近年來，著作權人嘗試利用科技保護措施，防止其著作於數位網路環境中被大量重製與散布，然而各類科技保護措施，卻難逃使用者的破解與規避，而無法達到保護著作之目的。因此，各國陸續開始制訂反規避條款，間接保障著作權人的相關權益。美國首先於西元1998 年，通過數位千禧年著作權法案（DigitalMillennium Copyright Act，簡稱DMCA），將反規避條款納入著作權法之中。由於美國DMCA 反規避條款之規範內容嚴格禁止規避行為與協助規避行為，因而引發相當大的爭議，許多人認為該規定過度地保障著作權人之權益，對公眾正當接觸、使用各類著作的機會與能力產生負面之影響，終將有損著作權法促進社會科學與文化發展之初衷。由於我國近來亦有意在著作權法中，納入類似DMCA之反規避條款規定，因而有必要徹底瞭解DMCA 反規避條款對公眾利益所造成之衝擊。本文除詳細介紹美國DMCA 反規避條款之規範內容與近來發生之各項重大案例外，亦加入部分個人之創見，歸納出DMCA 反規避條款對於公眾利益之種種不利影響，期望未來我國在制訂相關規定時，能夠盡量避免給予著作權人
過多不必要之保護，而損害著作權法促進社會文化發展之精神。

Recently, copyright owners had tried implementing various technological protecting measures to prevent their works from reproducing and distributing among the digital network without their authorization. But these technology protecting measures could hardly protect their works due to user’s circumvention. Therefore, many countries have begun their anti-circumvention provision to protect copyright infringement further, and the United States had taken the lead. Section 1201 of The “Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998” (DMCA) strictly prohibits others from circumventing technological protecting measures to access the copyrighted works, and from helping such circumvention to access or duplicate the copyrighted works. But criticisms argue that such strict prohibitions will adversely affect public interests and will ultimately damage the spirit of copyright law – to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Since recently our administrative department have started drafting DMCA-like anti-circumvention provision, it’s important to realize it’s critical impact on public interests. This thesis will introduce the anti-circumvention provision of DMCA and some crucial rulings of U.S. courts in detail. Through such introduction and my personal point of view, this thesis summarize some adverse impact of the anti-circumvention provision of DMCA. In order to achieve the goal of the copyright law, our anti-circumvention legislation should avoid overprotecting copyright owners at the expense of public access and use of the information.

案例：
1. RealNetworks, Inc. v. Streambox, Inc., No. C99-2070P, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1889 (W.D. Jan. 18, 2000).
2. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 82 F. Supp.2d 211 (Feb. 2, 2000).
3. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d. 294 (Sep. 6, 2000).
4. Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Corley, 273 F.3d 429 (2nd Cir. 2001).
5. United States v. Elcom Ltd., 203 F. Supp. 2d 1111 (2002).
6. Roulette v. City of Seattle, 97 F.3d 300 (9th Cir. 1996).
7. Recording Industry Association of America v. Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc., 29 F. Supp.2d 624 (Cal. Dist. Ct. 1998)
8. Recording Industry Association of America v. Diamond Multimedia Systems, Inc., 180 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. App. 1999).
9. Atari Games Corp. v. Nintendo of America, 975 F.2d 832 (9th Cir. 1992)
10. Sega Enterprise Ltd. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510 (9th Cir. 1992)
11. Sony Computer Entertainment Inc., v. Connectix Corp., 203 F.3d 596 (9th Cir. 2000).
12. Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc. v. Gamemaster, 87 F. Supp. 2d 976 (Nov. 4, 1999).

外文期刊論文（按照姓名字母順序排列）：
1. Bolinger, Brain, Comment: Focusing on Infringement: Why Limitations on Decryption Technology Are Not the Solution to Policing Copyright, 52 Case W. Res. 1091 (2002).
2. Burk, Dan L. & Cohen, Julie E., Fair Use Infrastructure for Rights Management System, 15 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 41, 51 (2001).
3. Burk, Dan L., Article: Anticircumvention Misuse, 50 UCLA L. Rev. 1095. (2003).
4. Calaba, Victor F., Article: Quibees “N Bits: Making a Digital First Sale Doctrine Feasible, 9 Mich. Telecomm. Tech. L. Rev. 1, 4 (2002).
5. Colangelo, Alex, Article: Copyright Infringement in the Internet Era: The Challenge of MP3s, 39 Alberta L. Rev. 891 (2002).
6. Esler, Brian W., Article: Protecting the Protection: A Trans-Atlantic Analysis of The Emerging Right to Technological Self-Help, 43 IDEA 553 (2003).
7. Garrow, Philip D., Legal Update: Recent Development in Digital Technology Law, 9 B.U. J. SCI. & TECH. L. 194 (2003).
8. Gasaway, Laura N., The New Access Right and Its Impact on Libraries and Library Users, 10 J. Intell. Pro. L. 269 (2003).
9. Ginsburg, Jane C., From Having Copies to Experiencing Works: The Development of an Access Right in U.S. Copyright Law (Columbia Law School Public Law & Legal Theory Working Paper Group, Paper Number 8, 2000), http://ssrn.com/abstract=222493 (last visited Mar. 3, 2004).
10. Ginsburg, Jane C., Copyright Legislation for the "Digital Millennium", 23 Colum-VLA J.L. & Arts 137 (1999).
11. Ginsburg, Jane C., Copyright and Control Over New Technologies of Dissemination, 101 Columb. L. Rev. 1613 (2001).
12. Ginsburg, Jane C., Copyright Use and Excuse on the Internet, 24 Colum. –VLA J.L. & Arts 1 (2000).
13. Ginsburg, Lev, Article: Anti-circumvention rules and fair use, 2002 UCLA J. L. Tech. 4 (2002).
14. Goldstein, Paul, Copyright and First Amendment, 70 Colum. L. Rev. 983 (1970).
15. Imfeld, Cassandra, Article: Playing Fair with Fair Use? The Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s Impact on Encryption Researchers and Academicians, 8 Comm. L. & Pol’y 111 (2003).
16. Katz, Eddan Elizafon, Intellectual Property: A. Copyright: 3. Digital Millennium Copyright Act: A) Anti-Circumvention Provisions: Realnetworks, Inc. V. Streambox, Inc. & Universal City Studios, Inc. V. Reimerdes, 16 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 53 (2001).
17. Lunney Jr., Glynn S., The Death of Copyright: Digital Technology, Private Copying, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 87 Va. L. Rev. 813 (2001).
18. Nimmer, David, A Riff on Fair Use in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 148 U. Pa. L. Rev. 673 (2000)
19. Patterson, L. Ray, Free Speech, Copyright, and Fair Use, 40 Vand. L. Rev. 1 (1987).
20. Quinn Jr., Eugene R., Article: An Unconstitutional Patent in Disguise: Did Congress Overstep its Constitutional Authority in Adopting the Circumvention Prevention Provisions of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act? , 41 Brandeis L.J. 33(2002).
21. Reese, Anthony, Symposium: The Law and Technology of Digital Rights Management: Will Merging Access Controls and Rights Controls Undermine the Structure of Anticircumvention Law？, 18 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 619 (2003).
22. Samuelson, Pamela, Symposium: Intellectual Property and the Digital Economy: Why the Anti-Circumvention Regulations Need to be Revised, 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 519 (1999).
23. Samuelson, Pamela & Scotchmer, Suzanne, The Law and Economics of Reverse Engineering, 111 Yale L.J. 1575 (2002).
24. Sharp, Jeff, Article: Coming Soon to Pay-per-View: How the Digital Millennium Copyright Act Enables Digital Content Owners to Circumvent Educational Fair Use, 40 Am. Bus. L.J. 1 (2002).
25. Sheets, Jason, Copyright Misused: The Impact of the DMCA Anti-circumvention Measures on Fair & Innovative Markets, 23 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 1 (2000).
26. Singer, Pete, Comment: Mounting a Fair Use Defense to The Anti-Circumvention Provisions of The Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 28 Dayton L. Rev. 111 (2002).

外文書籍（按照姓名字母順序排列）：
1. GOLDSTEIN, PAUL , COPYRIGHT VOL. II (2d ed. 1996).
2. LITMAN, JESSICA , DIGITAL COPYRIGHT (2001).
3. NIMMER, DAVID, COPYRIGHT: SACRED TEXT, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE DMCA (2004).
4. NIMMER, MELVILLE B. & NIMMER, DAVID, NIMMER ON COPYRIGHT (2002).
5. THE DIGITAL MILLENNIUM COPYRIGHT ACT: TEXT, HISTORY, AND CASELAW (Zachary J. Wheat et al. eds., 2003).

外文新聞：
1. Julius J. Marke, Proposed Legislation on Digital Copyright, NEW YORK LAW JOURNAL, May 19, 1998, at 5
2. WIPO Treaties Implementation Act prohibits circumvention of technological copyright protection systems and bars alteration of copyright management information, 20 ENTERTAINMENT LAW REPORTER 6 (Nov. 1998).

美國政府文件（按照時間排列）：
1. U.S. Dep’t of Commerce Info. Infrastructure Task Force, Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure: The Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights, (1995).
2. H.R. Rep. No. 105-551, pt. 1 (1998).
3. H.R. Rep. No. 105-551, pt. 2 (1998).
4. S. Rep. No. 105-190 (1998).
5. Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection Systems for Access Control Technologies, 65 Fed. Reg. 64,556 (Oct. 27, 2000).

中文書籍：
1. 羅明通，著作權法論，台北：台英商務法律，民國91年。
2. 馮震宇，智慧財產權發展趨勢與重要問題研究，台北：元照，民國92年10月。
3. 王銘勇，妨害電腦使用罪解析，資訊通信法律論文精選，新竹：清華大學，民國93年3月。

中文期刊論文（按姓名筆畫順序排列）：
1. 邵瓊慧，科技保護措施之著作權法爭議及挑戰，智慧財產權季刊，第34期，民國91年9月。
2. 章忠信，著作權法制中『科技保護措施』與『權利管理資訊』之探討（上），萬國法律，第113期，民國89年10月。
3. 馮震宇，WIPO著作權相關條約規範內容與其爭議問題之探討（上）、（下），智慧財產權月刊，民國90年11月、12月。
4. 馮震宇，論網路科技發展對合理使用的影響與未來，法令月刊，第51卷第10期，民國89年10月。
5. 馮震宇，數位內容之保護與科技保護措施，月旦法學，第105期，民國93年2月。
6. 陳錦全，日本著作權法關於技術保護措施之修正（上）、（下），智慧財產權月刊，民國89年7月、8月。
7. 謝銘洋，網路發展與未來我國著作權法之修正方向，全國律師，民國91年12月。