本文關(guān)鍵詞： 后TRIPs時代 權(quán)利屬性 知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用 法律規(guī)制　出處：《安徽大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的濫用伴隨著知識產(chǎn)權(quán)制度的創(chuàng)設(shè)一同產(chǎn)生,根本原因在于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利屬性的特點：私權(quán)性與公共性的并存。當知識產(chǎn)權(quán)政策偏向于弱保護時,知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的公共屬性即成為知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護的主要矛盾,當知識產(chǎn)權(quán)政策偏向于強保護時,私權(quán)屬性則成為主要矛盾,對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的濫用通常表現(xiàn)為對私權(quán)屬性的過分強調(diào)。無論是公共屬性還是私權(quán)屬性都有一定的理論依據(jù)作為支持,知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的理論依據(jù)往往可以追溯到自然法的起源。但因為自然法本身漫長的發(fā)展歷程以及巨大的影響力,它的研究者眾多,得出的結(jié)論也不勝枚舉。筆者認為其與最初的自然法精要并不完全符合,甚至在某些地方,產(chǎn)生了“異化”,這究竟是法學(xué)理論發(fā)展的正常過程,還是被刻意的歪曲? 所謂后TRIPs時代,是指知識產(chǎn)權(quán)問題被納入WTO項下,TRIPs被所有成員接受以后的時代。這一時代的來臨標志著知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護有了世界統(tǒng)一的標準,并且有了統(tǒng)一的執(zhí)行和處罰措施。對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護起步較早的國家而言,是有百利而無一害的,他們早已熟知并因此獲利的標準被推廣至全世界。而廣大發(fā)展中國家大多是被迫納入這一體制,遵守超過他們承受能力的義務(wù)。知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的后果主要集中體現(xiàn)在發(fā)展中國家內(nèi)部。這些后果出現(xiàn)的范圍十分廣泛,從引起世界關(guān)注的公共健康問題到跨國公司對市場的壟斷,無一不存在發(fā)展中國家為這一制度買單的情況。在公共健康領(lǐng)域,跨國醫(yī)藥公司把持著治療危險疾病藥品的專利,一些經(jīng)濟嚴重落后國家,為了遏制疾病所采取的國內(nèi)政策一度飽受跨國公司詬病。雖然在國際輿論的壓力下,這些跨國公司以及發(fā)達國家政府作出了一定程度的妥協(xié),但是發(fā)展中國家為此付出的卻是數(shù)以百萬計人民的生命作為代價�？鐕驹谏虡I(yè)領(lǐng)域的壟斷行為,因其高度的技術(shù)性以及商業(yè)性,并未能像公共健康問題那樣引起世界范圍內(nèi)的關(guān)注,但是這一領(lǐng)域受知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的影響卻非常深遠,它不止影響了一大批中小企業(yè)的生產(chǎn)經(jīng)營,導(dǎo)致大量企業(yè)破產(chǎn),更嚴重的是它打亂了發(fā)展中國家產(chǎn)業(yè)重組的節(jié)奏,并使得產(chǎn)業(yè)結(jié)構(gòu)的重塑更符合發(fā)達國家的利益需求。 后TRIPs時代是發(fā)達國家整體獲益而發(fā)展中國家大部分受損的時代,這一時代的意義可以從多個維度來討論：首先,這一時代的來臨標志著知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護站在了人類前所未有的高度,產(chǎn)生了世界范圍內(nèi)統(tǒng)一遵守的機制。其次,后TRIPs時代的誕生可以看成是發(fā)達國家在知識產(chǎn)權(quán)戰(zhàn)略乃至全球經(jīng)濟戰(zhàn)略的一次巨大勝利,因為這一制度基本符合了發(fā)達國家的利益需求,并符合他們對于未來國際經(jīng)濟格局的規(guī)劃；同時,發(fā)達國家受益的過程也是發(fā)展中國家付出代價的過程,對現(xiàn)有標準的遵守,超出了大多數(shù)發(fā)展中國家能力所及的范圍。最后,這一時代的到來對于中國和其他發(fā)展中國家而言,最重要的意義莫過于引發(fā)對本國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)制度的反思,進而摸索和探尋出符合本國經(jīng)濟發(fā)展需要的道路來。 對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的法律規(guī)制,主要的發(fā)達國家實際上已經(jīng)為我國樹立了好榜樣,包括TRIPs協(xié)議本身,也有很多可以利用的空間。從我國的情況來看,現(xiàn)有的法律在一定程度上反映了建立知識產(chǎn)權(quán)法律體系的決心。但法律體系的架構(gòu)是一項任重而道遠的工作,不可能一蹴而就,不僅要在現(xiàn)有法律、法規(guī)和司法解釋的基礎(chǔ)上進一步完善,更要勇于創(chuàng)新,制定專門法來規(guī)制濫用行為。同時,要擺正心態(tài),對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的濫用有清醒的認識,才能使我國在未來的國際知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護領(lǐng)域贏得更多的話語權(quán)。
[Abstract]:The abuse of intellectual property rights with the creation of the intellectual property system to produce, the fundamental reason lies in the characteristics of the nature of intellectual property rights, both private and public rights. When the intellectual property policy in favor of the weak protection, public intellectual property that has become the main contradiction of intellectual property protection of intellectual property rights, when the policy is biased in favor of strong the protection of private property, has become the main contradiction, abuse of intellectual property rights is usually too much emphasis on private property. Whether it is public property or private property has a certain theoretical basis as support the theoretical basis of intellectual property rights often can be traced back to the origin of natural law. But because of the long history of natural law itself and a huge influence, its researchers concluded. The author believes that it also be too numerous to enumerate and natural law does not fully comply with the original essence, Even in some places, "alienation" has come into being. Is this the normal process of the development of the theory of law, or is it deliberately distorted?
The so-called post TRIPs era, refers to intellectual property issues to be included in the WTO, TRIPs all the members with era. In this era, intellectual property protection has been the world unified standard, and a unified implementation and punishment measures. On the protection of intellectual property rights play a step earlier in the country, is there is no harm, they are already familiar with and profit of the standard was extended to the whole world. The developing countries are forced into this system, with more than they tolerance obligations. The abuse of intellectual property rights is mainly embodied in the consequences within developing countries. These consequences appear widely, to multinational corporations from the public health problems caused by the world's attention on the market, no one does not exist for this system for the developing countries. In the field of public health, multinational pharmaceutical companies Our control treatment of dangerous diseases drug patents, some serious economic backward countries, taken in order to curb the disease of domestic policy was suffering from multinational companies criticized. Although under the pressure of international public opinion, these multinational companies and governments of developed countries to a certain degree of compromise, but developing countries pay is millions of people's lives as the price of monopolistic behavior. Multinational companies in the business field, because of its highly technical and commercial, and not like public health problem that has attracted worldwide attention, but this area is affected by the abuse of intellectual property rights is very profound, it not only affects a large number of small and medium-sized enterprises of production and operation, resulting in a large number of the bankruptcy of the enterprise, more serious is that it disrupted industrial restructuring in developing countries and makes the rhythm, to reshape the industry structure more in line with the developed country The demand for the interests of the family.
After the TRIPs era is the overall benefit of developed countries while developing countries most of the damaged era, the era significance can be discussed from multiple dimensions: first of all, in this era of intellectual property protection in human hitherto unknown height, the mechanism of the world within the scope of uniform compliance. Secondly, after the birth of TRIPs in the era of developed countries can be regarded as a great win in intellectual property strategy and global economic strategy, because this system accords with the interests of developed countries and meet their needs for the future of international economy planning; at the same time, developed countries benefit is the process of developing countries to pay, to comply with existing standards that is beyond the scope of most developing countries and ability. Finally, this era is the most China and other developing countries. The important significance is to arouse the reflection on the intellectual property system of the country, and to explore and explore the way to meet the needs of the national economic development.
On the legal regulation of the abuse of intellectual property rights, the main developed countries has actually set a good example for our country, including the TRIPs protocol itself, there are a lot of available space. From our point of view, the existing legal system of intellectual property law reflects the establishment method of determination to a certain extent. But the legal system architecture is a long-term and arduous task, not overnight, not only in the existing laws, regulations and judicial interpretations on the basis of further improvement, more to innovation, formulate special law to regulate the abuse. At the same time, to put positive mentality, the abuse of intellectual property rights have a clear understanding, to make our country to win more right to speak in the field of international intellectual property protection in the future.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D997.1;D996

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 韓勇;試論知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的濫用與反壟斷法的規(guī)制[J];當代法學(xué);2002年07期

2 徐元;;國際貿(mào)易中的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用及其表現(xiàn)形式論析[J];當代經(jīng)濟管理;2011年03期

3 余長林;王瑞芳;;發(fā)展中國家的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護與技術(shù)創(chuàng)新:只是線性關(guān)系嗎?[J];當代經(jīng)濟科學(xué);2009年03期

4 黃勇;;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與反壟斷法的基本關(guān)系[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年07期

5 王先林;潘志成;;反壟斷法適用于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域的基本政策主張——日本《知識產(chǎn)權(quán)利用的反壟斷法指南》介評[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2008年01期

6 黃玉燁;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)利益衡量論——兼論后TRIPs時代知識產(chǎn)權(quán)國際保護的新發(fā)展[J];法商研究;2004年05期

7 韓赤風(fēng);對DVD事件中知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的法律思考[J];法商研究;2005年03期

8 鄭友德;胡章怡;;歐盟知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的反壟斷問題研究——以歐盟新修訂的《技術(shù)許可協(xié)議集體豁免條例》為中心[J];法學(xué)評論;2006年06期

9 馮潔菡;;國際組織與知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的國際保護[J];法學(xué)評論;2007年03期

10 繆劍文,劉恮;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)與競爭法[J];法學(xué);1999年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 饒明輝;當代西方知識產(chǎn)權(quán)理論的哲學(xué)反思[D];吉林大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 胡騰云;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)全球保護的法理思考[D];南京師范大學(xué);2007年

2 畢生;國際貿(mào)易中的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)保護研究[D];廈門大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號：1530264