本文選題：知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動 + 公示效力��； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：知識產(chǎn)權(quán)是權(quán)利主體依法享有的對權(quán)利客體支配性的權(quán)利。知識產(chǎn)權(quán)可以基于法律行為與非法律行為產(chǎn)生權(quán)利變動,基于非法律行為的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動一般不涉及第三人的交易安全而無需公示。但基于法律行為的權(quán)利變動一般涉及第三人的交易安全與交易效率,必須通過以某種方式向公眾予以公示。知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動的公示效力是指潛在的交易主體基于公示的權(quán)利狀態(tài)所為的交易應(yīng)該受法律保護的效力,其價值在保護交易安全與提升交易效率。我國《專利法》、《商標(biāo)法》與《著作權(quán)法》對權(quán)利變動公示效力有不同的制度安排�！秾＠ā穼＠D(zhuǎn)讓與許可采用不同的公示效力,專利轉(zhuǎn)讓采用登記生效效力,而專利許可的公示效力立法未予以明確;《商標(biāo)法》對商標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓采用登記生效效力,對商標(biāo)許可采用登記對抗效力;《著作權(quán)法》對著作權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓和許可均采用意思主義,無公示效力的規(guī)定。我國現(xiàn)行立法對不同的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)以及相同的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)的許可與轉(zhuǎn)讓等變動方式采非一體化公示效力的安排。這種對公示效力非一體化的制度安排,導(dǎo)致相同性質(zhì)權(quán)利變動的公示效力不同,同樣的權(quán)利沒有同樣的制度安排,理論上不符合法律體系化的要求;在實踐中公眾需要熟悉三種不同制度安排,交易主體難以適從,提高交易成本,不利于提升交易效率。應(yīng)該通過立法的修訂對知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動公示效力進行一體化的制度安排,鑒于知識產(chǎn)權(quán)對象無體性的特征與著作權(quán)的自動取得,知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動公示效力一體化的制度安排應(yīng)統(tǒng)一調(diào)整為公示對抗效力,《專利法》、《商標(biāo)法》、《著作權(quán)法》以及《物權(quán)法》的具體相關(guān)規(guī)定予以調(diào)整。
[Abstract]:Intellectual property right is the right that the subject of right enjoys according to law to the object of right.Intellectual property rights can be changed on the basis of legal acts and non-legal acts. The changes of intellectual property rights based on non-legal acts generally do not involve the transaction security of the third party and need not be publicized.However, the change of rights based on legal act generally involves the transaction security and transaction efficiency of the third party, and must be publicized to the public in some way.The publicizing effect of intellectual property change refers to the effect that the potential transaction subject should be protected by law on the basis of publicizing the right state, and its value is to protect the transaction security and enhance the transaction efficiency.China's Patent Law, the Trademark Law and the copyright Law have different institutional arrangements for the publicity of changes in rights. The Patent Law applies different publicity effects to the transfer and licensing of patents, and the registration takes effect for the transfer of patents.However, the legislation on the publicity effect of patent license is not clear; the Trademark Law adopts the effective effect of registration on the transfer of trademark, and the effectiveness of registration against the trademark license; the copyright Law adopts the doctrine of will on the transfer and license of copyright.A provision that has no publicity effect.The current legislation of our country adopts the arrangement of non-integration publicity effect to different intellectual property rights and the same intellectual property rights license and transfer.This kind of institutional arrangement which does not integrate the publicity effect leads to the change of the same nature rights. The same rights do not have the same institutional arrangements. In theory they do not meet the requirements of legal systematization.In practice, the public needs to be familiar with three different institutional arrangements.In view of the characteristics of the object of intellectual property rights and the automatic acquisition of copyright, we should make an integrated institutional arrangement on the effect of public announcement of changes in intellectual property rights through legislative amendments.The institutional arrangement of the integration of the publicity effect of the change of intellectual property rights should be unified and adjusted to the effectiveness of public demonstration and confrontation, and the relevant provisions of the Patent Law, the Trademark Law, the copyright Law and the property Law shall be adjusted.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湘潭大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.2

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 寧立志;盛賽賽;;論專利許可與專利轉(zhuǎn)讓的對抗與繼受[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2015年07期

2 梅鋒;;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動登記效力模式探析——以專利權(quán)為例[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2012年02期

3 汪曉華;;論著作權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓變動模式[J];青島農(nóng)業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2011年03期

4 彭學(xué)龍;;商標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓的理論建構(gòu)與制度設(shè)計[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2011年03期

5 蘇平;;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)變動模式研究[J];法商研究;2011年02期

6 郭鵬;;設(shè)立著作權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓登記對抗制度的必要性——以著作權(quán)質(zhì)押融資為視角[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(下旬刊);2009年12期

7 何煥鋒;;著作權(quán)公示制度探析[J];山東社會科學(xué);2009年11期

8 崔文星;;論物權(quán)公示及其效力[J];大連海事大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2008年03期

9 李楊;;著作權(quán)公示的制度解讀及效力重塑[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2008年05期

10 于宏偉;物權(quán)變動模式之選擇與交易安全[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報;2005年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 孫楠;注冊商標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓公示制度研究[D];湖南大學(xué);2013年

2 李春旭;權(quán)利質(zhì)權(quán)公示制度研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2011年

3 呂媛;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)公示制度研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1753873