'집필서적-보고서'에 해당되는 글 8건

  1. 2015.09.22 [학술서적] 법정책학이란 무엇인가 -이론과 실제-, 한국법정책학회(삼영사, 2015.8) 출간
  2. 2015.08.23 [한국저작권위원회 연구보고서] 오픈소스SW 라이선스에서의 저작권 등 지적재산권 관계 분석
  3. 2015.08.23 [문화체육관광부 연구보고서] 해외 저작권보호 기관현황 및 공동대응체계 구축연구
  4. 2014.04.25 [특허청 연구보고서] 한-미-EU-중-일 등 주요국 디자인침해판단기준 비교-분석(참여연구)
  5. 2014.02.18 [한국저작권위원회 연구집] SW 관련 기술적 보호조치 무력화 금지에 대한 예외 설정에 관한 연구 - 비교법적 검토를 중심으로-
  6. 2013.01.24 [한국저작권위원회 연구보고서(참여 연구)] SW 최종사용계약서(EULA) 개선방안 연구
  7. 2013.01.24 [한국저작권위원회 연구보고서(공동 연구)] SW 역분석과 기술적 보호조치 : 법적.기술적 재해석
  8. 2013.01.24 [컴퓨터프로그램보호위원회(현 한국저작권위원회)] SW관리체계 보급교육 강의교재

제가 제2부 제2장 부분을 집필한 서적이 출간되었습니다.

 

 

서적명 : 법정책학이란 무엇인가 [이론과 실제]

저자 : 한국법정책학회 (강동욱 외 16인)

출판사 : 삼영사

출판일 : 2015년 8월 31일

 

목차 :

 

제1부 법학의 새로운 흐름과 정책법학
 제1장 법정책학의 의의와 과제
 제2장 법정책학의 학문적 성격과 연구방법
 제3장 법해석과 법정책의 관계
 제4장 국가작용과 법정책의 기능
 제5장 소송과 법정책
 제6장 미국의 법정책학 연구
 제7장 유럽연합(EU)의 법정책

 

제2부 사회ㆍ문화의 변화와 법정책의 전개
 제1장 문화법정책의 이론과 실제
 제2장 정보유통의 법정책 
 제3장 지적재산과 법정책
 제4장 사회보장의 법정책
 제5장 노동관계법제와 노동정책
 제6장 보건의료법제의 과제와 해결방안
 제7장 형법정책의 현황 및 과제

 

제3부 산업 활동과 법정책의 전개
 제1장 기업규제에 관한 법정책
 제2장 금융법과 금융정책
 제3장 부동산 법정책

 

판매처 : http://www.kyobobook.co.kr/product/detailViewKor.laf?ejkGb=KOR&mallGb=KOR&barcode=9788944503849&orderClick=LEA&Kc=

 

강기봉(책임연구원), 오픈소스SW 라이선스에서의 저작권 등 지적재산권 관계 분석, 한국저작권위원회, 2014.11.

 

[연구보고서 목차]

 

제1장 서론 1

 

제1절 연구의 목적 1
제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 2

 

제2장 오픈소스 소프트웨어 라이선스 5

 

제1절 서설 5
제2절 오픈소스 라이선스 5
제3절 자유 소프트웨어 라이선스 18
제4절 비전형 오픈소스 라이선스 25
제5절 오픈소스 소프트웨어 라이선스의 법적 성격 26

 

제3장 OSS 라이선스의 저작권 관계 분석 29

 

제1절 문제의 소재 29
제2절 오픈소스 정의에 따른 라이선스의 검토 : 공통 요소 29
제3절 오픈소스 소프트웨어 라이선스의 특별한 조항들 57
제4절 비전형 오픈소스 소프트웨어 라이선스 85
제5절 사례 검토 89
제6절 시사점 및 법적 문제의 대응 118

 

제4장 OSS 라이선스의 특허권 관계 분석 130

 

제1절 문제의 소재 130
제2절 라이선스의 검토 131
제3절 특허 관련 사례 검토 182
제4절 관련 법률 및 내용 195
제5절 시사점 및 법적 문제에 대한 대응 198

 

제5장 OSS 라이선스의 상표권 관계 분석 204

 

제1절 문제의 소재 204
제2절 라이선스의 검토 205
제3절 상표 관련 사례 검토 229
제4절 관련 법률 및 내용 235
제5절 시사점 및 법률 문제에 대한 대응 236

 

제6장 OSS의 영업비밀 관계 분석 240

 

제1절 문제의 소재 240
제2절 라이선스의 검토 240
제3절 영업비밀 관련 사례 검토 241
제4절 관련 법률 및 내용 245
제5절 시사점 및 법적 문제에 대한 대응 246

 

제7장 결론 249

 

제1절 마치며 249
제2절 오픈소스SW 라이선스에서의 저작권 등 지적재산권에 관한 가이드라인 250

 

 

 

[발간 정보]

ㅇ 발간부서 : 한국저작권위원회 공정이용진흥국

ㅇ 발행년도 : 2014년 11월

ㅇ 연구기간 2014-05-29~ 2014-11-28 

 

연구보고서 정보(URL) :  

 - http://library.copyright.or.kr/asp/csp/search/SSearchDetail.csp?LOC=SOCOP&RNO=8Tmf&Conv2Han=00

 - http://www.alio.go.kr/information_view.do?p=information04_view&board_no=382748

 

김경숙 외(참여연구원), 해외 저작권보호 기관현황 및 공동대응체계 구축연구, 문화체육관광부, 2014.8.

 

[연구보고서 목차]

 

제1장 연구개요 ······························································································· 1

제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적 ································································································· 1
 1. 연구의 배경 ··············································································································· 1
 2. 연구의 목적 ················································································································· 1

제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 ································································································· 2
 1. 연구의 범위 ················································································································· 2
2. 연구의 방법 ················································································································· 3

 

제2장 해외 저작권 보호체계 비교분석 ···························································· 5

제1절 국가별 보호정책 현황 및 법제도 ········································································· 5
 1. 미국 ······························································································································ 5
  (1) 저작권보호를 위한 법령 ····················································································· 5
  (2) 온라인상의 침해대응 ·························································································· 6
  (3) 침해구제 ············································································································· 10
 2. 영국 ···························································································································· 15
  (1) 저작권보호를 위한 법령 ··················································································· 15
  (2) 온라인상의 침해대응 ························································································ 20
  (3) 침해구제 ············································································································· 22
 3. 프랑스 ························································································································ 26
  (1) 저작권 보호를 위한 법령 ················································································· 26
  (2) 온라인상의 침해대응 ························································································ 30
  (3) 침해구제 ············································································································· 36
 4. 독일 ···························································································································· 38
  (1) 저작권 보호를 위한 법령 ················································································· 38
  (2) 온라인상의 침해대응 ························································································ 41
  (3) 침해구제 ············································································································· 46
 5. 중국 ······························································································································ 48
  (1) 저작권 보호를 위한 법령 ················································································· 48
  (2) 온라인상의 침해대응 ························································································ 57
  (3) 침해구제 ············································································································· 60
 6. 일본 ······························································································································ 66
  (1) 저작권 보호를 위한 법령 ················································································· 66
  (2) 온라인상의 침해대응 ························································································ 70
  (3) 침해구제 ············································································································· 71
  (4) 일본 저작권 침해구제의 특징 ········································································· 77

제2절 국가별 보호기관 현황 ··························································································· 80
 1. 미국 ······························································································································ 80
  (1) 정부 및 공공기관 ································································································ 80
  (2) 민간 및 권리자단체 ···························································································· 92
 2. 영국 ···························································································································· 104
  (1) 정부 및 공공기관 ······························································································ 104
  (2) 민간 및 권리자단체 ·························································································· 110
 3. 프랑스 ························································································································ 117
  (1) 정부 및 공공기관 ······························································································ 117
  (2) 민간 및 권리자단체 ·························································································· 118
 4. 독일 ···························································································································· 124
 5. 중국 ···························································································································· 127
  (1) 정부 및 공공기관 ······························································································ 127
  (2) 민간 및 권리자단체 ·························································································· 134
 6. 일본 ···························································································································· 139
  (1) 정부 및 공공기관 ······························································································ 139
  (2) 민간 및 권리자단체 ·························································································· 140

 

제3장 공동 대응체계의 구축 가능성 ··························································· 150

제1절 국제공조의 현황 ··································································································· 150
 1. 조약을 통한 법제도의 조화 ·················································································· 150
  (1) 베른협약 ··········································································································· 150
  (2) 세계저작권협약(UCC) ····················································································· 152
  (3) 무역관련 지식재산권에 관한 협정(TRIPs) ··················································· 153
  (4) 자유무역협정(FTA) ························································································· 154
  (5) WIPO 조약 ······································································································· 156
  (6) 위조품 거래방지에 관한 협정(ACTA) ·························································· 156
  (7) 환태평양경제동반자협정(TPP) ······································································· 158
 2. 국제기구 등을 통한 공조 ······················································································ 159
  (1) 저작권 관련 국제기구 및 국제회의 ······························································ 159
  (2) 국제형사경찰기구의 협력 ··············································································· 164
 3. 국가별 공조의 현황 - 정부기관, 권리자단체등의 활동 ······································ 166
  (1) 미국 ··················································································································· 166
  (2) 영국 ··················································································································· 171
  (3) 프랑스 ··············································································································· 172
  (4) 독일 ··················································································································· 172
  (5) 증국 ··················································································································· 174
  (6) 일본 ··················································································································· 183

제2절 시사점 ····················································································································· 195
 1. 조약 등 가입현황의 파악 ························································································ 195
 2. 국제기구 회의 등의 참가확대 ················································································· 196
 3. 사법적 공조의 추진 ·································································································· 196
 4. 행정적 지원의 확대 ·································································································· 196

 

보론 ······································································································································ 198
 1. 우리나라 저작권 보호체계 ······················································································ 198
 2. 우리나라 저작권 보호체계의 문제점 ····································································· 205
 3. 저작권 보호기관 일원화 논의 ················································································· 209
 4. 보호기관 일원화의 방향성 ························································································ 214
 5. 개선방안 ······················································································································ 215

 

[발간 정보]

ㅇ 발간부서 : 문화체육관광부 문화콘텐츠산업실 저작권정책관실 저작권보호과

ㅇ 발행년도 : 2014년 8월

ㅇ 연구기간 2014-04-08~ 2014-08-07 

 

연구보고서 전문(프리즘, 정책연구관리시스템) : http://www.prism.go.kr/homepage/researchCommon/downloadResearchAttachFile.do?work_key=001&file_type=CPR&seq_no=001&pdf_conv_yn=N&research_id=1371000-201500039

 

 

윤선희 외 8인(참여연구원), 한-미-EU-중-일 등 주요국 디자인침해판단기준 비교-분석, 특허청, 2013.12.


[연구보고서 목차]


제1장 서론 13


  제1절 연구의 목적 13

  제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 14


제2장 TM5의 디자인 관련 제도 일반론 19


  제1절 TM5의 디자인 보호 체계 19

  제2절 TM5의 디자인 성립요건 및 등록요건 32

  제3절 디자인권 침해 56

  제4절 TM5의 심판/침해소송제도 67


제3장 TM5의 디자인 침해판단 81


  제1절 한국의 디자인 침해판단 81

  제2절 중국의 디자인 침해판단 154

  제3절 일본의 디자인 침해판단 183

  제4절 EU의 디자인 침해판단 218

  제5절 미국의 디자인 침해판단 238


제4장 TM5의 디자인침해판단의 비교 266


  제1절 서 266

  제2절 법규 266

  제3절 권리범위 269

  제4절 판단주체 272

  제5절 관찰방법 274

  제6절 판단기준 276


제5장 결론 279


<부록 1> 한국 판례 정리

<부록 2> 2007년 이후 일본 디자인 유부 판단 재판례


[발간 정보]

ㅇ 발간부서 : 특허청 디자인심사정책과 산업재산정보협력팀

ㅇ 발행년도 : 2013년 12월

 총 면수 : 307면


연구보고서 전문(URL)http://www.kipo.go.kr/kpo/user.tdf?a=user.ip_info.others.BoardApp&board_id=others&cp=2&pg=1&npp=10&catmenu=m02_03_07&sdate=&edate=&searchKey=&searchVal=&bunryu=&st=&c=1003&seq=13241&gubun=

강기봉・이용정, SW 관련 기술적 보호조치 무력화 금지에 대한 예외 설정에 관한 연구 - 비교법적 검토를 중심으로-, 한국저작권위원회, 2013.11. (공동연구집)

 

[연구집 목차]

 

제1장 서론 1

제1절 연구의 목적 1
제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법 3

 

제2장 기술적 보호조치의 법적 보호와 예외 5

제1절 기술적 보호조치 관련 규정 5
제2절 해외의 법률과 룰메이킹 제도 9
제3절 기술적 보호조치 무력화 예외의 고시 17

 

제3장 미국·호주·싱가포르의 룰메이킹 현황 20

제1절 서 20
제2절 미국 20

제3절 호주 135

제4절 싱가포르 166

 

제4장 미국, 호주 및 싱가포르 룰메이킹의 시사점 180

제1절 서 180
제2절 SW 관련 사안의 검토 184

제3절 SW 이외의 사안의 검토 212

제4절 판단기준 및 거절유형의 검토 228

 

제5장 결론 241

 

[참고문헌] 246

[부    록] 252
1. 한국 문화체육관광부 고시  252
2. 미국 룰메이킹 예외 규정 연혁 254
3. 호주 룰메이킹 예외 규정 및 2012년 제안 비교 256
4. 싱가포르 룰메이킹 예외 규정 연혁  259
5. 미국 2012년 룰메이킹 제안 중 3번 내지 5번 유형에 대한 주요 의견 정리 261

 

[한국저작권위원회 공지문]

 

SW 관련 기술적보호조치 무력화 금지에 대한 예외 설정에 관한 연구
ㅇ 발간부서 : 정책연구실 산업연구팀
ㅇ 발행연도 : 2013년
ㅇ 총 면수 : 316쪽
※ 문의 : 산업연구팀(T. 2660-0083) 

 

 

연구집 전문: https://www.copyright.or.kr/info/publish/report_view.do?hm_seq=99&bd_seq=11415

  다음은 제가 참여한 연구과제의 연구보고서(한국저작권위원회 발간)로서 참여 연구자로서 연구한 내용이며, 일부 직접 작성한 부분이 포함되어 있습니다.

  주로 패키지 소프트웨어의 최종사용자계약서(EULA)에 관한 내용으로 계약서를 검토할 때 도움이 되기를 바랍니다.

 

지식재산네트워크(전응준 연구책임자), SW 최종사용계약서(EULA) 개선방안 연구, 한국저작권위원회, 2010.12. (참여 연구)

 

[목차]

제1장 서 론
Ⅰ. 연구의 목적
Ⅱ. 연구의 범위와 접근방법

 

제2장 SW 최종사용계약서의 법적 쟁점 검토
Ⅰ. SW 최종사용계약서의 법적 성격
Ⅱ. 저작권법상 쟁점
Ⅲ. 약관규제법, 소비자보호법, 공정거래법상 쟁점


제3장 국내외 SW 최종사용계약서 조사・분석
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 계약 조항 별 조사・분석
Ⅲ. 해외 SW 최종사용계약서 조사・분석
Ⅳ. 국내 SW 최종사용계약서 조사・분석
Ⅴ. 결론


제4장 SW 최종사용계약서의 개선방안 및 표준 패키지 SW 최종사용계약서
Ⅰ. SW 최종사용계약서의 개선방안
Ⅱ. 표준 패키지SW 최종사용계약서

 

[연구의목적(보고서 3~4면 내용)]

 

□ SW 최종사용계약서의 법적 쟁점 검토

 

  ○ 종래 소프트웨어 최종사용계약은 사용자의 재판매 제한, 역분석 금지, 복제 횟수 제한 등 저작권법이 허용하고 있는 사항을 금지하는 경우가 많고, 이용자 권익보호를 위한 보증조건, 재판관할에 관한 규정등도 충분하지 않은 경우가 많음

 

  ○ 이 연구에서는 SW 최종사용계약서 관련 국내외 문헌을 조사하고 관련 전문가 회의를 개최하여 SW 최종사용계약서 관련 법적 쟁점을 도출하고 검토함

 

□ 국내외 소프트웨어 최종사용계약서의 조사・분석

 

  ○ 국내에서 사용되고 있는 SW 최종사용계약서를 직접 수집하고 분석하여 국내법체계에서 문제될 수 있는 사항을 검토함


  ○ 특히 외국 저작권자의 SW 최종사용계약서에서 나타나는 저작권법, 약관규제법, 소비자보호법, 민사소송법적 문제점을 검토하여 개선방안을 도출함
    - 외국 저작권자의 소프트웨어의 경우, 국내법에서 허용되는 공정이용에 관한 규정이 배제된 영문 라이선스계약이 일방적으로 통용되거나 번역이 잘못되어 그 의미가 불분명한 국문 라이선스계약이 존재함
    - 또한 영문 라이선스 계약은 대체로 준거법 및 재판관할을 외국법 및 외국 법원의 전속 관할로 하고 있는 경우가 많아, 라이선스 계약에 관한 분쟁시 국내 소비자의 권리구제에 상당한 제약을 가하고 있음

 

□ 표준 SW최종사용계약서 도출

 

  ○ SW 최종사용계약서의 개선방안을 마련하고, 궁극적으로 국내에서 활용될 수 있는 표준적인 SW최종사용계약서를 도출함

 

보고서 원문(한국저작권위원회): http://www.copyright.or.kr/info/publish/report_view.do?hm_seq=99&bd_seq=8148&serach_con1=0&searchTarget1=BD_TITLE&searchWord1=EULA&page=1

  다음은 제가 참여한 워킹그룹의 연구보고서입니다. 제 박사학위 논문에서 대부분 다뤄진 내용이지만 견해가 다른 부분도 있고 제 박사학위 논문에서는 다루지 않은 부분도 포함되어 있으니 참고하시기 바랍니다.

 

손승우 외 7인, SW 역분석과 기술적 보호조치: 법적, 기술적 재해석(워킹그룹 보고서), 한국저작권위원회, 2009.12.4. (공동 연구)

 

[목차]

 

제1장 연구의 목적과 범위
Ⅰ. 연구의 목적
Ⅱ. 연구의 범위

 

제2장 역분석의 기술적 이해

Ⅰ. 역분석의 의의
Ⅱ. 역분석의 유형

 

제3장 SW 역분석의 법적 이해

Ⅰ. 저작권법상 SW 역분석 조항
Ⅱ. SW 역분석에 대한 법적 재해석
Ⅲ. SW 역분석 관련 국내외 판례
Ⅳ. 한·미 FTA 이행법안 검토


제4장 기술적보호조치의 기술적 이해

Ⅰ. 기술적보호조치의 의의
Ⅱ. 기술적보호조치의 유형
Ⅲ. 기술적보호조치 현황 및 다양한 활용

 

제5장 기술적 보호조치의 법적 이해

Ⅰ. 법적 보호의 필요성과 의의
Ⅱ. 저작권법상 기술적 보호조치 규정
Ⅲ. 기술적 보호조치 관련 국내외 판례
Ⅳ. 한·미 FTA 이행법안 검토

 

제6장 SW 역분석과 기술적보호조치의 관계 분석

Ⅰ. 기본적 관계
Ⅱ. 저작권법상의 관계
Ⅲ. EU 지침상의 관계
Ⅳ. DMCA상의 관계
Ⅴ. 한·미 FTA 관련 개정법률안상의 관계

 

제7장 역분석과 기술적 보호조치 관련 법제도 개선방안

Ⅰ. SW 역분석 관련 법제도 개선방안
Ⅱ. 기술적 보호조치 관련 법제도 개선방안

 

[연구의 범위(연구보고서 7~8면)]

 

  이번 연구의 범위는 기본적으로 SW의 역분석과 기술적보호조치에 대한 기술적인 이해와 현행 법제도에 대한 이해를 기반으로 이에 대한 문제점을 살펴보고 이에 대한 개선방안을 도출하는데 그 목적이 있다.
  이를 위해서 크게 역분석 부분과 기술적보호조치에 대한 부분으로 나누고 마지막에서 이 둘의 상관관계에 대해서 검토하였다.
  이를 위해 제2장에서는 역분석에 대한 기술적 이해를 돕기 위해 역분석이 무엇이고 역분석이 어떻게 이루어지는를 살펴보았다. 그리고 역분석의 유형에는 어떤 것이 있는지에 대해서 살펴보았다

  제3장에서는 이러한 역분석에 대한 이해를 바탕으로 현행 역분석의 법적 이해를 위해 저작권법상 역분석에 대한 정의와 이를 적용하기 위한 요건들을 살펴보았다. 그리고 이 조항이 가지는 저작권법에서 가지는 법적 의미에 대해서 검토해보고 역분석과 불가분에 관계에 있는 기술적보호조치 예외 사유의 관계와 국내외외 판례에서는 어떻게 역분석 사례를 다루고 있지는 살펴보았다.
  제4장에서부터는 기술적보호조치로 넘어가서 기술적보호조치의 기술적 이해를 돕기 위해 먼저 기술적보호조치의 의의와 유형에 대해서 살펴보고 기술적보호조치의 기술현황 및 어떻게 기술적 보호조치가 적용되는지에 대해서 검토해보았다.
  제5장에서는 역분석과 같이 기술적보호조치가 가지는 법적 성격을 살펴보기 위해서 기술적보호조치의 법적 의의와 저작권법상 기술적보호조치가 어떻게 규정되고 적용되는지를 살펴보았다. 또한 국내외 판례를 통해서 기술적보호조치에 대한 해외 사례 및 국내 사례를 살펴보았다.
  제6장에서는 창과 방패와도 같은 역분석과 기술적 보호조치와의 관계에 대해서 분석을 해 보았다. 이를 위해 저작권과 기술적보호조치로 저작물을 이중으로 보호하게 된 배경과 기술적보호조치 저작물에 대한 저작권 제한 규정의 적용가능성, 그리고 저작권법상 이 두 규정간의 상관관계에 대해서 살펴보았다. 그리고 해외 법률과 해외지침 등을 통해 현재 역분석 조항과 기술적보호조치 조항의 입법배경에 대해서도 살펴보았다.
  마지막으로 제7장에서는 지금까지 논의된 기술적이고 법적인 논의들을 바탕으로 우리나라의 역분석 및 기술적보호조치를 위한 법적∙정책적 개선방안들을 정리해보았다.
  그리고 여기서 사용되는 용어 중 역분석과 리버스 엔지니어링이 혼동되어 사용되고 있는데 이것은 실제 개발자들 사이에서는 리버스 엔지니어링이라는 용어가 법적으로는 역분석이라고 사용되고 있기 때문에 생겨나는 용어상의 차이로 이 보고서에서는 동일한 의미로 사용된다.

 

보고서 원문(한국저작권위원회): http://www.copyright.or.kr/info/publish/report_view.do?hm_seq=99&bd_seq=7161&serach_con1=0&searchTarget1=BD_TITLE&searchWord1=%EC%97%AD%EB%B6%84%EC%84%9D&page=1

 

최진녕, 김석훈, 오승근, 강기봉, 고광용, SW관리체계 보급교육 강의교재, 컴퓨터프로그램보호위원회, 2009.


o 발간처 : 컴퓨터프로그램보호위원회/SW교육컨설팅팀

o 발행년도 : 2009

o 내용

  - SW지적재산권의 이해와 보호방안

  - SW불법복제 단속절차와 저작권 침해유형

  - SW라이선스의 이해와 주요 SW저작권사 라이선스 정책

  - SW관리담당자를 위한 SW자산관리실무

  - SW불법복제 예방을 위한 점검용SW 활용실무


※ 본 교재는 개정 저작권법 시행 이전의 발간된 자료이오니, 이점 참고하시기 바랍니다.


자료 원문(한국저작권위원회) : http://www.copyright.or.kr/info/publish/report_view.do?hm_seq=99&bd_seq=7040

1 

글 보관함

카운터

Total : 58,172 / Today : 7 / Yesterday : 48
get rsstistory!

티스토리 툴바