摘要： 我国《著作权法》在规定著作权人和广播组织的专有权利时，均使用了“转播”一词，但未对其下定义，由此引发了“转播”能否涵盖各种同步传播手段的争议。根据《伯尔尼公约》对“广播及相关权利”的规定，《著作权法》中的“广播权”定义中的“有线传播或者转播”既包括有线转播，也包括无线转播。为使同一条文中的逻辑保持统一，“广播权”定义中的“有线”应与“信息网络传播权”定义中的“有线”具有相同含义，能涵盖互联网转播。《著作权法》为广播组织规定“转播权”的立法原意是控制传统的无线和有线电视转播。在给予广播组织更强保护的新条约尚未缔结，以及国际上对此问题仍存在争议的情况下，不宜将广播组织权条文中“转播”解释为包括互联网转播。

关键词: 广播权, 广播组织权, 转播权, 互联网转播

Abstract: In China’s Copyright Law，both the provisions on copyright owners and broadcasters use the term“  re-transmission” without definition. Controversies arise on whether the term could cover all types of new ways ofcommunication. This paper argues that based on Berne Convention，the term“communication by wire or byrebroadcasting” in the provision on the“right of broadcasting” in China Copyright Law should cover re-transmission not only by wire but also by wireless means. Since the same term should have the same meaningin the same article of a law，the term“wire” in the provision of“right of broadcasting” and“right ofcommunication through information network” should have the same meaning to cover retransmission by Inter-net. The right of retransmission granted by China Copyright Law to broadcasters is intended to cover tradition-al wireless retransmission and cable retransmission. It is not well grounded to extend the scope of the term“retransmission” in the provision of the right of broadcasters to cover retransmission by Internet due to thelack of new international treaty granting stronger protection to broadcasters and the controversies on this issuein the international communities.

Key words:  Right of Broadcasting, Right of Broadcasting Organization, Right of Rebroadcasting, Retransmission by Internet