發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-04 10:38

  本文選題：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：諸邊協(xié)議　出處：《中國(guó)計(jì)量學(xué)院》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)具有復(fù)雜的經(jīng)濟(jì)屬性，，如何在刺激創(chuàng)新和既有知識(shí)普及兩者之間實(shí)現(xiàn)動(dòng)態(tài)平衡，選擇最佳的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策至關(guān)重要。國(guó)際貿(mào)易的迅猛發(fā)展對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)強(qiáng)烈的地域性產(chǎn)生了巨大的沖擊，全球范圍內(nèi)整體性的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策越來(lái)越普及。全球知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)所有權(quán)及其商業(yè)開發(fā)仍然控制在發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和一定數(shù)量的新興經(jīng)濟(jì)體手中。然而，知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)不力，尤其是假冒和盜版現(xiàn)象的日益猖獗，造成了以知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)為立國(guó)興邦基礎(chǔ)的創(chuàng)新型國(guó)家付出慘重的代價(jià)：削弱創(chuàng)新，破壞就業(yè)，損害消費(fèi)者利益，進(jìn)而導(dǎo)致經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)滯后。如果說(shuō)國(guó)際知識(shí)保護(hù)制度在立法方面已經(jīng)取得了舉世矚目的成就，那么在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法尤其是國(guó)際知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)協(xié)調(diào)執(zhí)法方面無(wú)疑有很大的完善空間�！斗醇倜百Q(mào)易協(xié)定》（ACTA）正是以歐盟、日本和美國(guó)為代表的的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)強(qiáng)國(guó)基于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)不足的現(xiàn)狀，在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)多邊執(zhí)行機(jī)制的動(dòng)機(jī)下，尋求建立其他國(guó)家，尤其是知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)不力國(guó)家，能夠鼓勵(lì)并堅(jiān)持的最佳國(guó)際實(shí)踐標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。ACTA是典型意義上的諸邊協(xié)議，代表的是國(guó)際知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)同國(guó)際貿(mào)易結(jié)合的復(fù)邊體制，內(nèi)容主要涵蓋民事執(zhí)法、刑事執(zhí)法、邊境措施和數(shù)字環(huán)境下的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法等領(lǐng)域，而數(shù)字執(zhí)法更是在《與貿(mào)易有關(guān)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)協(xié)定》（TRIPS）基礎(chǔ)之上新增加的內(nèi)容。ACTA在民事執(zhí)法、刑事執(zhí)法和邊境措施等傳統(tǒng)領(lǐng)域都有超越性嘗試，在TRIPS-plus的道路上又邁出了堅(jiān)實(shí)的一步。且不論ACTA在提升知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法標(biāo)準(zhǔn)方面是否符合各國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)水平，ACTA對(duì)公民基本權(quán)利，諸如言論信息自由、個(gè)人隱私和數(shù)據(jù)受保護(hù)權(quán)、公平審判權(quán)和公共健康權(quán)，都提出了嚴(yán)峻的挑戰(zhàn)，而這些正是作者特別關(guān)注也是本文將要著重解讀并予以回答的核心領(lǐng)域所在。
[Abstract]:Intellectual property rights have complex economic attributes, and how to strike a dynamic balance between stimulating innovation and spreading existing knowledge, The choice of the best intellectual property policy is crucial. The rapid development of international trade has had a tremendous impact on the strong regional nature of intellectual property rights. Global ownership of intellectual property and its commercial development remain in the hands of developed countries and a certain number of emerging economies. However, intellectual property protection is weak. In particular, the increasingly rampant phenomenon of counterfeiting and piracy has resulted in innovative countries based on intellectual property rights as the basis for national prosperity, paying a heavy price: weakening innovation, destroying employment and harming the interests of consumers. In turn, economic growth lags behind. If the international knowledge protection system has made remarkable achievements in legislation, Well, there is no doubt that there is great room for improvement in the enforcement of intellectual property rights, especially in the area of international coordination and enforcement of intellectual property rights. The Anti-counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTAA) is precisely the EU. The intellectual property powers represented by Japan and the United States seek to establish other countries, especially those with weak intellectual property protection, under the motivation of the multilateral IPR enforcement mechanism, based on the current situation of inadequate intellectual property protection. The best international practice standard. ACTA, which can be encouraged and upheld, is a plurilateral agreement in the typical sense, representing a plurilateral system in which the protection of international intellectual property rights is integrated with international trade. The content mainly covers civil law enforcement and criminal law enforcement. In areas such as border measures and intellectual property law enforcement in the digital environment, and digital law enforcement is a new addition to the trips Agreement on Trade-Related aspects of intellectual property Rights. ACTA is in civil law enforcement. There have been transcendent attempts in traditional areas such as criminal law enforcement and border measures. This is a solid step on the path of the TRIPS-plus. Regardless of whether ACTA complies with the level of intellectual property protection in various countries in terms of raising standards for IPR enforcement, ACTA has fundamental rights to citizens, such as freedom of speech and information, personal privacy and the right to data protection. Both the right to a fair trial and the right to public health pose serious challenges, and these are the key areas in which the author will pay special attention and answer.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)計(jì)量學(xué)院
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D997.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張偉君;李茂;;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法的國(guó)際新標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以及我國(guó)的應(yīng)對(duì)——以ACTA民事救濟(jì)措施為例[J];東方法學(xué);2012年03期

2 薛潔;;走近《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)議》(ACTA) 知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)民事執(zhí)法部分初探[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2011年07期

3 袁真富;鄭舒姝;徐洋;;《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)定》的主要特點(diǎn)及其現(xiàn)實(shí)影響[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2011年08期

4 程文婷;;《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)定》與我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法比較芻議[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2011年08期

5 薛潔;;走近《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)議》(ACTA) 知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)邊境執(zhí)法部分初探[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2012年02期

6 楊鴻;;《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)定》的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法規(guī)則研究[J];法商研究;2011年06期

7 李宗輝;;《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)定》(ACTA)的“表”與“里”[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2011年08期

8 左玉茹;;《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)定》與歐盟知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法比較研究[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2011年08期

9 符正;;《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)定》的主要特點(diǎn)及中國(guó)的應(yīng)對(duì)之策[J];中華商標(biāo);2012年02期

10 薛潔;;對(duì)數(shù)字環(huán)境下的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)執(zhí)法分析——基于《反假冒貿(mào)易協(xié)議》(ACTA)[J];科技與法律;2011年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 馬樂(lè);國(guó)際知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)貿(mào)易中平行進(jìn)口法律規(guī)制研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2010年

本文編號(hào)：1565351