本文選題：商業(yè)秘密預防性保護 + 威脅性侵害�。� 參考：《大連海事大學》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：商業(yè)秘密因其脆弱性需要對其予以預防性保護,而本文所指的預防性保護是僅針對商業(yè)秘密威脅性侵害這一種情況而言的。威脅性侵害并不是一種侵權(quán)行為,但在此種情況下,商業(yè)秘密處于一種將被不可避免侵害的危險之中,因此對其予以預防性保護也是急迫而且必要的,且相對于事后救濟,預防性保護更注重的是消除侵害的危險,阻止侵害的發(fā)生。 商業(yè)秘密預防性保護是必要的,這不僅源于商業(yè)秘密的價值性,還在于其知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的屬性,而妨害預防是其知識產(chǎn)權(quán)請求權(quán)的當然內(nèi)容之一,而商業(yè)秘密的秘密性更決定了預防性保護對其的特殊意義。除此之外,現(xiàn)實中針對商業(yè)秘密威脅性侵害的多發(fā)性也是預防性保護的重要原因之一。 在商業(yè)秘密預防性保護上,有建立在其知識產(chǎn)權(quán)屬性上的產(chǎn)權(quán)式保護和基于威脅性侵害特點的契約式保護兩種方式。在對各國商業(yè)秘密預防性保護比較分析的基礎(chǔ)上,將預防性保護的模式歸納為產(chǎn)權(quán)式保護與契約式保護并用的模式及單一的契約式預防性保護模式兩種類型。在并用模式下,以對威脅性侵害的判斷方法為標準,又可將并用模式分為建立在獨立判斷基礎(chǔ)上的產(chǎn)權(quán)式保護與契約式保護并用模式與合同確定的產(chǎn)權(quán)式保護與契約式保護并用模式兩類。 我國承認商業(yè)秘密的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)屬性,但卻僅對其予以契約式的保護,這顯然是與其的性質(zhì)不相符的,因此產(chǎn)權(quán)式保護與契約式保護并用的模式是我國應(yīng)選擇的商業(yè)秘密預防性保護之路。以競業(yè)禁止合同的約定作為判斷威脅性侵害是否存在的依據(jù)不僅避免了事后競業(yè)禁止合同之嫌,而且又將競業(yè)禁止合同的約定與威脅性侵害的判定統(tǒng)一化,因此合同確定的產(chǎn)權(quán)式保護是符合我國現(xiàn)狀的產(chǎn)權(quán)式預防性保護方式。在并用模式下,不僅在現(xiàn)有的體系與制度上要做相應(yīng)的補充與完善,而且競業(yè)禁止合同的合理性也被賦予了新的涵義,這也便于司法實踐中統(tǒng)一合理性的認定標準。我國雖沒有日本員工終身制的用工習慣,但其卻給了我國企業(yè)重要的員工管理方面的啟示,而員工的良性流動不僅不妨礙商業(yè)秘密的保護,而且有利于競爭環(huán)境的形成。
[Abstract]:Trade secrets need to be protected precautionary because of their vulnerability, and the precautionary protection mentioned in this paper is only aimed at the situation of threatening infringement of trade secrets. Threatening violations are not a violation, but in such cases trade secrets are in danger of being inevitably infringed, and its preventive protection is therefore urgent and necessary, as opposed to ex post facto relief, Preventive protection pays more attention to eliminating the danger of infringement and preventing the occurrence of infringement. The preventive protection of trade secrets is necessary, not only from the value of trade secrets, but also from the nature of their intellectual property rights, and prejudice prevention is one of the natural contents of their intellectual property claims. The secrecy of trade secrets determines the special significance of preventive protection. In addition, the number of threatening violations of trade secrets in reality is also one of the important reasons for preventive protection. In the protection of trade secret, there are two ways: property right protection based on intellectual property and contract protection based on threatening infringement. On the basis of comparative analysis of the preventive protection of trade secrets in various countries, the preventive protection model is divided into two types: the combination of property rights protection and contractual protection and the single contractual preventive protection mode. In the combined mode, the method of judging threatening aggression is taken as the standard. It can also be divided into two types: property rights protection based on independent judgment and contractual protection and contractual property rights protection and contractual protection. Our recognition of the intellectual property attributes of trade secrets, but the contractual protection of them, is clearly incompatible with their nature. Therefore, the combination of property right protection and contract protection is the way to protect trade secrets in our country. Taking the agreement of the non-compete contract as the basis for judging the existence of threatening infringement not only avoids the suspicion of non-competition contract after the event, but also unifies the agreement of the non-competition contract and the judgment of threatening infringement. Therefore, the property right protection determined by the contract is a kind of property right preventive protection which accords with the present situation of our country. Under the mode of use, not only the existing system and system should be supplemented and perfected, but also the rationality of non-competition contract has been given a new meaning, which is convenient to unify the standard of rationality in judicial practice. Although our country does not have the Japanese employee lifelong employment custom, but it has given our country enterprise the important employee management aspect enlightenment, and the staff benign flow not only does not hinder the protection of the trade secret, but also is advantageous to the competitive environment formation.
【學位授予單位】：大連海事大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D997

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王洪亮;;物上請求權(quán)的訴權(quán)與物權(quán)基礎(chǔ)[J];比較法研究;2006年05期

2 王賓容;劉曉輝;張穎;;商業(yè)秘密“即發(fā)侵權(quán)”的禁令救濟[J];北京科技大學學報(社會科學版);2007年02期

3 歐廣遠;;商業(yè)秘密禁令保護之源流與功能[J];商業(yè)研究;2009年11期

4 李偉;單曉光;;中德附隨義務(wù)的比較思考[J];德國研究;2006年03期

5 劉妙香,白恒晶;美國《經(jīng)濟間諜法》對商業(yè)秘密的超強度保護[J];法學雜志;2002年04期

6 黃邦道;;合同附隨義務(wù)的形成與發(fā)展[J];改革與戰(zhàn)略;2009年07期

7 張紅;合同附隨義務(wù)適用之探析[J];貴州大學學報(社會科學版);2005年04期

8 徐朝賢;美、德、日商業(yè)秘密侵權(quán)救濟制度的發(fā)展及借鑒[J];河北法學;2001年02期

9 付慧姝;商業(yè)秘密保護中的價值沖突與權(quán)利沖突研究[J];河北法學;2005年12期

10 李永明;競業(yè)禁止的若干問題[J];法學研究;2002年05期

，

本文編號：1967397