|
制售游戏外挂行为的类型化刑法研究
|
Abstract:
游戏外挂的广泛使用严重破坏了游戏公平,侵犯了游戏开发商的利益,对游戏外挂的规制具有现实意义。本文通过对相关案例的实证分析,发现在刑法规制外挂行为的司法实践中,存在着外挂类型区分不明、罪名适用混乱的问题。针对实践中存在的以上两个问题,本文首先对外挂进行了类型上的区分,将游戏外挂根据技术原理分为辅助型外挂、修改型外挂和复制型外挂,其次对规制游戏外挂实践中主要适用的四种罪名进行了分析,认为非法经营罪,提供侵入、非法控制计算机信息系统程序、工具罪以及破坏计算机信息系统罪均不具有适用的空间,在目前的立法背景下仅侵犯著作权罪存在着较大的适用空间。最后,本文类型化地对各类游戏外挂构成侵犯著作权罪的入罪路径进行了深入阐述,以期对司法实践具有借鉴意义。
The widespread use of game plug-ins seriously undermines game fairness and infringes on the interests of game developers. The regulation of game plug-ins has practical significance. Through empirical analysis of relevant cases, this article finds that there are problems in the judicial practice of regulating cheating behavior in criminal law, such as unclear differentiation of cheating types and confusion in the application of charges. In response to the above two problems in practice, this article first distinguishes the types of cheating, dividing game plug-ins into auxiliary cheating, modified cheating, and replication cheating according to technical principles. Secondly, it analyzes the four main charges applicable in regulating game plug-in practices, and believes that the crimes of illegal business operation, providing intrusion and illegal control of computer information system programs and tools, and damaging computer information systems do not have applicable space. In the current legislative background, there is a large applicable space for the crime of copyright infringement alone. Finally, this article provides an in-depth explanation of the ways in which various game plug-ins constitute the crime of copyright infringement, in order to provide a reference for judicial practice.
[1] | 袁博. 从余刚等侵犯著作权罪案看擅自制作独立型游戏外挂牟利[N]. 中国知识产权报, 2013-05-29(011). |
[2] | 姚杏. 对制作经营外挂的刑法分析[J]. 中国出版, 2016(19): 45-48. |
[3] | 苏佳. 非法运营网络游戏外挂软件的法律适用问题研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 兰州: 兰州大学, 2011. |
[4] | 付蓉. 中国网游外挂的法律规制实证研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 广州: 华南理工大学, 2019. |
[5] | 曲润松. 制作、销售网络游戏外挂的刑法分析[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 上海: 华东政法大学, 2019. |
[6] | 高翼飞. 从扩张走向变异: 非法经营罪如何摆脱“口袋罪”的宿命[J]. 政治与法律, 2012(3): 37-46. |