AI修复技术介入下胶片影像保护的著作权问题研究
Research on Copyright Issues in the Protection of Film Images with the Intervention of AI Restoration Technology
摘要: 在当前AI修复技术深度介入胶片影像数字化全流程的时代背景下,需明确不同层级修复行为的法律定性,完善新技术环境下著作权法规则的解释路径,以填补当前针对胶片影像AI数字化修复这一特定场景专门化研究存在的明显空缺,实现文化遗产数字活化、技术创新激励与著作权人私权保护这三重价值平衡。从胶片影像AI修复的概念入手,通过运用技术类型化方法厘清胶片影像AI修复技术的层级边界,并在此基础上构建出分层式独创性判断标准,在细化权利归属规则与合理使用边界的同时化解各著作权人之间的权利冲突。是故,建议根据技术干预程度将AI修复划分为基础修复、中度修复、深度修复三个层级,三个层级的AI修复技术行为分别对应构成对原作品的复制与改编的著作权法定性;对不同层级AI技术修复的胶片影像及其成果还需要进行不同程度的独创性认定与可版权保护。同时,通过分清原著作权人的权利保护范围与行权规则以维护修复者的合法私权,最终以期在著作权法的激励机制与公共利益目标之间实现最优适配。
Abstract: Against the backdrop that AI restoration technology is deeply involved in the entire process of film image digitalization, it is necessary to clarify the legal nature of restoration acts at different levels and improve the interpretive approaches to copyright law rules in the new technological context. This will fill the conspicuous gaps in specialized research on the AI‑enabled digital restoration of film images as a specific scenario, and achieve the triple value balance of digital activation of cultural heritage, incentives for technological innovation, and protection of copyright owners’ private rights. Starting from the concept of AI restoration of film images, this paper adopts a technical typology approach to define the hierarchical boundaries of AI restoration technologies for film images, and on this basis constructs a hierarchical originality judgment standard. It refines the rules of right attribution and the scope of fair use, while resolving conflicts of rights among various copyright holders. Therefore, it is proposed that AI restoration be divided into three levels according to the degree of technical intervention: basic restoration, moderate restoration, and in-depth restoration. Acts of AI restoration at these three levels respectively constitute the copyright categories of reproduction and adaptation of the original work. Film images restored by AI technologies at different levels and their resulting works shall be subject to differentiated originality identification and copyright protection. Meanwhile, by clarifying the scope of rights protection and the rules for exercising rights of the original copyright holders, the legitimate private rights of restorers shall be safeguarded, so as to ultimately realize an optimal alignment between the incentive mechanism of copyright law and the goal of public interest.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
李春晖. 人工智能训练侵犯作品复制权吗? [J]. 华东政法大学学报, 2025, 28(4): 46-66.
|
|
[2]
|
张惠彬, 何嘉怡. 大模型数据训练中《著作权法》“复制”规范的适用性反思[J]. 科技与法律(中英文), 2025(5): 26-36.
|
|
[3]
|
孙山, 李研. 数字时代未经许可之演绎作品的著作权保护研究[J]. 科技与法律(中英文), 2025(2): 42-53.
|
|
[4]
|
曾青未. 演绎性创作视角下人工智能生成内容的可版权性[J]. 当代法学, 2026, 40(2): 72-85.
|
|
[5]
|
左英, 王瑶. 再续时光: 当AI融入电影修复时[J]. 当代电影, 2025(3): 115-120.
|
|
[6]
|
吴汉东. 论人工智能生成内容的可版权性: 实务、法理与制度[J]. 中国法律评论, 2024(3): 113-129.
|
|
[7]
|
孙昊亮, 崔永进. 算法时代的作者观与作品的独创性认定[J]. 私法, 2024, 50(4): 131-146.
|
|
[8]
|
张祥志, 杨诗圆. 作品类型扩张下“独创性”司法裁判的实证考察与标准构建[J]. 私法, 2024, 50(4): 219-239.
|
|
[9]
|
唐艳. 数字时代二次创作的著作权保护困境与制度变革——以演绎权为中心[J]. 电子知识产权, 2022(2): 52-70.
|
|
[10]
|
蒋华胜. 著作权法中改编权侵权救济的法律适用[J]. 人民司法, 2025(13): 87-92.
|
|
[11]
|
王迁. 著作权法[M]. 第2版. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2023.
|
|
[12]
|
熊琦, 张文窈. 人工智能生成内容著作权规制的全球趋向与本土路径[J]. 知识产权, 2024(11): 59-76.
|
|
[13]
|
胡迈迈. 生成式人工智能生成物的著作权归属与法律保护路径研究[J]. 中国价格监管与反垄断, 2026(1): 92-94.
|
|
[14]
|
刘桢. 人工智能辅助创作的应用分类及著作权归属[J]. 出版发行研究, 2025(12): 85-93.
|
|
[15]
|
吴汉东. 知识产权法[M]. 第7版. 北京: 法律出版社, 2022.
|
|
[16]
|
地丽格娜·地里夏提, 宋晓亭. 合理使用在我国著作权司法实践中的适用——基于113个诉讼案例的实证分析[J]. 科技与法律(中英文), 2022(1): 109-117.
|