【摘要】：伴隨著高新技術(shù)的快速發(fā)展,技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與專利權(quán)的結(jié)合已經(jīng)成為當(dāng)今世界技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)發(fā)展和專利全球化推廣的重要趨勢(shì)。技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與專利權(quán)的結(jié)合是主客觀因素共同作用的必然結(jié)果。二者的結(jié)合猶如一把雙刃劍：一方面對(duì)市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)有著正面的促進(jìn)效應(yīng)；另一方面,技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為會(huì)產(chǎn)生限制市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的負(fù)面效應(yīng)。技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為具有自身的特殊性,其表現(xiàn)形式也是多種多樣。在技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定過(guò)程中,主要有故意不披露相關(guān)專利信息、聯(lián)合抵制等表現(xiàn)形式；在技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)實(shí)施過(guò)程中,主要有拒絕許可、搭售、收取不合理許可費(fèi)、專利聯(lián)營(yíng)等表現(xiàn)形式。規(guī)制此類行為的法律途徑主要有三種：民法中的禁止權(quán)利濫用原則、專利法自身的權(quán)利限制規(guī)則以及反壟斷法的相關(guān)規(guī)則。但是,前兩種途徑都由于其自身的局限性而無(wú)法針對(duì)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中專利權(quán)濫用行為的特點(diǎn)進(jìn)行有效規(guī)制。與之相反,反壟斷法因其與專利權(quán)在根本目標(biāo)上的一致性以及其自身在分析方法、處理機(jī)制上的優(yōu)越性而適應(yīng)了規(guī)制此類行為的需要。針對(duì)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為,美國(guó)、歐盟、日本等發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家和地區(qū)在長(zhǎng)期的實(shí)踐中形成了一套內(nèi)容詳細(xì)、行之有效的反壟斷法規(guī)制體系。近些年,在華跨國(guó)公司濫用技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)頻頻向我國(guó)企業(yè)發(fā)難。而在規(guī)制技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為方面,我國(guó)《反壟斷法》現(xiàn)有的相關(guān)規(guī)定過(guò)于原則,缺乏可操作性。在建立我國(guó)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中專利權(quán)濫用的反壟斷法規(guī)制制度時(shí),必須兼顧鼓勵(lì)創(chuàng)新和保護(hù)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的雙重目標(biāo),立足我國(guó)國(guó)情,從嚴(yán)規(guī)制技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為。同時(shí),借鑒國(guó)外技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中專利權(quán)濫用反壟斷法規(guī)制的有益經(jīng)驗(yàn),采用原則性規(guī)定和具體規(guī)則相結(jié)合的立法模式,確立“合理原則為主,本身違法原則為輔”的審查方法,對(duì)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為進(jìn)行類型化分析。還應(yīng)設(shè)置專門的反壟斷執(zhí)法機(jī)構(gòu),建立對(duì)壟斷行為的刑事責(zé)任制度,以更有效地規(guī)制技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利權(quán)濫用行為,保護(hù)市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of high and new technology, the combination of technical standards and patent rights has become an important trend of the development of world technology standards and patent globalization. The combination of technical standards and patent rights is the inevitable result of both subjective and objective factors. The combination of the two is like a double-edged sword: on the one hand, it has a positive promoting effect on market competition; on the other hand, the abuse of patent rights in technical standards will have a negative effect on restricting market competition. Patent abuse in technical standards has its own particularity and various forms. In the process of making technical standards, there are mainly manifestations such as intentional non-disclosure of relevant patent information, boycott and so on; in the implementation of technical standards, there are mainly manifestations such as refusing permission, tying up, charging unreasonable license fees, patent association, and so on. There are three legal ways to regulate this kind of behavior: the principle of prohibiting abuse of rights in civil law, the restriction rules of patent law itself and the relevant rules of antimonopoly law. However, the former two approaches can not effectively regulate the characteristics of patent abuse in technical standards because of their own limitations. On the contrary, the anti-monopoly law adapts to the need of regulating this kind of behavior because of its consistency with the patent right on the basic goal and its superiority in the analysis method and the processing mechanism. In view of patent abuse in technical standards, developed countries and regions such as the United States, European Union, Japan and other developed countries and regions have formed a set of detailed and effective anti-monopoly law regulation system in long-term practice. In recent years, multinational corporations in China frequently abuse patent rights in technical standards to Chinese enterprises. However, in regulating the abuse of patent rights in technical standards, the existing regulations of Anti-monopoly Law in China are too principled and lack maneuverability. When setting up the regulation system of patent right abuse in Chinese technical standard, we must take into account the double goals of encouraging innovation and protecting competition, and strictly regulate the abuse of patent right in technical standard based on our country's national conditions. At the same time, drawing lessons from the beneficial experience of patent abuse regulation in foreign technical standards and adopting the legislative model of combining the principle and concrete rules, the author establishes the examination method of "reasonable principle is the main principle, and the illegal principle is the secondary". The types of patent abuse in technical standards are analyzed. We should also set up a special anti-monopoly law enforcement agency and establish a criminal liability system for monopoly behavior in order to more effectively regulate the abuse of patent rights in technical standards and protect market competition.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 寧立志;周圍;;專利許可中差異化許可價(jià)格的反壟斷法分析[J];法商研究;2014年04期

2 祝建軍;;標(biāo)準(zhǔn)必要專利權(quán)人濫用市場(chǎng)支配地位構(gòu)成壟斷[J];人民司法;2014年04期

3 易繼明;;禁止權(quán)利濫用原則在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域中的適用[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2013年04期

4 王先林;;理想與現(xiàn)實(shí)中的中國(guó)反壟斷法——寫在《反壟斷法》實(shí)施五年之際[J];交大法學(xué);2013年02期

5 饒愛(ài)民;;歐盟競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法對(duì)專利聯(lián)營(yíng)的控制[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2013年03期

6 吳太軒;;技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的專利權(quán)濫用及其反壟斷法規(guī)制[J];法學(xué)論壇;2013年01期

7 呂明瑜;;專利聯(lián)營(yíng)中專利性質(zhì)的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)影響審查[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2013年01期

8 張炳生;蔣敏;;技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中專利權(quán)壟斷行為的理論分析及其法律規(guī)制[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2012年05期

9 劉斌斌;;論專利制度下的獨(dú)占與公共利益——以專利的經(jīng)濟(jì)功能分析為視角[J];蘭州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年01期

10 吳廣海;;專利權(quán)濫用法律規(guī)制模式探討[J];中國(guó)科技論壇;2012年01期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 劉仁;;標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題[N];中國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)報(bào);2007年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 吳太軒;技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的反壟斷法規(guī)制[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年

2 楊帆;技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2397827