论文部分内容阅读
在通俗文化里,表演者的表演行为和他(她)的姓名及肖像都具有商业价值。由表演者或者名人控制这些资产的权利,称为“公开权”最恰当。它是法院及评论家们在试图确定这种权利的范围——它的期限、适用条件和受益人时努力创造的成果。它导致了通过其它法律类推的适用。这种类推适用在卢戈西诉宇宙电影制作公司一案中最为明显。在该案中,就贝拉·卢戈西扮演的角色德拉库拉伯爵肖像的商业权利归属产生了四种观点。这四种观点把公开权说成是:一种财产权、一种隐私权、一种属于雇主所有的雇佣产品和一种应被视为类似版权的专有权。
In popular culture, performers’ performances and their (her) names and portraits have commercial value. The right to control these assets by a performer or celebrity is called the “right of publicity” most appropriate. It is the result of the efforts that courts and commentators are trying to establish when it comes to defining the scope of this right - its terms, conditions of application, and beneficiaries. It led to the adoption of analogies by other laws. This analogy applies most clearly to Lugosi v. Cosmic Film Production Company. In that case, there were four views of the commercial rights attributed to the portrayal of Earl Drakula in the role played by Bela Lugosi. These four views describe openness as a property right, a privacy right, an employer-owned hired product, and an exclusive right that should be treated as similar copyright.