【摘要】： 伴隨著科學(xué)技術(shù)的發(fā)展，知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)及其法律保護(hù)制度應(yīng)運(yùn)而生。知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則作為知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法律保護(hù)制度的核心問題，很有研究的必要。近幾年，理論界圍繞知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)歸責(zé)原則問題爭(zhēng)論不休，司法實(shí)踐中，，法官也往往因被控侵權(quán)方“無過錯(cuò)”的抗辯而陷入困惑與迷茫之中。我國(guó)《民法通則》的規(guī)定把過錯(cuò)原則以法律形式固定下來，確認(rèn)了它作為民法中侵權(quán)行為一般歸責(zé)原則的法律地位。我國(guó)幾部知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法對(duì)侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的行為進(jìn)行了列舉，但對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則沒有做出明確規(guī)定。 由于幾部知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法的規(guī)定不明確，在司法實(shí)踐中，法官對(duì)于當(dāng)事人關(guān)于過錯(cuò)的抗辯態(tài)度不一，形成一定程度的司法不統(tǒng)一。一方面損害了法制的統(tǒng)一，更重要的是導(dǎo)致了實(shí)質(zhì)的不公平，侵蝕了法律的正義性基石。正確處理知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)糾紛案件，關(guān)鍵是掌握知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任的歸責(zé)原則。筆者從知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)理論和實(shí)踐上對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任作了初步探討，試圖全面分析和認(rèn)識(shí)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則問題，對(duì)完善我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法律中的侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)體系進(jìn)行了思考并提出了自己的建議。 文章第一部分是對(duì)歸責(zé)原則的一般理論進(jìn)行了分析，從歸責(zé)原則的含義和意義開始，分析了歸責(zé)原則的適用范圍應(yīng)該是指所有的民事責(zé)任而不僅限于損害賠償責(zé)任。最后就我國(guó)法律中規(guī)定的歸責(zé)原則的體系和各個(gè)具體歸責(zé)原則進(jìn)行了分析和解析。 文章第二部分運(yùn)用分析比較的研究方法，首先對(duì)英美法系國(guó)家、大陸法系國(guó)家和TRIPS協(xié)議中有關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則進(jìn)行了分析，然后本章又從縱向比較了我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法最近一次修改前后關(guān)于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則的規(guī)定和趨勢(shì)以及存在問題。 文章第三部分論述我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)歸責(zé)原則的定位。從我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律規(guī)定過錯(cuò)責(zé)任是侵權(quán)責(zé)任的主要?dú)w責(zé)原則為切入點(diǎn)，分析了依過錯(cuò)責(zé)任原則認(rèn)定行為人承擔(dān)侵權(quán)責(zé)任存在的諸多問題，然后對(duì)我國(guó)理論界中學(xué)者們對(duì)我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)歸責(zé)原則的主要理論及其分歧原因進(jìn)行了分析和評(píng)價(jià)，最后對(duì)停止侵權(quán)等排除性責(zé)任的性質(zhì)進(jìn)行了分析并推出排除性責(zé)任的承擔(dān)適用無過錯(cuò)歸責(zé)原則，從而完成了知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則中引入無過錯(cuò)責(zé)任原則的法理分析。 文章第四部分從對(duì)我國(guó)有關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則立法和司法現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行分析和思考，最后對(duì)完善我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則體系提出了幾點(diǎn)建議：第一，認(rèn)為關(guān)于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)行為的認(rèn)定，法律應(yīng)明確規(guī)定與歸責(zé)原則無關(guān)，從而避免產(chǎn)生對(duì)歸責(zé)原則適用范圍包括知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)行為認(rèn)定的錯(cuò)誤認(rèn)識(shí)。第二，認(rèn)為法律應(yīng)當(dāng)明確規(guī)定對(duì)排除類責(zé)任適用無過錯(cuò)責(zé)任，但應(yīng)當(dāng)有例外規(guī)定。第三，認(rèn)為對(duì)損害賠償類責(zé)任主要適用特殊形式的過錯(cuò)責(zé)任原則即過錯(cuò)推定責(zé)任原則。 本文以侵害知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)應(yīng)適用何種歸責(zé)原則為切入點(diǎn)，借鑒國(guó)內(nèi)外有關(guān)理論、法規(guī)，探索我國(guó)法律解決知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則的合理答案，構(gòu)建更完善的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)侵權(quán)責(zé)任歸責(zé)原則體系，以有利于對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)所有人和社會(huì)利益的平衡保護(hù)。
[Abstract]:With the development of science and technology, intellectual property rights and its legal protection system emerge as the times require. As the core issue of intellectual property rights legal protection system, the principle of liability fixation for intellectual property rights infringement is necessary to be studied. The defendant's plea of "no fault" is confused and confused. The provisions of the General Principles of Civil Law of China fix the principle of fault in legal form and confirm its legal status as a general principle of liability for infringement in civil law. The principle of liability fixation for infringement of intellectual property rights has not been clearly stipulated.
As the provisions of several intellectual property laws are not clear, in judicial practice, the judges have different attitudes towards the parties'defenses of faults, resulting in a certain degree of judicial inconsistency. On the one hand, it damages the unity of the legal system, more importantly, it leads to substantive injustice and erodes the cornerstone of legal justice. The key to a case is to master the principle of liability fixation for infringement of intellectual property rights. The author makes a preliminary discussion on the liability fixation for infringement of intellectual property rights from the perspective of theory and practice of intellectual property rights, tries to comprehensively analyze and understand the principle of liability fixation for infringement of intellectual property rights, and ponders over the improvement of the system of liability fixation for infringement of intellectual property rights in China. I put forward my own proposals.
The first part of the article analyzes the general theory of the imputation principle, starting from the meaning and significance of the imputation principle, and analyzes that the scope of application of the imputation principle should refer to all civil liabilities, not only the liability for damages. Analysis and analysis.
In the second part of the article, by using the method of analysis and comparison, the author first analyzes the principles of liability fixation for intellectual property infringement in Anglo-American law system countries, civil law system countries and TRIPS agreements, and then compares the rules of liability fixation for intellectual property infringement before and after the latest amendment of China's intellectual property law vertically. Trends and problems.
The third part of the article discusses the orientation of the principle of liability fixation for intellectual property rights in China.From the point of view that the fault liability is the main principle of liability fixation for infringement in the current law of our country,this paper analyzes many problems existing in the principle of liability fixation for infringement on the part of the perpetrator. The main theory of the doctrine of attribution of rights and liabilities and the reasons for its divergence are analyzed and evaluated. Finally, the nature of exclusive liability such as stopping infringement is analyzed and the principle of no-fault attribution applied to the acceptance of exclusive liability is deduced.
The fourth part of the article analyzes and ponders on the legislation and judicial status of the principle of liability fixation for intellectual property infringement in China. Finally, it puts forward some suggestions on perfecting the system of liability fixation for intellectual property infringement in China. Firstly, the law should clearly stipulate that the principle of liability fixation has nothing to do with the determination of intellectual property infringement. In order to avoid the misunderstanding of the scope of application of the imputation principle, including the determination of intellectual property infringement. Second, the law should clearly stipulate the application of no-fault liability to exclusionary liability, but there should be exceptions. Third, the author thinks that the special form of fault liability principle, namely fault presumption liability, should be mainly applied to compensation for damages. Be a principle.
In this paper, starting from what kind of imputation principle should be applied to infringement of intellectual property rights, drawing on the relevant theories and regulations at home and abroad, the author explores the reasonable answers to the principle of imputation of liability for infringement of intellectual property rights in China's laws, and constructs a more perfect system of imputation principle for infringement of intellectual property rights, in order to help balance the interests of intellectual property owners and society. Protection.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：四川大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類號(hào)】：D923.4

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 吳鶯;;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)歸責(zé)原則文獻(xiàn)綜述[J];大舞臺(tái);2011年02期

本文編號(hào)：2247852