍៕។។ ࡢࡼࡾไးⓗ࡞ࠕࣇ࢙࢔࣭ࢹ࢕࣮ࣜࣥࢢࠖ᮲ᅟࢆẚుࡏࡼࠋSee J Griffiths,
ࡋ࡚ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࢆศᯒࡍࡿ࡜ࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡣࠊᗈú࡞≧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௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
ࡅࡿᗈú࡞฼ᐖࢆࣂࣛࣥࢫࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢࠊᰂమ࡞ᇶ‽࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ౑⏝౯್ࢆ
ᜳ᜜Ȇਭូ
ኻ࠺ࡇ࡜࡞ࡃࠊࡼࡾ॔๎ⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡟ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿᝯ᝱
ůᅜἲ࡜࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃἲࢆ༊ศࡍࡿၯ࡟ࡣࠊᅛᐃ५ᛕࢆഺࡅࡿࡇ࡜ࡀฌ
᭱ಶࡢࡇࡢ◊"࡟↷ࡽࡏࡤࠊഓᗘ࡟୙☜ᐇ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍࡿࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘ
ो࡛࠶ࡿࠋไး࡟ᑐࡋ࡚᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ࠕࢡ࣮ࣟࢬ࡞ࠖ࢔ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ᥇⏝ࡍࡿ
ࢫ࣭ࣔࢹࣝ࡬ࡢఏțⓗ࡞࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ᢬ᢠࡣࠊ෌ͳࡍࡿᚲोࡀ࠶ࡿࡼ࠺
ᅜ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡉ࠼ࠊฌो࡞ᰂమᛶࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࠋࡑࢀࡽࡣࠊůᅜἲࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭
࡟ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ
࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃ࡯࡝ࡣᗈࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚ࡣ࠸࡞࠸ࡋࠊ࠿ࡘࠊůᅜἲ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࣇ࢙
࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡀ༨ࡵࡿࡼ࠺࡞୰᰾॔ᐃࢆᵓᡂࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡶ࡞࠸ࠋ
ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡣᅜၯἲ࡟ച཯ࡍࡿ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ᢈุࡶࠊࡋࡤ
ࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡢ୰࡟࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘࡢᰂమᛶࢆǼࡳನࡴྍЏ
ࡋࡤᣦ᦬ࡉࢀࡿ⛬ࡢ਍ᚓຊࡣᣢࡓ࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢཎ๎ࡣࠊ࣋ࣝࢾ఍એࡲࡓࡣ
ᛶࢆͳ៖ࡍࡿၯ࡟ࡣ॒೘ࡏ࡞࠸ࠋ˜᮲࡟࠾࠸࡚ͳ៖ࡉࢀࡿोǢ࡟ࡣ
៰៮៥៬៯ ༠ᐃࡀ⏝ពࡍࡿ࣓࢝ࢽࢬ࣒ࢆ೫ࡌࡓṇᘧ࡞ᣮᡓࢆཷࡅ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋ
≉࡟␗ਭࡣ࡞࠸ࠋୡ⏺୰ࡢከࡃࡢᅜࡢ‫؝‬సᶒἲไᗘ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ‫؝‬సᶒࡢ
࠸ࡎࢀ࡟ࡏࡼࠊůᅜࡢ࣋ࣝࢾ఍એ࡬ࡢཧຍ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎
ไးࢆṇᙜ໬ࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊࡲࡉ࡟࿥ಀࡍࡿ࡜ͳ࠼ࡽࢀࡿ✀ᆞࡢͳᐹࡔ࠿ࡽ
ࡣᏲࡽࢀࡓ࡜࠸࠺୺ᙇࡶ࠶ࡿᝯ ࡇࡢཎ๎ࡣࠕࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫ
࡛࠶ࡿࠋůᅜἲࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢᇶ┙࡟࠶ࡿ౯್५࡜ࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵ
ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡜ᝰࢫࣜ
ࣃ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢᇶ┙࡜ࡢ࿛࡟ࡣࠊฌो࡞ᩥ໬ⓗ࡞┦ചࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣ࿛
࣮࣭ࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺ᝱࡜ࡢᩚྜᛶ᜖ࡑࡋ࡚ࠊࡇࡢએਭ࡟ࡣࠊᏛ"ⓗ࡞
ച࠸࡞࠸ࠋ˜᮲ࡀ̿ົ࡙ࡅࡿ஦ᐇ࡟ࡶ࡜࡙࠸ࡓุ౛୺ᑟࡢྖἲᑂᰝ
એਭࢆ୨࠼ࡿࡶࡢࡶՍᖸ࠶ࡿ᜗࡟ᑐࡍࡿଦᡂਭࡸ཯ᑐਭࡢ࣓ࣜࢵࢺࡀࠊ
ࡣࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢఏțⓗ࡞ྖἲ࡜ࡣ┦ᐜࢀ࡞࠸ࠋࡉࡽ࡟ࠊůᅜࡀ᥇⏝ࡋ
࠸࠿࡞ࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࡟ࡏࡼࠊ୍▐WࡕṆࡲࡗ࡚ࡇࡢၥᆏ࡟ᑐࡍࡿख़Ⅼࢆ
࡚࠸ࡿᙧ࡛ࡢࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᰂమᛶ࡜⌧ᐇ୺̿ࡣࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢᅜࠎ
ࢺࠖࡢोồ࡜ࡶਚ࿴࡛ࡁࡿ࡜ࡍࡿਭ͵ࡶ࠸ࡿᝯ
ྲྀࡾᡠࡍ౯್ࡣ࠶ࡿࠋ˜᮲࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ៅฌ࡟೽໬ࡋࠊǭൺࡲ᳨࡛হࡉ
࡛ࡣ᰿ᮏⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ͳ࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠊ዇࠸ࣞ࣋ࣝࡢ‫ࡢ͵؝‬ಖઔࢆ☜ಖ࡛
ࢀࡓ୍ೳࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡀࠊពᅗⓗ࡟୙᫂░࡞ᨻ἞ⓗ࡞ጇ༠࡟ࡼ
ࡁ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࠿࡜࠸࠺ᠱᛕࡶ⌧ᐇ࡟Ꮡᅾࡍࡿࠋከࡃࡢ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ੆
ࡗ࡚⏕ࡲࢀࠊࡑࡢព࿡ࡸो௳ࡀࡲࡗࡓࡃ࡜঍ࡗ࡚ࡼ࠸࡯࡝୙᫂☜࡞᪉ᘧ
ᅜࡢἲᚊࡣࠊ‫ࡢࡑ࡜͵؝‬సရ࡜ࡢ࿛ࡢȵȶⓗ࡞࿥ಀ̿๰೰ⓗ࠿ࡘȂ῭ⓗ
࡟ࠊྲྀࡗ࡚௦ࢃࡽࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺࠿ᜭࡶࡋࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ࿛ച࠸࡞ࡃ
࡞̿ࢆ৶ࡵࠊಖઔࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ┠ᶆ࡟ᙧᡂࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡇࡢ࿥ಀࡢಖઔࡣࠊ
ࡑࢀࡣ኱ኚ࡞⓶χ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡢ࣮࢜ࣉࣥ࡞ᛶ᱁࡟ୣᅉ
ůᅜࡢ‫؝‬సᶒἲ࡛ࡣᙅࡃࠊࡲࡓࠊ˜᮲࡟ࡼࡿࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࡢᑂᰝ
ࡍࡿ࠸࠿࡞ࡿண ᅔႤᛶࡶࠊᝰࢫ࣮࣭ࣜࢫࢸࢵࣉ࣭ࢸࢫࢺ᝱᪉ᘧࡢ୙☜ᐇ
࡟ၯࡋ࡚ࡣࠊ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝ࡑࡢᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡉ࡞࠸ࠋ
࡞࢖ࣥࣃࢡࢺ࡟ୣᅉࡍࡿண ᅔႤᛶ࡟ẚ࡭ࢀࡤࠊࡣࡿ࠿࡟ᑠࡉ࠸࠿ࡽ࡛
࠶ࡿࠋ
ࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫἲไࢆࠊ஦ᐇࢆ࣮࣋ࢫ࡟
ࡋࡓࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃ࡟᭩ࡁᨵࡵࡿࠊࡘࡲࡾࠕ᭱ᝏࡢሙྜࡢࢩࢼࣜ࢜ࠖ
࠿ࡽᢤࡅฟࡋ࡚ࠊࠕ஧ࡘࡢୡ⏺ࡢ᭱ၿࡢࡶࡢࠖ࡜ࡍࡿၯ࡟ࠊୖঠࡢฌ኱
Ibid, 2621.
For discussion, see R Okediji, “Toward an International Fair Use Doctrine” [2000] 39
Columbia Journal of Transnational Law 75.
࡞஋Ⴃࢆͳᐹࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀྍЏ࠿ྰ࠿ͳᐹࡍࡿ౯್ࡣ࠶ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣ኱௙஦
࡛࠶ࡾࠊ©͵ࡀࡇࡇ࡛ࡑࢀ࡟ྲྀࡾǼࡴពᅗࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡋ࠿ࡋᑡ࡞ࡃ࡜ࡶࠊ
See M Senftleben, Copyright, Limitations and the Three-Step Test: an Analysis of the
ࡑ࠺ࡋࡓࠕ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖཎ๎ࡀࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘ
Three-Step Test in International and EC Copyright Law (Kluwer Law International, 2004)
ࢫ࣭ࣔࢹࣝࡢಟṇ∧ࢆ࣮࣋ࢫ࡜ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣྍЏ࡜ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ˜᮲ࡢ
167-8 and “Declaration on a Balanced Interpretation of the ‘Three-Step Test’ in Copyright
ẚుⓗ␗ਭࡢ࡞࠸ोǢࢆࣥ඘ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡢ௚ࡢोǢࡶࠊ
Law” [2008] 39 IIC 702-3.
࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ࡛ࡣ᰿ᮏⓗ࡜ͳ࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿၥᆏ᜖ࠕ‫؝‬స͵ࡢே᱁ⓗ฼┈࠾
▱ⓗ૸⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊"
9RO
▱ⓗ૸⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊"
9RO
ೳȶ௻⏬
୰᰾ไᗘࡢᰂమ໬̿Ḣᕞ‫؝‬సᶒἲࡢ࿔ᨺ៣᠎᠅᠂᠂᠅᠐᠄᠏
ࡼࡧȂ῭ⓗ฼┈ࠖ᜗࡟ᑐฎࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣྍЏ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊůᅜࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭
ࢁ࠺ᝯ ࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ཎ๎ࡢ࿔Ⓨ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ਚᰝࡍࡿ౯್ࡣ
࣮ࣘࢫศᯒࡢṔྐࢆ᭷ຠά⏝ࡋ࡚ࠊ௚ࡢฌो࡞ၥᆏ᜖࠾ࡑࡽࡃࠊࠕᢏ࢑
࠶ࡿࠋࣉࣟࢪ࢙ࢡࢺ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ࡝ࢇ࡞ၰᐖࡶࠊϬᬒ࡟࠶ࡿ⌧ᅾࢃࢀࢃࢀࡀ
ࡢⓎᒎࢆಁ೽ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡢฌोᛶࠖࡲࡓࡣࠕ஧ḟⓗᕷሙ࡟࠾ࡅࡿwதಁ೽
̘࠿ࢀࡓཝࡋ࠸≧ἣ࡟ᑐࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡳ࡞ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࡢᚲोᛶࠖ᜗࡟ᑐฎࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡶ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࠕ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙
࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖ॔ᐃࡣࠊᇶᮏⓗᶒ฼࡟࿥ಀࡋࡓ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ॔ú࡜୧Wࡍ
ࡿ᪉ἲ࡛᥇⏝ࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡜ࢆࠊ᫂☜࡟ࢢ᫂ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊุ࣒
ᡤࡣᚲो࡜৶ࡵࡽࢀࡿሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊ‫؝ࡣࡓࡲ͵؝‬సᶒಖ᭷͵࡟പษ࡞ሗ෈
ࢆᨭᡶ࠺ࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊసရࡢ౑⏝ࢆ঱ྍ࡛ࡁࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ᫂☜࡟ࢢ᫂ࡍࡿ
ࡇ࡜ࡶ࡛ࡁࡿࠋࡑ࠺ࡋࡓཎ๎ࡢⓎᒎࡣࠊ⌧ᅾ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢ‫؝‬సᶒࢩࢫࢸ
࣒ࢆᨭපࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᰂమᛶࡢḞዴࢆɶ࿴ࡍࡿࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ
ཎ๎ࡀůᅜ࡟ࡶࡓࡽࡍࠊ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃ࡟ᑐࡍࡿwதୖࡢඃ఩ࢆʠᑠࡋᝲ
ୡ⏺୰࡛ቑຍഴྥࢆ♧ࡍࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃ᥇⏝ᅜ࡜ࡢਚ࿴ࡶ࠶ࡿ⛬ᗘ
ಖহ࡛ࡁࡿᝯ
ࡇࡇ࡛ᥦ᱌ࡋࡓͳ࠼࡟ࡣ᫂ࡽ࠿࡞ᅔႤࡀక࠺ࠋࡑࡢከࡃࡣࡍ࡛࡟Dz௓
ࡋࡓࠋ
ࠕ࣮ࣚࣟࢵࣃࡢࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖ᮲ᅟࢆಟṇࡍࡿ࠸࠿࡞ࡿ஺΅ࡶࠊ
࠿࡞ࡾ␗ਭࡀ࠶ࡿࡶࡢ࡜᥎ ࡉࢀࡿࠋࡲࡓࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞౯್࠶ࡿഘලࢆ
ุ࣒ᐁ࡟ᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊInfopaq ุ࣒ࡢࡼ࠺࡟ࠊุ࣒ᡤࡀἲᚊ࡟ᑐࡋ
࡚ཝ᱁࡞ᯟǼࡳࢆപ⏝ࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊᡭຓࡅ࡟ࡣ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸࡛࠶
៣᠋᠋᠃᠈᠁ ࡀࡑࡢάືࢆ᧦ઔࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ࡟౫Ꮡࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊࡇࡢ
ཎ๎ࡀჹ᪂ⓗ࡞ࣅࢪࢿࢫᝳࣔࢹࣝࢆϡ࡚ࡿྍЏᛶࢆ⛎ࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ♧ࡍᐇ౛࡛࠶
ࡿࠋ
᭱ಶࠊࢩ࣏࣮ࣥ࢞ࣝ see N Loon, “Exploring Flexibilities within the Global IP
Standards” [2009] IPQ 162 ࠾ࡼࡧ࢖ࢫ࢚ࣛࣝ see OF Afori, “An Open Standard ‘Fair
Use’ Doctrine: A Welcome Israeli Initiative” [2008] EIPR 85 ࡛ࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫཎ๎ࡀ᥇
⏝ࡉࢀࡓࠋ᪥ᮏ࠾ࡼࡧᅁᅜ࡛ࡣ⌧ᅾࠕࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫࠖᆺࡢWἲࡀ᳨খࡉࢀ࡚࠸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࠺࡜ࡍࡿએਭ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊsee R Burrell & A Coleman, Copyright Exceptions: The
159.
Digital Impact (Cambridge University Press, 2005) 249-275.
▱ⓗ૸⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊"
9RO
ุ࣒ᡤ࡟ᅛ᭷࡞ಖᏲ୺̿ࡣࠊࣇ࢙࢔࣭࣮ࣘࢫ॔ᐃࡢእ॒ⓗ࡞ᰂమᛶࢆᗁ᝿࡟ࡋ࡚
▱ⓗ૸⏘ἲᨻ·Ꮫ◊"
9RO