|
|
مبانی حمایت حقوقی از شهرت
|
|
|
|
|
نویسنده
|
میرشکاری عباس
|
منبع
|
مطالعات حقوق تطبيقي - 1399 - دوره : 11 - شماره : 1 - صفحه:339 -361
|
چکیده
|
اگرچه امروزه دربارۀ اصل حمایت از شهرت اشخاص مشهور کمتر تردید وجود دارد، اما در خصوص مبانی این حمایت، رویکردهای مختلفی ارائه شده است. برای این منظور از مبانی مختلفی مانند تئوری کار و نظریۀ تراژدی مال مشترک استفاده میشود. نظام حقوقی امریکا تحت تاثیر فرهنگ مصرفگرایی و سرمایهداری، شهرت را صرف نظر از سبب ایجاد و استحقاق دارندهاش، سزاوار حمایت میداند. در حال حاضر نیز بیش از همه از تئوری تراژدی مال مشترک برای توجیه حمایت از شهرت استفاده میشود؛ چراکه در این مبنا برخلاف تئوری کار، به این نکته که شهرت شخص بر اثر کار و زحمتش بهدست آمده است یا نه، کاری نداریم، بلکه شهرت صرف نظر از روش تحصیل آن، موضوعیت دارد و در هر صورت سزاوار حمایت است. در نظامهای حقوقی آلمان و فرانسه عمدتاً به حقوق شخصیت برای توجیه حمایت حقوقی از اشخاص مشهور استناد میشد که البته این مبنا از توجیه آثار مالی حق اشخاص یادشده ناتوان بود. برای همین، در این دو نظام حقوقی در حال حاضر به مبنای دارا شدن بلاجهت استناد میشود. در نظام حقوقی ایران بهنظر میرسد با توجه به تاکیدی که در مبانی دینی و نظام حقوقی بر کار و نقش آن در ایجاد مالکیت شده است، مبنای حمایت از آثار مالی شهرت را میتوان تئوری کار دانست. بر این اساس، آثار مالی شهرت تنها زمانی مورد حمایت خواهد بود که بهدنبال تلاش و زحمت شخص بهدست آمده باشد، نه از روی تصادف و اتفاق. بااینحال، آثار غیرمالی شهرت اشخاص اگرچه از روی تصادف حاصل شده باشد با توجه به مبنای حقوق شخصیت قابل توجیه است.
|
کلیدواژه
|
تئوری تراژدی اقتصادی، تئوری کار، حقوق شخصیت، دارا شدن بلاجهت، شهرت
|
آدرس
|
دانشگاه تهران, دانشکدۀ حقوق و علوم سیاسی, ایران
|
پست الکترونیکی
|
mirshekariabbas1@ut.ac.ir
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foundations of Legal Protection of Reputation
|
|
|
Authors
|
Mirshekari Abbas
|
Abstract
|
Today, celebrities have a profound impact on various aspects of society, and especially on its economy. As in marketing, it has been proven that the use of celebrities in advertising, especially where it means the endorsement of a celebrity’s quality, makes the subject matter of the advertisement remain in the audience’s mind for a long time. This bold and influential role has led different legal systems to try to give celebrity a special right to their fame. In American law, for example, The Right of Publicity is used. This right means that a person is allowed to exploit his identity and oppose exploitation without the permission of others. The right is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary as &the right of [an] individual, especially [a] public figure or celebrity, to control [the] commercial value and exploitation of his name or picture or likeness or to prevent others from unfairly appropriating that value for their [own] commercial benefit.&The right, which is now recognized as the right of publicity, was originally rooted in privacy law but in the future, this right was separated from the right of privacy. The right of privacy was nonfinancial and nontransferable to another while publicity right was a financial and transferable right to another.Although there is little doubt about the principle of celebrity protection today, there are different approaches to the foundations of celebrity support. why celebrities should be supported? Is their support justified? Some believe that celebrities do not deserve protection. They believe that celebrity fame has no benefit to society. So why should we increase their income without justification by recognizing this right? The group argues that celebrity rights should not be compared with intellectual property rights. Because intellectual property rights have benefits for society, but fame is not as intellectual property rights. Against this approach, some have tried to support celebrities. Some try to use ethical basics to justify the need for the legal protection of the reputation of celebrities. Others use economic principles to justify this right. They use the theory of the common property tragedy. The American legal system, under the influence of a culture of consumerism and capitalism, protect the fame. No matter what its origin is. So, economic fundamentals are used to justify the issue. Because in this set of fundamentals, we have nothing to do with whether or not a person’s reputation is derived from his or her hard work, but that reputation, irrespective of how it is acquired, in any case, deserves support. In the legal systems of Germany and France, personality rights are mainly cited, but this ground is incapable of justifying the financial effects of the rights of the persons concerned. In the Iranian legal system, a different approach seems to be chosen: given the emphasis of religious and the legal system on work and its importance, it seems that the basis for the protection of reputation is work. Accordingly, fame will only be supported when it is achieved by effort, not by accident. However, nonfinancial effects are justified by reference to the personality rights.
|
Keywords
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|