本文選題：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：懲罰性損害賠償　出處：《遼寧大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：現(xiàn)階段我國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)案件仍屢見不鮮、頻繁發(fā)生,與此同時(shí)暴露出我國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)機(jī)制存在的諸多缺陷和問題。懲罰性賠償制度的適用能夠有效遏制侵權(quán)行為,全面彌補(bǔ)受害人的損失,是解決該問題的重要手段。2014年5月施行的新《商標(biāo)法》第六十三條增添了對(duì)情節(jié)嚴(yán)重且主觀存在惡意的侵權(quán)行為能夠予以懲罰性賠償?shù)囊?guī)定,懲罰性賠償金依據(jù)補(bǔ)償性損害賠償中的受害人所受的利益虧損、侵權(quán)人非法得利、商標(biāo)許可使用費(fèi)的倍數(shù)該三種方式之一的一倍以上三倍以下來確定,標(biāo)志了懲罰性賠償制度的正式引入。同時(shí),《著作權(quán)法》第三次修正草案送審稿、《專利法》第四次修訂建議稿也對(duì)該制度進(jìn)行了規(guī)定。毋庸置疑,懲罰性賠償制度將發(fā)揮重要的影響作用。然而,我國學(xué)術(shù)界、實(shí)務(wù)界對(duì)于該制度的適用條件、參考因素、賠償額度等基本問題仍爭(zhēng)論不已,研究不夠全面、深入、系統(tǒng),特別是在司法實(shí)踐運(yùn)用的討論不足,以致于法官在具體運(yùn)用時(shí)困難重重,影響裁判的效率和結(jié)果。因此,深入、系統(tǒng)地考察商標(biāo)權(quán)、專利權(quán)、著作權(quán)侵權(quán)懲罰性損害賠償制度,分析制度的正當(dāng)性、合理性,為我國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的立法和司法提供理論支撐,這是當(dāng)前知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界面臨的十分緊迫而重要的任務(wù)。本文從我國知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法引入懲罰性賠償制度的價(jià)值目的角度為切入點(diǎn),首先明確其適用源于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)自身的無形性、可復(fù)制性的權(quán)利特點(diǎn),分析知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)目前在補(bǔ)償性賠償制度下存在諸多問題,闡明懲罰性賠償制度能夠解決這些缺陷問題,之后探討了該制度的引入符合現(xiàn)代侵權(quán)責(zé)任法“社會(huì)本位”的法理基礎(chǔ)。其次,論文重點(diǎn)剖析了知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)懲罰性賠償制度當(dāng)前的立法狀況及存在的不足,追根溯源,找到癥結(jié)所在。最后,借鑒其他國家相關(guān)先進(jìn)立法,結(jié)合我國具體國情,探究出完善該制度的具體方法,即在專利權(quán)和著作權(quán)侵權(quán)領(lǐng)域擴(kuò)大對(duì)該制度的適用,明確構(gòu)成要件,對(duì)于懲罰性賠償金列舉了確定時(shí)考慮的因素和具體的計(jì)算方式,以期通過以上措施完善制度,進(jìn)而達(dá)到遏制侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)行為,保護(hù)受害人利益的最終目的。
[Abstract]:At present, the cases of intellectual property infringement in our country are still common and frequent. At the same time, many defects and problems exist in the mechanism of intellectual property protection in our country are exposed. The application of punitive damages system can effectively curb the infringement. To make up for the loss of the victim is an important means to solve the problem. The new Trademark Law (63th), which was implemented in May 2014, has added the provision that punitive damages can be awarded for the serious and subjective malicious infringement. The punitive damages shall be determined on the basis of the loss of benefits suffered by the victims of compensatory damages, the illegal enrichment of the infringers, and the multiple of the trademark licensing fees by one to three times of the above three methods. It marks the formal introduction of the punitive damages system. At the same time, the third revision draft of the copyright Law and the 4th revised and proposed draft of the Patent Law also provide for this system. The punitive damages system will play an important role. However, the academic and practical circles of our country still argue over the basic issues of the system's application conditions, reference factors, compensation quotas, and so on, and the research is not comprehensive, thorough and systematic. Especially in the judicial practice the discussion of the application is insufficient, so that the judge has many difficulties in the concrete application, which affects the efficiency and result of the judge. Therefore, the system of punitive damages for trademark right, patent right, copyright infringement is thoroughly and systematically investigated. Analyzing the legitimacy and rationality of the system provides theoretical support for the legislation and judicature of intellectual property protection in China. This is an urgent and important task facing the intellectual property theorists and practitioners. First of all, it is clear that its application originates from the intangible and replicable characteristics of intellectual property rights, analyzes many problems existing in the current compensatory compensation system of intellectual property rights, and clarifies that the punitive damages system can solve these defects. Then it discusses the legal basis of the introduction of the system in line with the "social standard" of the modern tort liability law. Secondly, the paper focuses on analyzing the current legislative situation and existing deficiencies of the punitive damages system of intellectual property rights, and tracing back to the source. Finally, draw lessons from the relevant advanced legislation of other countries, combined with the specific conditions of our country, explore the specific ways to improve the system, that is, in the field of patent rights and copyright infringement to expand the application of the system, clear elements, In order to perfect the system through the above measures, the author enumerates the factors and the concrete calculation methods of determining punitive damages in order to curb the infringement of intellectual property rights and protect the interests of the victims.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 周曉冰;;建立知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)損害賠償?shù)摹白畲蟪潭却_定”規(guī)則(待續(xù))[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2008年09期

2 楊立新;;法官適用《侵權(quán)責(zé)任法》應(yīng)當(dāng)著重把握的幾個(gè)問題[J];法律適用;2010年Z1期

3 王衛(wèi)國;中國消費(fèi)者保護(hù)法上的欺詐行為與懲罰性賠償[J];法學(xué);1998年03期

4 張新寶;李倩;;懲罰性賠償?shù)牧⒎ㄟx擇[J];清華法學(xué);2009年04期

5 吳漢東;關(guān)于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)私權(quán)屬性的再認(rèn)識(shí)——兼評(píng)“知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)公權(quán)化”理論[J];社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年10期

6 鄭成思;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任、損害賠償責(zé)任與知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)[J];中國專利與商標(biāo);2004年01期

7 郭明瑞;張平華;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任法中的懲罰性賠償問題[J];中國人民大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

8 胡海容;雷云;;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)適用懲罰性賠償?shù)氖桥c非——從法經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)角度解讀[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2011年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 余藝;懲罰性賠償研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 張金強(qiáng);論專利侵權(quán)的損害賠償責(zé)任[D];吉林大學(xué);2006年

2 張慶會(huì);我國專利侵權(quán)懲罰性賠償制度研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1590407