<?xml version="1.1" encoding="utf-8"?>
<article xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://jats.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/1.1/xsd/JATS-journalpublishing1-mathml3.xsd" dtd-version="1.1" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">SE</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Society and Economy</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn>2995-4959</issn><eissn>2995-4975</eissn><publisher><publisher-name>Art and Design</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.61369/SE.2025070003</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Article</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title>比较法视域下合作作品共同创作意图的法律解释探析</title><url>https://artdesignp.com/journal/SE/3/7/10.61369/SE.2025070003</url><author>廖旺</author><pub-date pub-type="publication-year"><year>2025</year></pub-date><volume>3</volume><issue>7</issue><history><date date-type="pub"><published-time>2025-07-20</published-time></date></history><abstract>随着网络信息技术的发展与文化产业的多元化需求提升，合作作品在创作实践中日益频繁，随之而来的著作权归属纠纷也日益凸显。本文参考美国&amp;ldquo;共同创作意图&amp;rdquo;从司法实践到立法确立的发展历程，分析我国学界与实务中对该概念的解释，进一步明确&amp;ldquo;共同创作意图&amp;rdquo;在合作作品认定中的独立构成地位。将共同创作意图作为合作作品的构成要件，有助于合作作品制度解释论上的完善，厘清合作作品与演绎作品之间的界限，防止著作权期限被不当延长对公共领域（public domain）造成侵蚀。</abstract><keywords>合作作品,共同创作意图,法律解释,比较法研究</keywords></article-meta></front><body/><back><ref-list><ref id="B1" content-type="article"><label>1</label><element-citation publication-type="journal"><p>[1] Edward B. Marks Music Corp. v. Jerry Vogel Music Co., 140 F.2d 266.&amp;nbsp;[2] Shapiro Bernstein &amp;amp; Co., Inc. v. Jerry Vogel Music Co., Inc. (D.C.S.D.N.Y 1953).&amp;nbsp;[3] Senate Report. No.94-473,101(1975). A &amp;ldquo;joint work&amp;rdquo;is a work prepared by two or more authors with the intention that their contributions be merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole.[4] Childress v. Taylor, 945 F.2d 500 (2d Cir. 1991).&amp;nbsp;[5] Lior Zemer,"Is Intention to Co-Author an Uncertain Realm of Policy," Columbia Journal of Law&amp;amp; the Arts 30,no.3-4(2007):611-624.[6] Thomson v. Larson 147 F.3d 195 (2d Cir. 1998).&amp;nbsp;[7] Erickson v. Trinity Theatre, Inc., 13 F.3d 1061 (7th Cir. 1994).&amp;nbsp;[8] 陈明涛.论合作作品中主体身份的确认[J].政法论丛,2013,(06):95页.[9] 左梓钰.论合作作品的著作权法规范[J].知识产权,2020,(07):72页.[10] 曹新明.合作作品法律规定的完善[J].中国法学,2012,(03):45页.[11] 赵平.&amp;ldquo;旧词谱新曲&amp;rdquo;情形下合作作品的认定[J].电子知识产权,2013,(J):142页.[12] 蒋舸.论人工智能生成内容的可版权性:以用户的独创性表达为视角[J].知识产权,2024,(01):36页.</p><pub-id pub-id-type="doi"/></element-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
