本文選題：技術(shù)　切入點(diǎn)：委托開(kāi)發(fā)　出處：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著科技技術(shù)創(chuàng)新的發(fā)展,技術(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)已經(jīng)逐漸成為衡量企業(yè)創(chuàng)新能力的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),由于目前的市場(chǎng)環(huán)境和技術(shù)環(huán)境影響,形成了以高校研究院為技術(shù)研發(fā)方,以企業(yè)為資金投入方的委托開(kāi)發(fā)模式進(jìn)行技術(shù)研發(fā)工作。由于技術(shù)本身的專(zhuān)業(yè)性以及復(fù)雜性,技術(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)過(guò)程中遭遇部分失敗或者全部失敗的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)時(shí)常發(fā)生,由于這種風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的產(chǎn)生而帶來(lái)一系列技術(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)糾紛也是與日俱增。然而,除了《合同法》第338條中提及的對(duì)技術(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)進(jìn)行合理分擔(dān)外,現(xiàn)有的法律法規(guī)并沒(méi)有對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)如何具體承擔(dān)做出具體規(guī)定。而合同法338條也是籠統(tǒng)規(guī)定,在具體適用時(shí)也是輔以公平公正、權(quán)利義務(wù)相一致等法律原則進(jìn)行處理,但是適用法律原則可解釋的空間太大,不利于維護(hù)當(dāng)事人的合法利益,也不利于整個(gè)交易市場(chǎng)的利益平衡,更加不利于整個(gè)社會(huì)的科學(xué)技術(shù)進(jìn)步,所以如何合理確定合同雙方當(dāng)事人之間風(fēng)險(xiǎn)責(zé)任的承擔(dān)成為一個(gè)亟待解決的問(wèn)題。文章通過(guò)三個(gè)方面解析《合同法》第338條以達(dá)到風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分擔(dān)規(guī)則的適用。關(guān)于舉證,由于研發(fā)方掌握研發(fā)項(xiàng)目的進(jìn)度以及核心資料,而投資方一般資金富足但不懂技術(shù),所以由研發(fā)方舉證,經(jīng)技術(shù)鑒定專(zhuān)家衡量以后確定是否屬于“無(wú)法克服的技術(shù)困難”;關(guān)于驗(yàn)收,實(shí)操中,當(dāng)技術(shù)合同中沒(méi)有約定驗(yàn)收標(biāo)準(zhǔn)時(shí),合同雙方當(dāng)事人在技術(shù)成果的驗(yàn)收問(wèn)題上經(jīng)常產(chǎn)生分歧,為了保持技術(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)的積極性,激勵(lì)研發(fā)創(chuàng)新,在確定“研究失敗或部分失敗”時(shí),不應(yīng)當(dāng)將市場(chǎng)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以及專(zhuān)利標(biāo)準(zhǔn)強(qiáng)行納入,而應(yīng)該根據(jù)實(shí)際情況,從合同簽訂背景、目的、履行情況等方面綜合分析得出合同技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn),以技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)作為合同的驗(yàn)收標(biāo)準(zhǔn)才符合技術(shù)合同的本質(zhì);關(guān)于風(fēng)險(xiǎn)分擔(dān),合理地分擔(dān)技術(shù)開(kāi)發(fā)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)主要體現(xiàn)在各自承擔(dān)已經(jīng)付出部分的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)責(zé)任,具體地,由投資方承擔(dān)資金投入風(fēng)險(xiǎn),相應(yīng)地,投資方獲得研發(fā)過(guò)程中所取得的階段性成果和資料,而研發(fā)方則承擔(dān)時(shí)間、精力等無(wú)形資產(chǎn)投入風(fēng)險(xiǎn),研發(fā)過(guò)程中所積累的經(jīng)驗(yàn)也是研發(fā)方所獲得的報(bào)酬,這種通過(guò)利益激勵(lì)以及平衡損失的方式可以改善雙方實(shí)力不均衡的局面,達(dá)到利益的動(dòng)態(tài)平衡,實(shí)現(xiàn)公平正義,同時(shí)節(jié)約司法成本,提高司法效率。
[Abstract]:With the development of scientific and technological innovation, technological development has gradually become the standard to measure the innovation ability of enterprises. Because of the influence of the current market environment and technological environment, the research and development of technology has been formed with the research institutes of colleges and universities as the R & D side. Technical research and development is carried out by the entrusted development model with the enterprise as the capital inputer. Due to the professionalism and complexity of the technology itself, the risk of partial or total failure in the process of technological development often occurs. As a result of this kind of risk, a series of technology development disputes are also increasing. However, in addition to the reasonable sharing of technology development risks mentioned in Article 338 of the contract Law, The existing laws and regulations do not make specific provisions on how to bear the risks. And Article 338 of the contract Law is also a general provision, which is supplemented by the legal principles of fairness and fairness, consistency of rights and obligations, and so on. However, the application of legal principles has too much room for interpretation, which is not conducive to safeguarding the legitimate interests of the parties concerned, is also not conducive to the balance of interests in the entire trading market, and is even more detrimental to the scientific and technological progress of the whole society. Therefore, how to reasonably determine the risk liability between the parties to the contract has become a problem to be solved urgently. The article analyzes Article 338 of contract Law through three aspects in order to achieve the application of the risk-sharing rules. Since the R & D side is in possession of the progress and core information of the R & D project, and the investor is generally rich in capital but does not know the technology, so the R & D side proves that, Whether or not it is "insurmountable technical difficulty" after being measured by a technical appraisal expert; in practice, when no acceptance standard is stipulated in the technical contract, The parties to the contract often have different opinions on the acceptance of technical achievements. In order to maintain the enthusiasm of technological development and encourage R & D innovation, when determining "research failure or partial failure", Market standards and patent standards should not be forcibly included, but the contract technical standards should be drawn from comprehensive analysis of the background, purpose and performance of the contract according to the actual situation, It is only when the acceptance standard of the contract is taken as the technical standard that it accords with the essence of the technical contract. Regarding the risk sharing, the reasonable sharing of the risk of technological development is mainly reflected in the fact that each of them bears the part of the risk responsibility that has already been paid, specifically, The investment risk is borne by the investor. Accordingly, the investor obtains the stage achievements and information obtained in the R & D process, while the R & D side assumes the risk of intangibles such as time and energy. The experience accumulated in the process of research and development is also the reward received by the R & D side, which can improve the unbalanced situation of both sides' strength by means of interest incentives and balanced losses, and achieve the dynamic balance of interests and the realization of fairness and justice. At the same time, it saves the judicial cost and improves the judicial efficiency.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.6

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 高華;何書(shū)W，

本文編號(hào)：1678265