本文關(guān)鍵詞：中國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)審判技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度研究　出處：《廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

  更多相關(guān)文章： 技術(shù)事實(shí)查明途徑 技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度 知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法院

【摘要】：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)案件具有較強(qiáng)的專業(yè)性,往往是技術(shù)問(wèn)題與法律問(wèn)題交織在一起,而技術(shù)事實(shí)之審查是正確適用法律的前提,但是我國(guó)法官中的大多數(shù)不具有相關(guān)的學(xué)科背景。目前,我國(guó)技術(shù)事實(shí)查明的途徑主要有司法鑒定、專家輔助人、專家咨詢、專家陪審員。最高人民法院頒布《最高人民法院關(guān)于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法院技術(shù)調(diào)查官參與訴訟活動(dòng)若干問(wèn)題的暫行規(guī)定》,知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)審判技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度建立起來(lái)。我國(guó)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度主要借鑒日本技術(shù)調(diào)查官、德國(guó)技術(shù)法官和臺(tái)灣技術(shù)審查官。由于我國(guó)是初次建立此制度,還有很多不完善之處,日本、德國(guó)、臺(tái)灣規(guī)定已相對(duì)成熟,研究他們的制度規(guī)定,有利于我國(guó)制度的完善。技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度與其他幾種技術(shù)事實(shí)查明制度都是幫助法官查明技術(shù)事實(shí),但是幾種制度有著許多不同之處,他們之間的關(guān)系該何去何從值得研究。發(fā)現(xiàn)我國(guó)技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度的不足之處,結(jié)合域外做法和三地知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法院的司法實(shí)踐,提出切實(shí)可行并符合我國(guó)國(guó)情的技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度是本論文的研究重點(diǎn)。
[Abstract]:Intellectual property cases have a strong professional, often technical issues and legal issues intertwined, and the examination of technical facts is the premise of the correct application of the law. However, most of the judges in our country do not have the relevant subject background. At present, the main ways to find out the technical facts in our country are judicial identification, expert assistant, expert consultation. Expert jurors. The Supreme people's Court promulgated the interim provisions of the Supreme people's Court on certain issues concerning the participation of Technical Investigative officers in intellectual property Courts in Litigation activities. The system of intellectual property judicial technology investigator has been established. The intellectual property technology investigation officer system of our country mainly draws lessons from Japanese technology investigator. Technical judges in Germany and technical examiners in Taiwan. As China is the first time to establish this system, there are still many imperfections, Japan, Germany, Taiwan regulations have been relatively mature, study their system provisions. It is beneficial to the perfection of the system of our country. The system of technical investigation officer and several other systems of technical facts are all to help the judge to find out the technical facts, but there are many differences between the several systems. The relationship between them is worthy of study. Find out the shortcomings of the system of technical investigators in China, combining the extraterritorial approach and the judicial practice of the three intellectual property courts. It is the focus of this paper to put forward a feasible and suitable system of technical surveyors in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：D923.4

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條

1 黃琨;論我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)審判中技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度的再造[D];河北經(jīng)貿(mào)大學(xué);2016年

2 賀偉;專利訴訟中技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2016年

3 竇川;中國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)審判技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度研究[D];廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué);2016年

4 蔣竹婷;關(guān)于我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法院技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度思考[D];廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué);2016年

5 竇川;中國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)審判技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度研究[D];廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué);2016年

6 蔣竹婷;關(guān)于我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法院技術(shù)調(diào)查官制度思考[D];廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué);2016年

，

本文編號(hào)：1439999