1. Open Access and (German) Copyright / By Karl-Nikolaus Peifer, Chair of Civil Law including
Copyright Law, Industrial Property Protection, New Media and Commercial Law, University of
Cologne
開放近用與(德國)著作權 / 卡爾-尼古勞斯‧帕勒爾, 民法主席含著作權法、工業財產保護、新媒
體和商法, 科隆大學
Introduction•••••••••••••
緒論
The Berlin Declaration demands Open Access to ‘scientific knowledge’. To the extent that knowledge
is in the public domain, in other words not protected by copyright, this demand can be fulfilled.
‘Creative Commons’, in the sense of a work being in the public domain, is however only possible at the
earliest when it goes out of copyright, as a rule 70 years after the death of the author (as laid down by
section 64 of the German Copyright Act - Urheberrechtsgesetz, UrhG). Open Access models for works
still in copyright must therefore be implemented within the scope of licensing agreements. The terms
‘green road’ (archiving on institutional servers) and ‘golden road’ (self-publishing, university presses),
which are used in the context of Open Access, have no direct relevance as far as copyright is
concerned. The question of the format in which access is granted and on what servers (institutional
servers or private homepage, technical specifications), can however be added as a term of the licensing
agreement concluded between the copyright owner and the user or exploiter of the work.
柏林宣言要求公開近用至科學知識。不受著作權保護的公版知識, 已符合此要求。'創作 CC'看似
屬於公版, 其實仍需作者已往生 70 年(如德國著作權法第 64 條的規定)。在著作權仍有效的情況
下, 開放近用模式的作品仍需取得授權。'玉律'(典藏在機構伺服器)與'金科'(自行出版、大學出版
社)是開放近用的兩項策略, 與著作權沒有直接的關聯。近用的授權及伺服器的種類(機構伺服器
或私人網頁等技術規格)等涉及格式的問題，可附加於著作所有權人與使用者或推廣者的授權條
款中。
What is protected?••••••••
何謂保護?
Anyone who sets out thoughts in an individual verbal, graphic or pictorial form, i.e. a form
characterised by his or her personal style, normally creates a work protected by copyright, whether it is
in the form of text, a visual art work, a graphic design, a scientific representation in the form of a
model, a drawing or a complex diagram. Copyright protection arises solely through the act of creation,
whether the creator desires it or not. While copyright is territorially restricted, there is an extensive
network of international obligations which afford protection to the works and creations of foreign
scientists and scholars in Germany as well as those of German scholars and scientists abroad.
以語言、圖像或圖案呈現自己的思想, 即以個人風格為基礎, 以特定形式生產的作品, 不論是文
字、視覺藝術作品、圖像設計、呈現科學意念的模式、複雜的圖, 都受著作權的保護。不論創作
者是否要求, 創作的行為本身就受著作權保護。雖然著作權受到領土的限制, 不過, 有廣泛地國際
義務, 保護外國科學家及學者在德國的作品, 同樣的, 德國學者及科學家在國外的作品, 也相對地
受到外國的保障。
In principle, the (unformed) content (idea) itself is free, and only the concrete form (expression) of the
statement enjoys protection. Laws and court judgements, abstract ideas, theories, methods, discoveries,
styles and everyday utterances, such as letters and ordinary communications, are not such personally
intellectual creations and may in principle be freely exploited by anyone. This also applies to raw
materials and metadata. Source material may have enjoyed will have expired. The freedom to exploit
material ends when the ideas are embedded in an organised collection of information (database) and

2. access can be controlled de facto (e.g. by electronic access mechanisms). The same applies when
sources are ‘re-monopolised’, for example when an archive or museum photographer photographs the
items. These photographs then enjoy copyright protection of their own. In the electronic world,
freedom to carry out exploitative actions is the exception.
原則上，(未成形的)內容(想法)本身是自由的，只有具體形式(表達方式)的聲明, 才能得到保護。
法律和判例、抽象的概念、理論、方法、發現、風格和日常話語，如信件和一般溝通等, 都不算
個人的智慧創作, 原則上可被別人自由利用。原始數據和後設資料也屬於此範圍，原始數據通常
不受著作權保護, 把創意植入組織後的資訊(資料庫), 近用的權限被控制後(如, 經由電子近用機
制), 就失去自由利用的特性。當來源被'再壟斷'後, 如: 檔案館或博物館的攝影師拍成照片後, 這
些照片本身就享有著作權的保護。在電子的世界裡, 自由使用祗是例外。
The specific permission of the author or copyright holder is not required for actions which fall within
certain conditions (in Germany, these are set out in sections 44a to 63a of the UrhG). These include
academic quotation, duplication for personal (including academic) or archive use, the sending of copies
by public libraries (to be regulated in future by section 53a of the UrhG), the displaying of contents in
reading areas in libraries, museums and archives (in future to be regulated by section 52b of the UrhG),
public reproduction of contents in the lecture room, and making contents publicly available in internal
research networks (section 52a UrhG). All such uses, with the exception of quotations, are however
subject to royalties, which are as a rule collected by authors’ rights societies and are a burden upon the
university budget.
在某些情況下, 並不需要作者或著作所有權人的特別同意, 就可以再利用它們(在德國，這些情況
規定於著作權法第 44a 條至 63a 條)。這些情況包括學術性引用、個人(包括學術性)或典藏用的
複製、公共圖書館送出的複本(將符合德國著作權法第 53a 條的規定)、在圖書館或博物館或檔案
館的閱讀區展示其內容(將符合德國著作權法第 52b 條的規定)、演講時公開重製其內容、在內
部的研究網路公開其內容(德國著作權法第 52a 條)。然而, 除了引用之外, 在大學的預算之內, 作
者可以向這些用途收取授權費。
Licensing models•••••••••
授權模式
��.1Open Access means that whoever has the authority to license can make such access possible.
In copyright terms, this means that those with the right to prohibit also have the right to grant
permission. Opening up access comes about when either everyone is granted access, or
particular groups of people (e.g. academics, students, clients). The important thing is that the
formulated material is licensed not only to the first taker, but that it remains freely accessible,
even if it is further licensed by the first licensee. This happens when a licence is granted on
condition that it is passed on freely down the chain of users and exploiters. Open Access thus
reverses the logic of copyright: from prohibition, or permission on payment of a fee, to
permission without payment of a licence fee.。
著作所有權人才能授權其作品為開放存取模式。以著作權法的術語而言，有權禁止的同
時, 也有權同意。可以把近用的權限釋出給每一個人, 也可以祗釋出給特定社群(如: 學
者、學生、客戶)。重要的是，被授權的作品, 不祗對直接被授權者有效, 同時也授權其他
人可以近用; 也就是授權的條件一路往下, 直到最終端的使用者及利用者。開放近用顛倒
著作權的邏輯：從禁止、或付費後才同意，轉換成無需付費的授權。
��.2Open Access begins with a licence declaration by the author or copyright holder. Licence
declarations need not be issued in the context of contracts; they can also be issued unilaterally

3. (as is done, for example,by the Creative Commons model licence,
http://de.creativecommons.org). The copyright holder has a certain creative scope in this
respect. He or she can restrict the permission to a single person, and/ or individual types of use,
e.g. passing on protected material only in electronic, not printed form. Any user who performs
an unlicensed action is in breach of copyright. The Creative Commons model licence provides
for two types: the licensing of copying, dissemination and public reproduction, and,
additionally, the possibility of editing the text, both on condition that the original author is
named.
作者或著作所有權人的授權聲明, 形成開放近用。授權聲明不需以合約方式呈現; 可以單
方面發出(如: 創用 CC 授權模式, http://de.creativecommons.org)。著作所有權人可以用其
創意, 選擇授權模式。可以授權給一個人，或一群人, 或祗授權電子型式作品, 不包括印
本。任何人行使授權範圍外的權利, 就是違反著作權法。創用 CC 有兩個模式：授權複
製、傳播和公開的複製, 以及編修其文字，兩者都需要保留原作者的名字。
��.3More common, and more important for the future of Open Access, is the granting of
permission on condition that a licensing agreement is concluded with the user or exploiter (e.g.
the Digital Peer Publishing Licence (DPPL), www.dipp.nrw.de). Such an agreement may
impose duties on both the copyright holder and the user/exploiter that go beyond the scope of
copyright, for example, in the case of publicly funded projects, the duty of copyright holders
and of their licensees (users and exploiters) to publish material on institutional servers (‘green
road’), or the duty to provide metadata. The licence declaration is seen here as a unilateral offer
which the user accepts by virtue of performing the relevant act of use. The declaration must be
displayed to the user in a clear form, otherwise later enforcement of the duties accepted by the
user is put at risk.
更常見、更重要的是，開放近用的未來是從使用者或利用者的立場, 提出授權協議(如: 數
位同儕出版授權, www.dipp.nrw.de)。這樣的授權協議對著作所有權人和使用者/利用者均
課以超出著作權法的責任, 例如, 以公帑贊助的計畫, 著作所有權人及其被授權者(使用者
與利用者)有義務在機構伺服器出版作品('玉律'), 或有義務提供後設資料。授權協議祗是
著作所有權人的單向聲明, 行使相關的作為後, 使用者被視同贊成此協議。該協議聲明必
須以清楚的形式告知使用者, 否則就使用者執行其義務時, 就可能面臨危機。
Rights of third parties(publishers, universities, sponsors) to issue licences•••
第三者(出版社、大學、贊助者)的授權
��.1Problems arise with licence declarations issued by scientists and scholars in respect of works
already licensed to publishers or editors of journals. In so far as the scholar has not limited
himself/herself to issuing a simple right of use, but, as normally happens, has conceded
exclusive rights, only the licensee can issue licence declarations. Academics must therefore
ensure, in contracts with publishers, that they retain the authority to license their works for
publication in electronic archives. Whether they succeed, however, will depend on the
negotiating power of the scholar and on the generosity of the publisher. In order to guarantee
broad Open Access, it would be necessary at the legal level to ensure that ‘repository rights’,
which cannot be licensed, remain with the copyright holder, or to seek the cooperation of the
publisher.
科學家與學者將已經授權給學刊出版社或編輯的作品, 重新再授權, 引發若干問題。學者

4. 通常不會祗做單純的授權, 通常是賣斷式的獨家授權, 祗有接受授權的單位才有權利再授
權。學術界與出版社洽談授權時, 必須保留出版電子格式的權利。學者的談判能力與出版
社的慷慨, 是協商成功的關鍵。為了保證寬廣的開放近用，必須在法律層面保留'典藏的
權利'，由著作所有權人持有, 不能授權出去，或者交由合作的出版社保留。
��.2Open Access could in principle also be guaranteed if universities obtained the authority to
issue licences from their academic staff. However, this presupposes the readiness of scholars
not to publish their work in the journals run by publishing houses, but to grant their employers
the rights to their work on the basis of individual contracts. Universities could then set up
repositories and issue licence declarations of the type discussed. According to legal opinions to
date, an ‘automatic’ granting of rights to universities would have no legal foundation, as
academic freedom includes the freedom to leave results or insights unpublished and to decide
how results are to be published. In the context of sponsored projects, however, an obligation to
allow Open Access could be the subject of an individual contractual agreement. This is
something to be considered for research grants by bodies such as the German Research
Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft).
若大學取得其學術人員的發行授權, 原則上, 也可以授權為開放近用。然而，前提是學者
已同意不在出版社的學刊發表其作品, 以個別合約的方式, 將其作品授權給雇主。大學才
能依此設立典藏所, 並出版前述討論過的授權條款。根據當前的法律意見，'自動'授權給
大學是沒有任何法律基礎的，因為學術自由的範圍, 包括不出版研究成果或見解的自由,
以及如何出版成果的自由。接受贊助的研究計畫, 開放近用的義務由個別合約規範。德國
研究基金會等贊助單位, 已考慮採取此種模式。
Unknown forms of use•••••
未知的使用模式
To a limited extent, there is a loophole in publishing-contract law for old cases in which forms of use
were unknown (in the sense of being not commercially viable or technically possible) at the time the
rights were granted, for example rights to electronic use on the Internet. Under current German law
(section 31 sub-section 4 of the UrhG), such unknown forms of use can still (as of April 2007) not be
granted with any legal effect; in other words, they remain with the author. If the latter, in a contract
prior to 1995, granted an exploiter exclusive rights to copy, disseminate or reproduce his/her work, the
use of the work on the Internet is not covered. If the publisher wishes to exploit the work in this way,
he or she must acquire the rights specifically. This incidentally also applies to authors’ rights societies
which have concluded corresponding safeguarding contracts with the author involved. In the pending
reform of copyright law (the so-called ‘second basket’), this provision has been removed. For old
contracts, the draft bill means that an exploiter who has been granted comprehensive exclusive rights
can also exercise these rights in the future with respect to unknown forms of use, provided that the
author does not file an opposition within a year. This new provision will result in exploiters being able
to exclusively exploit many fully depreciated repertoires lying in their archives. The vision of making
archives freely accessible to the public could only be implemented if old rights could generally only be
exercised on moderate terms by intermediaries such as authors’ rights societies or academic
organisations.
在某個範圍內, 出版合約的法律基礎有漏洞, 昔日簽訂合約時並不知還有其他的使用型式(不知道
存在商業價值或技術可行性), 例如: 在網際網路的數位使用權利。根據目前的德國法律(著作權
法第 31 條第 4 款), 授權不知道的使用形式, 是沒有法律效力的, 換言之, 作者仍保有其權利。依

5. 此規定，1995 年之前的合約，都不包括獨家的複製、傳播或重製其作品的權利，以及在網際網
路使用作品的權利。出版社希望從這方面推廣作品, 必須特別取得授權。附帶地, 也適用於與個
別作者分別簽約的作者權利協會。在待修訂的著作權法(所謂'第二籃')裡, 已移除此規定。在修訂
草案裡, 祗要作者在一年內沒有提起訴訟, 已取得獨家授權的利用者, 可以行使不知道的使用模式
權利。新規定將導致利用者能夠獨家取得在檔案館裡, 被低估的作品。如果舊的權利可以由作者
權利協會或學術機構等中介者溫和地執行, 把檔案自由近用給社會大眾的願景, 才能實現。
p. 50-53
Open Access: Opportunities and challenges. A handbook [開放近用 : 機會及挑戰] / European
Commission/German Commission for UNESCO). -- Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of
the European Communities, 2008. -- 144 pp., 14.8 x 21.0 cm. -- ISBN 978-92-79-06665-8. -- EUR
23459, http://tinyurl.com/3q8wo5