本文選題：知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位 + 知識產(chǎn)權權利濫用　； 參考：《大連海事大學》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：知識產(chǎn)權旨在提高整個社會的公共利益的法律制度,自其誕生之時便與“壟斷”產(chǎn)生了互為依存之關系。在市場經(jīng)濟中,知識產(chǎn)權保護和反壟斷法兩者之間既存在著目標上的一致性,又存在著實施過程的沖突性。 知識產(chǎn)權具有一定的壟斷性,它既能根據(jù)法律規(guī)定給權利人帶來經(jīng)濟利益,同時也存在被權利人濫用的風險,并且這種濫用往往讓權利人在市場競爭排斥、限制競爭從而獲得壟斷性的利益。隨著改革開放的不斷深入,很多外國企業(yè)利用我國知識產(chǎn)權法律環(huán)境不健全的情況,通過搭售、拒絕許可、價格歧視、超高定價等不當手段,通過其擁有的市場支配地位,限制受讓方和第三方在技術許可使用、技術轉讓等領域的只有競爭地位,嚴重的危害到我國民族工業(yè)的發(fā)展以及產(chǎn)業(yè)升級,同時也損害市場相對主體消費者的切身利益。但是,《反壟斷法》出臺較晚,針對知識產(chǎn)權的規(guī)定僅有第55條,少之甚少,與知識產(chǎn)權有關的反壟斷執(zhí)法指南雖已經(jīng)研究到第五稿,但是正式出臺的時間還不明晰。 筆者在本文中通過對知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位及相關要素的分析和界定,以及對于如何進行反壟斷規(guī)制內容的研究,希望能夠精細化我國反壟斷法在知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位方面的執(zhí)法,通過學習和借鑒國際立法和司法實踐,為中國的知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位的反壟斷規(guī)制提出少許的完善建議。 本文共分五章展開：第一章通過對于知識產(chǎn)權法與反壟斷法之間的關系以及我國在知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位反壟斷法規(guī)制中存在的問題來介紹我國知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位反壟斷法規(guī)制的現(xiàn)狀；第二章著重介紹知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位形成的原因以及知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位的界定,希望通過這兩方面的介紹能夠給本文的分析奠定理論基礎；第三章通過對于美國、歐盟和日本知識產(chǎn)權反壟斷領域規(guī)制立法以及規(guī)制實踐的簡要介紹,給我國知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位反壟斷法規(guī)制予以參考；第四章將知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位反壟斷法規(guī)制和知識產(chǎn)權權利濫用的進行比較,明確市場支配地位與知識產(chǎn)權權利濫用的區(qū)別與聯(lián)系；第五章從立法方式、相關市場界定、知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位濫用的認定標準以及制定知識產(chǎn)權反壟斷執(zhí)法指南建議等方面對我國立法規(guī)制提出了完善建議。
[Abstract]:The legal system of intellectual property, which aims to improve the public interest of the whole society, has been interdependent with "monopoly" since its birth. In the market economy, the intellectual property rights protection and the anti-monopoly law both have the consistency on the goal and the conflict of the implementation process. Intellectual property rights have a certain monopoly, it can bring economic benefits to the right holders according to the law, but also has the risk of abuse by the right holders, and this abuse often makes the right holders to compete and exclude in the market. Limit competition and gain monopoly benefits. With the continuous deepening of reform and opening up, many foreign enterprises take advantage of the imperfect legal environment of intellectual property rights in our country, through improper means such as tying up, refusing permission, price discrimination, ultra-high pricing and so on, through their dominant position in the market. Restricting the transferee and the third party in the fields of technology license and technology transfer has only competitive position, which seriously endangers the development and upgrading of our national industry, and at the same time damages the vital interests of the market relative to the main consumers. However, the Anti-monopoly Law was issued relatively late, the provisions for intellectual property are only the 55th, very few. Although the guide of anti-monopoly law enforcement related to intellectual property has been studied to the fifth draft, but the time of its formal release is not clear. In this paper, the author analyzes and defines the dominant position of the intellectual property market and related elements, as well as the research on how to carry out the content of anti-monopoly regulation. It is hoped that the law enforcement of China's anti-monopoly law on the dominant position of intellectual property market can be refined. By studying and drawing lessons from international legislation and judicial practice, some suggestions are put forward for the anti-monopoly regulation of the dominant position of China's intellectual property market. The first chapter introduces the relationship between intellectual property law and antimonopoly law, and the problems existing in the regulation of China's dominant position in the intellectual property market. The status quo of anti-monopoly law; The second chapter focuses on the formation of the dominant position of the intellectual property market and the definition of the dominant position of the intellectual property market, hoping that the introduction of these two aspects can lay a theoretical foundation for the analysis of this paper. This paper briefly introduces the legislation and practice of anti-monopoly regulation in the field of intellectual property rights in EU and Japan, and gives a reference to the regulation of anti-monopoly law on the dominant position of intellectual property market in China. The fourth chapter compares the dominant position of intellectual property market with the abuse of intellectual property rights, and clarifies the difference and relation between market dominant position and abuse of intellectual property rights. This paper puts forward some suggestions on the legislative regulation of our country from the aspects of identifying standards for abuse of dominant position in the intellectual property market and formulating guidelines for antimonopoly enforcement of intellectual property rights.
【學位授予單位】：大連海事大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：D923.4;D922.294

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 王先林;;濫用市場支配地位與知識產(chǎn)權[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2007年07期

2 高靜;;試析知識產(chǎn)權濫用的反壟斷法規(guī)制——從搭售的角度分析[J];法制與社會;2009年29期

3 龍柯宇;;知識產(chǎn)權壟斷性檢討[J];法制與社會;2013年10期

4 鄭鵬程;美國反壟斷法“本身違法”與“合理法則”適用范圍探討[J];河北法學;2005年10期

5 陳曉波,徐云國,周亞夫,公丕祥;美國反壟斷法及其政策述評[J];江蘇社會科學;1996年05期

6 宋河發(fā);;知識產(chǎn)權壟斷及其對我國技術引進的影響[J];科技與法律;2006年01期

7 龍柯宇;;價格域濫用知識產(chǎn)權市場支配地位的反壟斷研究[J];現(xiàn)代經(jīng)濟探討;2013年05期

8 王秀玲;;反壟斷法中的濫用市場支配地位制度研究[J];青海社會科學;2010年01期

9 王東民;;知識產(chǎn)權反壟斷法律規(guī)制中的市場支配力[J];河南省政法管理干部學院學報;2009年02期

10 劉源;;論我國知識產(chǎn)權領域中的反壟斷法律制度[J];鄖陽師范高等專科學校學報;2008年02期

，

本文編號：1813873