本文關(guān)鍵詞： 專利 拒絕許可 反壟斷 關(guān)鍵設(shè)施 專利池　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著中國經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展，知識產(chǎn)權(quán)在經(jīng)濟(jì)總量中的影響越來越大，知識產(chǎn)權(quán)相關(guān)的法律問題也凸顯出來。“德先案”、“DVD案”和“華為案”都涉及知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的法律問題，尤其與專利拒絕許可的反壟斷規(guī)制相關(guān)。中國市場企業(yè)面臨此類事件時，要么沒有合適的相關(guān)法律來保護(hù)自己，要么是相關(guān)法律過于原則導(dǎo)致無法給出明晰的指引，比如“德先案”涉及的infolithium技術(shù)是否構(gòu)成原告進(jìn)入相關(guān)市場所必需設(shè)施，被告拒絕許可是否構(gòu)成壟斷行為；“DVD案”專利池拒絕許可的合法性判斷；“華為案”拒絕許可的成立與否，拒絕許可的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)等。相關(guān)法律缺少規(guī)定或模糊的回應(yīng)都反映我國的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)反壟斷規(guī)制的立法缺陷。本文先導(dǎo)出當(dāng)前專利拒絕許可反壟斷的相關(guān)事件，分析指出我國專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制在立法上的缺陷，然后從利益平衡和權(quán)利不得濫用的法理分析專利拒絕許可反壟斷的必要性，介紹探析歐美的立法和實(shí)例以及專利拒絕許可反壟斷的比較分析，最后結(jié)合我國的實(shí)際，提出了相應(yīng)的建議。 第一章專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的立法缺陷。首先導(dǎo)出專利拒絕許可的“德先案”、“DVD案”和“華為案”事件，分別就上述案件提出我國專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的法律問題，然后對目前我國專利許可反壟斷規(guī)制的立法規(guī)定做梳理，最后指出我國專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制立法的不足，重點(diǎn)指出關(guān)鍵設(shè)施規(guī)則、專利池拒絕許可判斷原則和專利單方拒絕許可判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的缺失。 第二章專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的法理分析。該章首先從專利權(quán)、合同自由與反壟斷的一般理解，分析專利權(quán)的壟斷性和行使、合同自由和限制以及反壟斷法的價值和適用的視角探析專利權(quán)行使過程中靜態(tài)和動態(tài)關(guān)系，，指出專利權(quán)濫用的可能性，然后分析專利拒絕許可的反壟斷規(guī)制的法理依據(jù)，從專利制度本身具有利益平衡性質(zhì)和知識產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用的反壟斷規(guī)制說明利益平衡理論；從自由是相對的和反壟斷法規(guī)制的是壟斷行為而不是權(quán)利本身分析了權(quán)利不得濫用理論。 第三章歐美專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的分析。首先分別介紹了美國歐盟專利拒絕許可的反壟斷規(guī)制的立法情況，介紹和簡要分析了美國和歐盟的專利拒絕許可的案例和反壟斷規(guī)制的思路；然后從相關(guān)市場、市場支配地位和關(guān)鍵設(shè)施三個要素比較分析歐美專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的規(guī)則，最后介紹了專利池拒絕許可的分析方法。 第四章完善專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的法律建議。首先指出制定知識產(chǎn)權(quán)反壟斷指南的需要解決的問題，即結(jié)合中國市場實(shí)際和排除部門利益，然后提出就專利拒絕許可反壟斷規(guī)制的具體法律建議，以及建議統(tǒng)一執(zhí)法部門。
[Abstract]:With the development of Chinese economy, intellectual property has more and more influence in the total economic volume, and the legal problems related to intellectual property are also highlighted. Both the DVD case and the Huawei case deal with legal issues related to intellectual property abuse, especially in relation to antitrust regulations that deny licensing for patents. Chinese market companies face such incidents. Either there is no appropriate relevant law to protect themselves, or the relevant laws are too principled to give clear guidance. For example, whether the infolithium technology involved in the "Desen case" constitutes the necessary facilities for the plaintiff to enter the relevant market, and whether the defendant's refusal of permission constitutes a monopoly act; The legitimacy judgment of the patent pool refusing permission in "DVD case"; "Huawei case" denied the establishment or not. The judgment standard of refusing license and so on. The lack of regulation or vague response of relevant laws reflect the legislative defects of anti-monopoly regulation of intellectual property in China. The author points out the defects in the legislation of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license in China, and then analyzes the necessity of patent refusal to license antitrust from the legal principle of balance of interests and right not to be abused. This paper introduces the legislation and examples of Europe and the United States, and the comparative analysis of the anti-monopoly of patent refusal license. Finally, combined with the reality of our country, the corresponding suggestions are put forward. The first chapter is about the legislative defects of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license. Firstly, the "Deson case", "DVD case" and "Huawei case" of patent refusal license are derived. On the above mentioned cases, the author puts forward the legal issues of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license in China, and then combs the legislative provisions of anti-monopoly regulation of patent license in China. Finally, it points out the deficiency of the legislation of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license in our country, and points out the key facility rules, the judgment principle of patent pool refusal license and the lack of judgment standard of patent unilateral refusal license. The second chapter is the legal analysis of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license. Firstly, this chapter analyzes the monopoly and exercise of patent right from the general understanding of patent right, freedom of contract and anti-monopoly. From the perspective of freedom and limitation of contract and the value and application of anti-monopoly law, the paper analyzes the static and dynamic relationship in the process of patent right exercise, and points out the possibility of patent abuse. Then it analyzes the legal basis of the anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license and explains the theory of interest balance from the nature of the patent system itself and the abuse of intellectual property rights. This paper analyzes the theory of non-abuse of right from the view that freedom is relative and antimonopoly law regulates monopoly behavior rather than right itself. The third chapter analyzes the anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license in Europe and the United States. Firstly, it introduces the legislation of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license in the United States and the European Union. This paper introduces and briefly analyzes the cases of patent refusal and antitrust regulation in the United States and the European Union. Then the rules of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license in Europe and the United States are compared and analyzed from the relevant market, market dominant position and key facilities. Finally, the analysis method of patent pool refusing license is introduced. Chapter 4th perfect the legal suggestion of anti-monopoly regulation of patent refusal license. First of all, it points out the problems that need to be solved in formulating anti-monopoly guide of intellectual property, that is, combining the reality of Chinese market and excluding the interests of departments. Then it puts forward some specific legal suggestions on the regulation of patent refusal license, and proposes to unify the law enforcement department.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D922.294

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 葉顏斌;“入世”后中國專利保護(hù)壓力更大[J];w攣胖蕓

本文編號：1450409