简介：摘要：我国《著作权法》在第三次修改时引入了惩罚性赔偿制度,但立法语言的模糊导致司法裁判标准混乱.基于对687件裁判文书实证分析可知:一方面,法定赔偿暗含的惩罚属性压缩了惩罚性赔偿的适用空间,也带来了能否将这一实践中具有绝对主导地位的损害赔偿计算标准作为惩罚性赔偿基准额的争议;另一方面,惩罚性赔偿构成要件语义模糊、规范指引缺乏,导致裁判标准无法统一.要促进我国著作权侵权惩罚性赔偿制度的司法完善,须以类型化、体系化的思维统一惩罚性赔偿适用标准.具体而言,须厘清并协调"故意"与"情节严重"等构成要件的功能;允许在特定条件下将法定赔偿作为惩罚性赔偿的基数;降低数额认定的高精度期待,避免损害赔偿"数学化"而忽略其法律价值;厘清法定赔偿与惩罚性赔偿的边界,在防止对侵权事实重复评价的基础上促进二者的协调适用.Abstract：China's Copyright Law introduced punitive damage rule in third amendment,but the ambiguity of legisla-tive language led to the confusion on judicial standards.Based on the empirical analysis of 687 judging documents,it can be concluded that,the implied punitive attribute of statutory compensation has compressed the space for the appli-cation of punitive compensation,which also brought about the controversy of whether the standard of calculating dam-ages has an absolutely dominant position in the practice as the benchmark punitive compensation.However,the seman-tic ambiguity of the constituent elements of punitive compensation and the lack of normative guidelines hav...