本文關(guān)鍵詞： 孤雌生殖 人類胚胎干細(xì)胞 專利適格性 社會公德 人格尊嚴(yán)　出處：《華中科技大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著生物技術(shù)的不斷發(fā)展創(chuàng)新,專利制度中專利法保護(hù)的客體范圍不斷地受到?jīng)_擊和挑戰(zhàn)。人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)技術(shù)的發(fā)展,給人類醫(yī)學(xué)帶來了不可估量的影響,各國都予以了極大的重視。但是,在傳統(tǒng)的專利制度中,基于倫理道德等因素的考量,人類胚胎干細(xì)胞的相關(guān)發(fā)明被明確的排除在專利保護(hù)客體范圍之外,以至于許多與人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)的技術(shù)發(fā)明都得不到專利保護(hù)。2012年8月,國際干細(xì)胞公司因兩項(xiàng)涉及孤雌生殖人類胚胎干細(xì)胞的技術(shù)因?yàn)闆]有獲得英國專利局的授權(quán)而提起了訴訟。孤雌生殖人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)技術(shù)的出現(xiàn),使得人們不得不再一次重新審視專利制度中關(guān)于專利保護(hù)客體的規(guī)定。本文即是圍繞這一問題,從是否有必要設(shè)置公序良俗條款、“社會公德”內(nèi)涵的不斷變化、公民生命健康權(quán)與人格尊嚴(yán)利益權(quán)衡、授權(quán)是否會損害人格尊嚴(yán)、我國干細(xì)胞產(chǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展需要五個(gè)角度展開討論,最后得出孤雌生殖人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明在我國具有專利適格性這一結(jié)論。本文共七章,可分為三個(gè)部分。第一部分為第一章至第五章。第一章主要介紹了論文選題的由來、國內(nèi)外關(guān)于人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)的研究現(xiàn)狀以及本文的研究思路方法、重難點(diǎn)和創(chuàng)新點(diǎn);第二章從案情、爭議焦點(diǎn)以及審理情況簡單介紹了孤雌生殖人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明專利授權(quán)爭議第一案;第三章介紹了人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)技術(shù)的一些基本概念以及孤雌生殖人類胚胎干細(xì)胞研究的特點(diǎn)和價(jià)值;第四章主要考察世界各國對于人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明的立法比較研究,選取了比較有代表性的美國模式和歐盟模式作簡要介紹;第五章則是梳理和概括了我國目前對于人類胚胎干細(xì)胞研究的專利立法現(xiàn)狀和管理對策;以上幾個(gè)部分均是為下文的論述作鋪墊。第二部分是本文的第六章,同時(shí)也是本文最重要最核心的一章。在以前文五章作為基礎(chǔ)和鋪墊的前提下,從專利法中是否有必要設(shè)置公序良俗條款、“社會公德”內(nèi)涵的不斷變化、生命健康權(quán)與人格尊嚴(yán)之間的法益權(quán)衡、授予此類技術(shù)是否會損害人格尊嚴(yán)以及我國干細(xì)胞產(chǎn)業(yè)的發(fā)展需要五個(gè)不同層次和角度論述了此類技術(shù)應(yīng)該具有專利適格性。第三部分也就是本文的最后一章。在明確了孤雌生殖人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明在我國具有專利適格性的基礎(chǔ)上,提出了對于《專利審查指南》的一些修改建議以及我國對于人類胚胎干細(xì)胞研究應(yīng)采取的立場。
[Abstract]:With the continuous development and innovation of biotechnology, the scope of the object protected by patent law in the patent system is constantly challenged and challenged. The development of human embryonic stem cell related technology has brought incalculable influence to human medicine. However, in the traditional patent system, due to the consideration of ethical and moral factors, the invention of human embryonic stem cells is explicitly excluded from the scope of patent protection. So many of the technological inventions related to human embryonic stem cells are not patented. International Stem Cell Corporation has filed a lawsuit over two technologies involving parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cells for lack of authorization from the British Patent Office. Technology related to parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cells has emerged. So that people have to re-examine the provisions of patent system on the object of patent protection. This article is around this issue, from whether it is necessary to set up the public order good custom clause, "social morality" connotation of continuous change, The development of stem cell industry in China needs to be discussed from five angles: the right to life and health of citizens and the interests of human dignity, and whether authorization will impair human dignity. Finally, it is concluded that the invention related to parthenogenesis human embryonic stem cells has patent suitability in China. This paper consists of seven chapters, which can be divided into three parts. The first part is from Chapter one to Chapter 5th. The first chapter mainly introduces the origin of the thesis. At home and abroad on the human embryonic stem cell related research status and research ideas and methods of this paper, important difficulties and innovations. Chapter two from the case, The focus of the dispute and the trial situation briefly introduced the first case concerning patent authorization of parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cells. The third chapter introduces some basic concepts of human embryonic stem cell technology and the characteristics and value of parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cell research. Chapter 4th mainly reviews the comparative research on the legislation of human embryonic stem cell (ESC) related inventions in the world, and introduces the representative American model and the EU model. Chapter 5th is to sort out and summarize the current status of patent legislation and management strategies for human embryonic stem cell research in China; the above parts are all for the discussion below. The second part is the 6th chapter of this paper. At the same time, it is also the most important and core chapter of this paper. Under the premise of the previous five chapters as the foundation and foundation, whether it is necessary to set up the public order and good custom clause in the patent law, the connotation of "social public morality" is constantly changing. The balance of legal benefits between the right to life and human dignity, Whether granting this kind of technology will impair human dignity and the development of stem cell industry in China need five different levels and angles to discuss that this technology should be patented. The third part is the last chapter of this paper. On the basis of making clear that the invention of parthenogenetic human embryonic stem cell has patent suitability in our country, Some amendments to Patent Review Guide and our country's position on the research of human embryonic stem cells are put forward.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號】：D923.42

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 范長軍;李波;;人類胚胎干細(xì)胞技術(shù)的可專利性——?dú)W洲法院Brüstle v. Greenpeace e.V.專利案述評[J];科技與法律;2014年03期

2 王利明;;民法上的利益位階及其考量[J];法學(xué)家;2014年01期

3 唐華東;王大鵬;;對我國人胚胎干細(xì)胞專利法律保護(hù)的思考[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2013年05期

4 劉李棟;;淺析我國人胚胎干細(xì)胞發(fā)明的可專利性[J];醫(yī)院管理論壇;2013年04期

5 劉曉楓;陳志偉;;人類胚胎及胎兒的法律地位分析[J];科技與法律;2011年03期

6 趙宏;;限制的限制:德國基本權(quán)利限制模式的內(nèi)在機(jī)理[J];法學(xué)家;2011年02期

7 肇旭;;英國人類胚胎干細(xì)胞研究法律規(guī)制述評[J];東北師大學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2011年01期

8 何敏;肇旭;;WARF胚胎干細(xì)胞專利復(fù)審案分析[J];科技與法律;2008年05期

9 胡波;;專利法的倫理基礎(chǔ)——以生物技術(shù)專利問題為例證[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;2008年02期

10 ;人類胚胎干細(xì)胞研究的倫理準(zhǔn)則(建議稿)[J];醫(yī)學(xué)與哲學(xué);2003年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 黃越;論人類胚胎干細(xì)胞發(fā)明的可專利性[D];華中科技大學(xué);2012年

2 劉李棟;人胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明的可專利性[D];上海交通大學(xué);2012年

3 韋東;人胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明可專利性研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

4 朱瀗;初探人類胚胎干細(xì)胞相關(guān)發(fā)明的專利性[D];華東政法大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號：1554336