臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

數位權利管理系統的發展改變了著作權的發展方向。過去人們關心的是網際網路使得盜版猖獗，對著作權產業有很多的負面影響。然而今日，法學者們關注的議意已不在是網路盜版，反而是數位權利管理系統是不是給著作權人太大的保護，甚至有傷害到美國憲法第一修正案所保護的言論自由之虞。在相關文獻中，有兩大類的主張:公共領域學說與契約自由學說。在公共領域學說中，Yochai Benkler教授反對數位權利管理系統，並提出數位權利管理系統將會造成著作權市場的集中化與同質化。從知識利用的角度，本文不同意Benkler教授的看法。強行規定的著作權法與任意規定的著作權法其實是在更有效率的利用散佈在社會上的知識與第三人外部性間做取捨。本文延伸Jesen和Meckling在討論組織中最適的決策權分配的模型，將其應在在著作權上。本文並得到數位權利管理系統將可使得言論市場中，價格更低，消費量更高的結論。

The trend has been reversed. With the advance of digital rights management technology, and the pass of Digital Millennium Copyright Act, legal scholars, instead of worrying about the rampant piracy on the Internet will kill the copyright industry, refocus there attention on the desirability of digital rights management system especially from the perspective of the first amendment of U.S Constitution. Among the literature, there are basically two kinds of viewpoints: public domain view and freedom of contract view. In the camp of public domain view, Professor Yochai Benkler argues against digital rights management system, claiming it will lead to consolidation and homogenization in copyright industry. From the perspective of knowledge utilization, this paper disagrees. Mandatory copyright law or unmandatory copyright law is a choice between benefits from more fully utilizing knowledge dispersed in the society and the cost of third parties externality resulting from free contracting. This paper extends Jensen and Meckling’s model in deciding optimal decision right allocation in an organization to the copyright issue. Finally, I refute Professor Yochai Benkler’s argument with the support of management control systems literature, and conclude digital rights management system will lead to more works at a lower price.

Table of Content
1. Introduction 1
2. A brief description of digital rights management system 5
3. Public domain or freedom of contract 8
Public domain view 12
Freedom of contract view 14
4. A more balanced framework 17
5. Examining Benkler’s argument 24
6. How will DRM affect music industry 29
Marketing cost 32
Retailing cost 34
What will reduced cost bring about 35
7. Conclusion 39

Anthony and Govindarajan, Management Control System 9th edition, McGraw-Hill
Bretty May and Marc Singer, unchained melody, Mckinsey Quarterly 2001
Douglas, North, Institution, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, W.W. Norton, 1990
Freidrich Hayek, The Use of Knowledge in Society, American Economic Review, XXXV, No. 4; September, 1945, 519-30
Jensen and Meckling, Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior,
Agency Costs and Ownership Structure Journal of Financial Economics, October 1976, V. 3, No. 4, pp. 305-360.
________________, SPECIFIC AND GENERAL KNOWLEDGE, AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE, Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Fall 1995
Julie E. Cohen, Some Reflections on Copyright Management Systems and Laws Designed to Protect Them, 12 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 161 (1997)
___________, LOCHNER IN CYBERSPACE: THE NEW ECONOMIC ORTHODOXY OF "RIGHTS MANAGEMENT", 97 Mich. L. Rev. 462 (1998)
___________, COPYRIGHT AND THE JURISPRUDENCE OF SELF-HELP,13 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1089 (1998)
Maureen A. O'Rourke, Copyright Preemption After the ProCD Case: A Market-Based Approach, 12 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 53 (1997)
__________________, Drawing the Boundary Between Copyright and Contract: Copyright Preemption of Software License Terms, 45 DUKE L.J. 479 (1995)
Niva Elkin-Koren, Copyright Policy and the Limits of Freedom of Contract, 12 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 93, (1997)
Neil Weinstock Netanel, Locating Copyright Within the First Amendment Skein, October, 2001 54 Stan. L. Rev. 1
Robert P. Merges, SYMPOSIUM: TAKING STOCK: THE LAW AND ECONOMICS OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS: Intellectual Property Rights and the New Institutional Economics, 53 Vand. L. Rev. 1857, 2000
Rosenblattt, Trippe & Mooney, Digital Rights management: Business and Technology, M&T Books,2001
Tom W. Bell, Fair Use vs. Fared Use: The Impact of Automated Rights Management on Copyright's Fair Use Doctrine, 76 N.C.L. REV. 557 (1998)
Yochai Benkler, Free as the air to common use: First amendment constraint on Enclosure of the Public Domain, 74 N. Y.U. L. Rev. 354 (1999)
____________, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND THE ORGANIZATION OF INFORMATION PRODUCTION, forthcoming Int'l Rev. of L.