Ding Xiaochun v.Nantong Education Bureau and Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House (Case of dispute over Infringement of Copyright)@# @# @# BASIC FACTS@# Plaintiff: Ding Xiaochun, male, 43 years old, Han Nationality, press photographer of Nantong Daily, resides at Haoxiyuan, Nantong City.@# Defendant: Nantong Education Bureau, located at Jianshe Road, Nantong City.@# Legal Representative: Wang Jianming, director of the Bureau.@# Defendant: Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House, located at Zhongyang Road, Nanjing City.@# Legal Representative: Gao Yun, president of the publishing house.@# The plaintiff Ding Xiaochun brought a lawsuit to the Intermediate People's Court of Nantong City, Jiangsu Province over the dispute of infringement of copyright against Nantong Education Bureau and Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House.@# Ding Xiaochun alleged that: on February 7th, 1999, I took a picture of my wife and child choosing and purchasing lantern on the street. This photo was published on the “Weekend Special Publish” of Nantong Daily on February 12th, 1999 with the title of “Red Lanterns Fever on the Street”. Afterward, when I paged through Nantong Fine Arts Hometown Teaching Material (Edition of High Grade of Elementary School) (hereinafter referred to as Hometown Material), compiled and shot by Nantong Education Bureau and published in January 2000 and printed and issued for the third time in January 2002 by Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House, I found that this book used my above-mentioned photo. The two defendants' act of using my work with copyright in the book compiled, published and issued by them without obtaining my consent and failing to pay any remuneration has infringed upon my copyright. Thus I plead with the court to adjudicate that the two defendants cease the infringing act, make public apology on the press of municipal level of Nantong City, compensate for a loss of 20,000 yuan and undertake the legal cost of this case.@# The evidences submitted by Ding Xiaochun are as follows:@# 1. One photo and one film negative of “Red Lanterns Fever on the Street”, which prove that this photo was taken by the plaintiff;@# 2. One volume of the Hometown Material published and printed and issued for the third time in January 2002 by Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House, which proves that the above-mentioned photo taken by the plaintiff was used in this book.@# Nantong Education Bureau argued that: this Bureau is not a competent defendant of this case, the Hometown Material was compiled by Yan Shuqin and published by Jiangsu Fine Arts Publishing House, so this Bureau is not the editor of this book. Ding Xiaochun's claim that this Bureau has infringed upon his copyright has no legal basis, thus this Bureau pleads with the court to reject the plaintiff's claim against this Bureau.@# ...... | | 丁晓春诉南通市教育局、江苏美术出版社侵犯著作权纠纷案@# 【裁判摘要】@# 根据《义务教育法》的规定,义务教育的教学制度、教学内容、课程设置和教科书审订,应当由国务院教育行政主管部门确定。国家教委制定的《全国中小学教材审定委员会章程》规定,教科书的编写必须经中央或省级教育行政部门批准,经学科审查委员会通过,并报送审定委员会批准后,由国家教育委员会列入全国普通中小学教学用书目录。因此,《著作权法》第二十三条第一款规定的教科书并非泛指中小学使用的所有教材,而应当界定为经省级以上教育行政部门批准编写、经国家专门设立的学科审查委员会通过,并报送审定委员会批准后,由国家教育委员会列入全国普通中小学教学用书目录的申小学课堂正式用书。除此以外的教材,不适用《著作权法》第二十三条第一款关于法定许可使用的规定。@# @# 原告:丁晓春,又名丁小春,男,43岁,汉族,《南通日报》社摄影记者,住南通市濠西园。@# 被告:南通市教育局,住所地:南通市建设路。@# 法定代表人:王建明,该局局长。@# 被告:江苏美术出版社,住所地:南京市中央路。@# 法定代表人:高云,该社社长。@# 原告丁晓春因与被告南通市教育局、江苏美术出版社发生侵犯著作权纠纷,向江苏省南通市中级人民法院提起诉讼。@# 原告丁晓春诉称:1999年2月7日,本人在街头为妻儿拍摄了一张选购红灯笼的生活照。该幅照片以“街上红灯闹”为题,发表于1999年2月12日的《南通日报》“周末特刊”上。后本人在翻阅由被告南通市教育局组织编写和摄影、由被告江苏美术出版社于2000年1月出版、2002年1月第三次印刷发行的《南通美术乡土教材 (小学高年级版)》(以下简称《乡土教材》)时,发现该书使用了本人拍摄的上述照片。两被告未征得本人同意,即在其编辑、出版发行的图书中使用本人享有著作权的作品,且未支付报酬,已构成对本人著作权的侵犯。请求法院判令两被告停止侵害,在南通市级报刊上公开赔礼道歉,赔偿损失2万元,并承担本案诉讼费用。@# 原告丁晓春提交了下列证据:@# 1.“街上红灯闹”的照片及底片各1张,用以证明该照片系原告拍摄;@# 2.江苏美术出版社出版、2002年1月第三次印刷发行的《乡土教材》1册,用以证明原告创作的前述照片被该书选用。@# 被告南通市教育局辩称:我局不是本案的适格被告,《乡土教材》是由严抒勤等编写、江苏美术出版社出版的,我局不是该书的编辑者。原告丁晓春诉称我局侵犯其著作权无法律依据,请求驳回原告对我局的诉讼请求。@# 被告南通市教育局未提交任何证据。@# 被告江苏美术出版社辩称:原告丁晓春无权以个人身份主张涉案照片的著作权。本社出版发行的《乡土教材》中选用的涉案“大红灯笼”照片,系从1999年2月 12日的《南通日报》转载的。该幅作品是原告为完成《南通日报》社交办的工作任务,并且代表法人意志而完成的作品,其著作权人应为《南通日报》社;本社出版的《乡土教材》是为了实施九年制义务教育和国家教育规划而编写出版的教科书,本社使用涉案照片属于《中华人民共和国著作权法》 (以下简称著作权法)第二十三条规定的法定许可使用的情形,更何况本社在编审时已尽审慎义务,主观上没有过错。因此,本社愿意按国家规定的标准向原告补付稿酬,但原告提起的侵权之诉不能成立,请求驳回原告的诉讼请求。@# 被告江苏美术出版社提交下列证据:@# 1.《乡土教材》1册及1999年2月12日的《南通日报》“周末特刊”的复印件1份,用以证明涉案照片转载自1999年2月 12日的《南通日报》“周末特刊”;@# 2.国家教育部颁发的《九年制义务教育全日制小学美术教学大纲(修订试用版)》1份,用以证明《乡土教材》属于为实施九年制义务教育和国家教育规划而编辑出版的教科书。@# 法庭依法组织了质证。被告南通市教育局、江苏美术出版社对原告丁晓春提交证据的真实性没有异议,对《乡土教材》上的“大红灯笼”照片与原告拍摄的“街上红灯闹”照片为同一幅没有异议,但认为这并不能证明该照片的著作权归属于原告。南通市教育局还认为,江苏美术出版社出版的《乡土教材》上没有该局的署名,证明该局与该教材无关。原告对江苏美术出版社提交证据的真实性没有异议,但认为江苏美术出版社根据涉案照片刊登在《南通日报》“周末特刊”上而主张原告对该照片不享有著作权没有法律依据,同时认为,《乡土教材》的销售价格远远超过其成本,与九年制义务教育教材的价格控制政策不相符。@# 南通市中级人民法院审理查明:@# 原告丁晓春系《南通日报》社摄影记者。1999年2月7日,丁晓春用自己的照相机为在街头选购大红灯笼的妻子和儿子拍摄了一幅照片,后该照片在1999年2月 12日《南通日报》“周末特刊”的“过大年”专版上发表,题名为“街上红灯闹”,署名为“本报记者丁晓春”。@# ...... |
Dear visitor, as a premium member of this database, you will get complete access to all content.Please go premium and get more.
1. To become a premium member, please call 400-810-8266 Ext. 171.
2. Binding to the account with access to this database.
3. Apply for a trial account.
4. To get instant access to a document, you can Pay Amount 【¥600.00】 for your single purchase. | | 您好:您现在要进入的是北大法宝英文库会员专区。 如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容。 Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153 Mobile: +86 13311570713 Fax: +86 (10) 82668268 E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com |