【摘要】：傳統(tǒng)的國際私法觀點認為，知識產(chǎn)權的地域性特征決定了其只在一國地域范圍內(nèi)有效，因而知識產(chǎn)權領域不能像其他民事領域一樣產(chǎn)生法律沖突。但筆者認為，知識產(chǎn)權及其立法本身也能具有域外效力，只是由于人們固守其地域性，因而無法產(chǎn)生法律沖突。隨著各國知識產(chǎn)權貿(mào)易往來的日益頻繁與知識產(chǎn)權國際合作的加強，各國逐漸放棄了對知識產(chǎn)權的專屬管轄權，知識產(chǎn)權的地域性得以弱化，從而各國開始普遍關注涉外知識產(chǎn)權的法律適用問題。因此，研究如何制定恰當?shù)闹R產(chǎn)權沖突規(guī)范，也即有效解決知識產(chǎn)權法律適用問題具有現(xiàn)實意義。由于知識產(chǎn)權本體關系純屬于一國的內(nèi)國法律關系，較知識產(chǎn)權合同關系和侵權關系更具特殊性，因此，，本文將重點探討知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的法律適用問題。本文在理論分析的基礎上，結合我國現(xiàn)有的立法規(guī)定，對完善我國知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的法律適用提出了一些建議。全文共分為四個部分： 第一部分主要對知識產(chǎn)權本體關系法律沖突的有關內(nèi)容進行了闡述。首先對知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的內(nèi)涵進行了界定。接下來分析了妨礙知識產(chǎn)權本體關系產(chǎn)生法律沖突的原因。認為知識產(chǎn)權領域之所以不能產(chǎn)生法律沖突，主要是各國不愿承認知識產(chǎn)權的域外效力。但地域性并非知識產(chǎn)權的獨有性質，因為一切權利都具有地域性。阻礙知識產(chǎn)權產(chǎn)生域外效力的根本原因時各國對于知識產(chǎn)權得以成立的條件規(guī)定不同。但隨著知識產(chǎn)權地域性的逐漸弱化，知識產(chǎn)權又具有了一定的域外效力，從而促使知識產(chǎn)權本體關系法律沖突的產(chǎn)生。 第二部分介紹了知識產(chǎn)權本體關系法律沖突的解決方法，也即直接調(diào)整方法和間接調(diào)整方法。在這部分中，筆者比較創(chuàng)新地提出了“隱性”沖突規(guī)則的說法。因為在知識產(chǎn)權統(tǒng)一實體公約中也存在著一些解決知識產(chǎn)權本體關系法律沖突的沖突規(guī)則，但它們并非具體的法律適用規(guī)則，而是從統(tǒng)一實體公約有關規(guī)范中引申出來的法律適用原則。此外，由于這些沖突規(guī)則不是由專門的沖突法進行規(guī)定，因此相對于“顯性”的沖突規(guī)范而言，稱之為“隱性”沖突規(guī)則更為貼切。筆者援引大量國外學者的觀點與法院判例進行了分析，認為《伯爾尼公約》第5.2條和第14條等規(guī)定確實提出了應當適用的法律，并都指向“保護國法”。 第三部分是本文重點論述的內(nèi)容,也即知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的法律適用問題。首先，論述了知識產(chǎn)權專有性對知識產(chǎn)權法律適用的影響。當知識產(chǎn)權作為一般民事權利時，應當適用權利行使地法；而當知識產(chǎn)權作為專有權利時，則以適用被請求保護地法為主。其次，界定了知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的內(nèi)涵。雖然知識產(chǎn)權是一種無形財產(chǎn)權，但其本體關系并不能適用一般財產(chǎn)的法律適用方法。因此筆者提出了知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的法律適用規(guī)則，也即對知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的法律適用采取“分割論”方法，對其不同方面分別適用沖突規(guī)則。同時，由于知識產(chǎn)權類型眾多，在法律適用方面也應進行“分割”。 第四部分主要是對完善我國知識產(chǎn)權本體關系法律適用的一些思考。首先，對我國知識產(chǎn)權本體關系法律適用的立法規(guī)定——《民法典（草案）》以及新出臺的《涉外民事關系法律適用法》進行了介紹與評價。其次，針對上述立法規(guī)定的不足，筆者在結合前文理論分析并聯(lián)系我國實際情況的基礎上提出了自己的完善建議，期望能使我國知識產(chǎn)權本體關系的法律適用規(guī)則更加全面、完整。
[Abstract]:The traditional view of private international law believes that the regional character of intellectual property determines that it is valid only in the territory of one State, so that the field of intellectual property cannot generate legal conflict as in other civil fields. But the author thinks that the intellectual property and its legislation can also have the extraterritorial effect, only because people keep their region, and thus can not produce the legal conflict. With the increasing of the trade of intellectual property and the strengthening of the international cooperation of intellectual property, countries have gradually abandoned the exclusive jurisdiction of the intellectual property right, and the region of the intellectual property right is weakened, so that the countries have begun to pay close attention to the legal application of foreign-related intellectual property rights. Therefore, it is of practical significance to study how to develop the appropriate norms of intellectual property conflict, that is, to effectively solve the problem of the application of intellectual property law. Because the relation of intellectual property ontology is pure in the legal relation of the internal state of a country, the relationship between the contract of intellectual property and the relationship of the infringement are more specific, and therefore, the article will focus on the legal application of the relationship between the intellectual property and the intellectual property. On the basis of the theory analysis, this paper puts forward some suggestions on the improvement of the legal application of the relationship between the intellectual property rights in our country in the light of the existing legislation of our country. The full text is divided into four parts: The first part mainly discusses the content of the legal conflict of the relationship between the intellectual property and the intellectual property. Firstly, the connotation of the relationship between the intellectual property and the intellectual property is defined. in that follow, the original of the legal conflict that hinder the relationship between the intellectual property and the body of the intellectual property is analyzed. In view of the fact that there is no legal conflict in the field of intellectual property, it is mainly that States do not wish to recognize the extraterritorial effects of intellectual property rights A force. But the region is not a unique property of intellectual property, because all rights have a region. (a) The conditions for the establishment of intellectual property rights by States when the root causes of the extraterritorial effects of intellectual property are hindered In the same way, with the gradual weakening of the regional property of the intellectual property, the intellectual property has a certain extraterritorial effect, thus promoting the production of the legal conflict of the relationship between the intellectual property and the intellectual property. The second part introduces the solution of the legal conflict of the relationship between the intellectual property ontology, that is, the direct adjustment method and the indirect adjustment In this part, the author puts forward the 鈥渞ecessive鈥

本文編號：2360443