【摘要】：專利與早期的技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不具有必然聯(lián)系。標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化組織從防止專利侵權(quán)與降低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的推廣成本目的出發(fā),盡可能避免將專利納入技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中。但20世紀(jì)90年代以后,科技的發(fā)展使越來越多的高新技術(shù)成果被授予專利,標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化組織在制定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)時(shí)要繞開專利變得異常困難。將專利納入技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn),隨著標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的廣泛實(shí)施,專利權(quán)人通常獲得了事實(shí)上的市場(chǎng)支配地位。因此,在技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定和實(shí)施過程中,經(jīng)專利權(quán)人同意甚至專利權(quán)人直接參與到標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定中,將專利納入標(biāo)準(zhǔn)以追求利益的最大化。此后相對(duì)人實(shí)施標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的行為,又通常被專利權(quán)人認(rèn)為侵犯專利權(quán)利而起訴,標(biāo)準(zhǔn)實(shí)施人應(yīng)訴時(shí)提出專利默示許可作為抗辯理由。基于專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化發(fā)生的訴訟與抗辯,解決案件的難點(diǎn)在于究竟應(yīng)認(rèn)定侵犯專利權(quán)還是認(rèn)定構(gòu)成專利默示許可。但是,我國(guó)現(xiàn)有專利法律法規(guī)中尚未將默示許可視為不侵犯專利權(quán)的抗辯理由。因此,我們需要在現(xiàn)行的專利政策、理論以及法律框架內(nèi)尋找更好的解決途徑。本文認(rèn)為,在國(guó)際、國(guó)內(nèi)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化盛行的大背景下,研究基于專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化情形下默示許可法律規(guī)則的適用,能夠?yàn)閷＠稍谶m宜我國(guó)國(guó)情下的制度變革提供選擇。因此,本文對(duì)專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的默示許可法律問題進(jìn)行了研究。正文共分技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定中專利默示許可概述、比較法視角的默示許可制度、我國(guó)專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的默示許可立法和實(shí)踐分析及其規(guī)則構(gòu)建四個(gè)部分:在本文的第一部分,針對(duì)技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定中專利默示許可概述,說明專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化對(duì)許可的影響以及此情形適用默示許可規(guī)則的必要性。第二部分探討的是比較法視角的專利默示許可制度。由于英國(guó)、德國(guó)、美國(guó)是專利默示許可理論起源較早,發(fā)展較為完善的國(guó)家。本部分通過借鑒研究英、德、美三國(guó)默示許可制度的起源和發(fā)展,為我國(guó)默示許可制度尋找理論支持,幫助解決專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化下實(shí)施許可的法律難題。第三部分是本文的重點(diǎn),該部分闡述了我國(guó)關(guān)于專利默示許可的立法現(xiàn)狀和發(fā)展趨勢(shì)以及審判現(xiàn)狀。首先,闡述和肯定了基于技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化情形將默示許可納入侵權(quán)抗辯理由在法規(guī)層面上的發(fā)展進(jìn)步,認(rèn)為隨著理論研究不斷深入和司法實(shí)踐的發(fā)展需要,將默示許可制度納入專利法律法規(guī)之中僅是時(shí)機(jī)問題。其次,也正視我國(guó)面臨的司法困境:即使訴訟中基于專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化主張默示許可的情形逐漸增多,國(guó)內(nèi)專利法相關(guān)的明文法令仍無跡可尋,審判實(shí)踐亦在探索與進(jìn)步中未臻成熟,立法層面的欠缺加重了審判的不確定性。第四部分是本文的最后一部分,是我國(guó)專利技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化的默示許可規(guī)則構(gòu)建部分,探討了技術(shù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定中專利默示許可的法律適用問題,提出了我國(guó)相關(guān)法律規(guī)范立法完善的建議。
[Abstract]:Patents are not necessarily related to early technical standards. In order to prevent patent infringement and reduce the cost of standard promotion, ISO avoids the incorporation of patent into technical standard as far as possible. However, since 1990s, more and more new and high-tech achievements have been granted patents with the development of science and technology. Patents are incorporated into technical standards, and as standards are widely applied, patentees usually gain de facto market dominance. Therefore, in the process of making and implementing the technical standard, the patentee agrees and even the patentee directly participates in the establishment of the standard, and brings the patent into the standard in order to pursue the maximization of the benefit. Thereafter, the act of enforcing the standard by the relative party is usually sued by the patentee for infringement of the patent right, and the standard implementer puts forward the patent implied license as the defense when responding to the suit. Based on the litigation and defense of patent technology standardization, the difficulty of solving cases lies in whether patent infringement or patent implied license should be recognized. However, the implied license has not been regarded as the defense of patent right infringement in the current patent laws and regulations of our country. Therefore, we need to find a better solution within the current patent policy, theory and legal framework. This paper holds that, under the background of the prevalence of international and domestic technology standardization, the study on the application of implied licensing rules based on patent technology standardization can provide an option for patent law to be reformed in a system suitable for China's national conditions. Therefore, this paper has carried on the research to the patent technology standardization implied license legal question. The text is divided into four parts: the outline of patent implied licensing in the formulation of technical standards, the implied licensing system from the perspective of comparative law, the legislation and practice analysis of patent technology standardization in China and the construction of its rules: in the first part of this paper, In view of the outline of patent implied licensing in technical standard making, this paper explains the impact of patent technology standardization on licensing and the necessity of applying implied licensing rules in this situation. The second part discusses the patent implied licensing system from the perspective of comparative law. Because of England, Germany and America, patent implied license theory originated earlier and developed well. By studying the origin and development of implied licensing system in Britain, Germany and the United States, this part seeks theoretical support for China's implied licensing system and helps to solve the legal problems of licensing under patent technology standardization. The third part is the focus of this paper, this part expounds the legislation and development trend of patent implied license and the current situation of trial in China. First of all, the paper expounds and affirms the development and progress of tacit license in tort defense on the basis of technology standardization, and holds that with the deepening of theoretical research and the need of the development of judicial practice, It is only a matter of timing to bring the implied license system into patent laws and regulations. Secondly, we should also face up to the judicial dilemma in our country: even though the cases of implied licensing based on patent technology standardization in litigation are gradually increasing, there is still no trace of the explicit laws and decrees related to domestic patent law. Trial practice is not mature in exploration and progress, and the lack of legislation exacerbates the uncertainty of trial. The fourth part is the last part of this paper, which is the construction of implied licensing rules of patent technology standardization in China, and discusses the legal application of patent implied licensing in the formulation of technical standards. Some suggestions are put forward to perfect the relevant laws and regulations of our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.42

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王棟;;基于網(wǎng)絡(luò)搜索服務(wù)的默示許可制度研究[J];民辦教育研究;2010年02期

2 王棟;;基于網(wǎng)絡(luò)搜索服務(wù)的默示許可制度研究[J];常熟理工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年01期

3 袁真富;;基于侵權(quán)抗辯之專利默示許可探究[J];法學(xué);2010年12期

4 郭威;;默示許可在版權(quán)法中的演進(jìn)與趨勢(shì)[J];東方法學(xué);2012年03期

5 鹿海燕;;淺析專利默示許可制度[J];社科縱橫(新理論版);2013年02期

6 浩然;王國(guó)柱;;意思表示理論對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)默示許可制度的支撐[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年05期

7 林貴苗;;專利默示許可探析[J];哈爾濱學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年10期

8 葉挺舟;;專利默示許可適用條件探析[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2013年05期

9 趙莉;質(zhì)疑網(wǎng)絡(luò)版權(quán)中“默示許可”的法律地位[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2003年12期

10 房鵬;;論建立我國(guó)專利訴訟的默示許可制度[J];山東審判;2010年06期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前4條

1 袁真富;;專利默示許可制度研究[A];專利法研究（2010）[C];2011年

2 董美根;;論專利默示許可——以對(duì)專利產(chǎn)品合理期待使用為目標(biāo)[A];專利法研究（2010）[C];2011年

3 黃姝;;沉默是“金”?——論標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的專利默示許可[A];探索社會(huì)主義司法規(guī)律與完善民商事法律制度研究——全國(guó)法院第23屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄏ拢C];2011年

4 路聰;;著作權(quán)默示許可制度研究[A];提升知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)服務(wù)能力 促進(jìn)創(chuàng)新驅(qū)動(dòng)發(fā)展戰(zhàn)略——2014年中華全國(guó)專利代理人協(xié)會(huì)年會(huì)第五屆知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)論壇優(yōu)秀論文集[C];2014年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前5條

1 中國(guó)政法大學(xué)民商經(jīng)濟(jì)法學(xué)院 朱海嬌;規(guī)范默示許可能否解海量作品授權(quán)之困?[N];中國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)報(bào);2012年

2 周宇飛;應(yīng)當(dāng)正確理解“默示許可”制度[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2004年

3 本報(bào)記者　王曉雁;律師駁斥其并無法律依據(jù)[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2006年

4 劉寶恒;市場(chǎng)監(jiān)管機(jī)制的制度安排含義探析[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2004年

5 《法制日?qǐng)?bào)》記者 張昊;法官詳解微博知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)焦點(diǎn)問題[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 閆宏;專利默示許可規(guī)則探析[D];清華大學(xué);2007年

2 王曉蓓;版權(quán)法中默示許可適用案例研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

3 王瑋婧;網(wǎng)絡(luò)著作權(quán)侵權(quán)認(rèn)定中的默示許可研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

4 崔瀛;專利默示許可問題研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2012年

5 鄧麗星;專利默示許可制度研究[D];華中科技大學(xué);2012年

6 王琳瀧;我國(guó)著作權(quán)默示許可適用研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2013年

7 鄧媛茹;網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下著作權(quán)默示許可制度研究[D];中南大學(xué);2013年

8 運(yùn)敏敏;版權(quán)默示許可制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

9 郭丙乾;網(wǎng)絡(luò)環(huán)境下的著作權(quán)默示許可制度研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2014年

10 石磊;論專利默示許可的適用[D];北京化工大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：2299880