本文選題：Bilski　切入點：軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明　出處：《上海交通大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：計算機(jī)軟件經(jīng)歷了商業(yè)秘密保護(hù)、版權(quán)保護(hù)�，F(xiàn)在，在西方發(fā)達(dá)國家的推動下，由計算機(jī)軟件產(chǎn)生的相關(guān)發(fā)明正在試圖用專利來保護(hù)。但是對于計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明可以獲得專利保護(hù)的條件，一直處于爭議之中，還無法就此給出一個明確的答案。本文主要通過對美國近期七個典型的案例研究來探討這一問題。 美國的Bilski案在美國專利史上有非常重要的意義，世界范圍內(nèi)的媒體都給予了廣泛關(guān)注。其經(jīng)過長達(dá)兩年之多的審判過程一波三折。美國最高法院由此確定了計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明審理的一般標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。眾所周知，美國是一個判例法國家，在其后諸多與計算機(jī)軟件發(fā)明相關(guān)案件的審理中，都引用了該標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。但同時又提出了一些新的判決理由和審判的方向，為我們指明了方向。本文選取了繼Bilski案件之后的計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明的六個典型案例，試圖從這七個案例審判中總結(jié)出法院審理計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明的一般審判標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。在本文中，主要總結(jié)了四點規(guī)律。 本文由引言、正文和結(jié)語三個部分構(gòu)成。在引言中本文首先介紹了其他國家對計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明這個概念的定義。將計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明的概念與計算機(jī)程序的概念區(qū)別開，確立本文的研究對象。然后介紹了本文研究的背景、目的。正文分為四個部分： 第一部分，，介紹Bilski案件。該部分首先回顧了Bilski案件的整個案情，指出其主要爭議點，然后總結(jié)其確立的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，最后論述該案確立的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對裁判類似案件的重要意義。 第二部分，是對后Bilski時期法院相繼判決的六個計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)的案件的介紹，這六個案件被在之后被判決的案件中引用并作為判決理由，因此具有典型性。該部分對這六個案件的案情作了簡介，重點指出其確定的判決標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 第三部分，總結(jié)以上六個案件所反映的認(rèn)定計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明的專利適格方面的總體趨勢，總結(jié)了四點規(guī)律。 第四部分，首先介紹了云計算的概念和特征，結(jié)合以上六個案件反映的趨勢并進(jìn)行總結(jié)和對比，探討云計算的可專利性問題，力圖為云計算尋求一種合適的保護(hù)模式。
[Abstract]:Computer software has experienced trade secret protection and copyright protection. Now, driven by the Western developed countries, Related inventions generated by computer software are trying to be protected by patents. But the conditions under which computer software-related inventions can be patented have been controversial. It is not possible to give a clear answer to this question. This paper mainly discusses this problem through seven recent typical case studies in the United States. The Bilski case in the United States is of great significance in the history of patents in the United States. The media around the world have paid a lot of attention. After two years of trial, the United States Supreme Court has established the general standards for the trial of computer software-related inventions. As we all know, The United States is a case law country, which has been cited in subsequent trials of cases related to computer software inventions. However, it has also put forward some new reasons for judgment and the direction of the trial. This paper selects six typical cases of computer software-related inventions following the Bilski case. This paper attempts to sum up the general trial standards of computer software related inventions in court from these seven cases. In this paper, four main rules are summarized. This paper is based on the introduction, In the introduction, this paper first introduces the definition of computer software related invention in other countries, and distinguishes the concept of computer software related invention from the concept of computer program. Then the background and purpose of this paper are introduced. The text is divided into four parts:. The first part introduces the Bilski case. This part reviews the whole case of Bilski case, points out its main points of dispute, then summarizes its established judgment standard, and finally discusses the significance of the standard established in this case to the adjudication of similar cases. The second part is an introduction to the six computer software-related cases decided by the court in the post Bilski period. These six cases were cited in the cases later adjudicated and used as the reasons for the judgment. So it is typical. This part introduces the six cases and points out the standard of judgment. The third part summarizes the general trend of patent suitability of computer software related inventions reflected in the above six cases and summarizes four rules. The fourth part first introduces the concept and characteristics of cloud computing combined with the trends reflected in the above six cases and makes a summary and comparison to explore the patentability of cloud computing in order to seek a suitable protection model for cloud computing.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D971.2;DD913

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李長健;徐麗峰;;我國計算機(jī)軟件專利保護(hù)文獻(xiàn)綜述[J];重慶郵電大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2010年03期

2 沙海濤;電子商務(wù)商業(yè)方法軟件的專利保護(hù)(下)[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2003年03期

3 陳磊;;商業(yè)方法專利方興未艾 評美國最高法院Bilski v.Kappos案判決及其影響[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2010年11期

4 余翔;劉珊;;美國、歐盟計算機(jī)軟件相關(guān)發(fā)明的專利保護(hù)比較研究[J];管理學(xué)報;2006年01期

5 劉斌斌;;論商業(yè)方法專利的變遷和發(fā)展——以美國案例的分析和考察為視角[J];甘肅社會科學(xué);2011年01期

6 高富平;;“云計算”的法律問題及其對策[J];法學(xué)雜志;2012年06期

7 李曉明;;淺析美國專利商標(biāo)局關(guān)于申請主題的臨時指令[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2010年01期

8 穆麗娟;;論計算機(jī)程序相關(guān)發(fā)明的客體審查[J];中國發(fā)明與專利;2012年08期

9 李凱;王春暉;;淺談與計算機(jī)程序相關(guān)的發(fā)明專利的申請與保護(hù)[J];法制與社會;2012年21期

10 蔡步青;;后Bilski時代電子商務(wù)商業(yè)方法專利之因應(yīng)與挑戰(zhàn)[J];河北法學(xué);2012年07期

本文編號：1670068