本文選題：專利證券化 + 瑕疵擔(dān)保　； 參考：《湘潭大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：專利資產(chǎn)證券化相對于傳統(tǒng)的專利權(quán)融資方式而言，是一種全新的專利權(quán)融資途徑，專利權(quán)人，即專利資產(chǎn)證券化的發(fā)起人，將專利資產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移到SPV（特殊目的機(jī)構(gòu)）構(gòu)成“真實銷售”，其應(yīng)承擔(dān)相應(yīng)的瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)。在我國當(dāng)前并無專利證券化的針對性法律法規(guī)下，根據(jù)證券化流程和專利權(quán)的特殊性分析，在專利證券化領(lǐng)域中，發(fā)起人瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)范圍的界定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、承擔(dān)責(zé)任的法律依據(jù)等法律問題在現(xiàn)存法律法規(guī)中均無明確規(guī)定，其諸多問題是獨(dú)特的。 故，現(xiàn)時在我國，發(fā)起人承擔(dān)瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)的法律依據(jù)存在的問題有：第一關(guān)于未來收益權(quán)的讓與（即未來債權(quán)的讓與）、專利權(quán)許可或轉(zhuǎn)讓以及有價證券轉(zhuǎn)讓，這些轉(zhuǎn)讓人的瑕疵擔(dān)保適用依據(jù)存在模糊性和不確定性；第二、理論界對專利資產(chǎn)證券化中的瑕疵擔(dān)保制度研究主要在權(quán)利瑕疵擔(dān)保上，且論述也不全面和系統(tǒng)，深入研究的甚少，，由于證券化涉及的主體較多，且之間的法律關(guān)系復(fù)雜，對于發(fā)起人的瑕疵擔(dān)保范圍難以界定；第三、專利法第47條學(xué)界有認(rèn)為是排除了瑕疵擔(dān)保制度的適用。筆者試圖從發(fā)起人承擔(dān)著雙重的瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)（對特殊目的機(jī)構(gòu)，即受讓人，承擔(dān)未來收益權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)讓的權(quán)利瑕疵擔(dān)保，也對專利權(quán)的被許可人和特殊目的機(jī)構(gòu)承擔(dān)專利相關(guān)的雙重瑕疵擔(dān)保，包括物之權(quán)利瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)和權(quán)利瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)）出發(fā)，撰寫該文論述上述問題，試以提出建議，希望能夠促進(jìn)我過專利資產(chǎn)證券化的發(fā)展，同時有利于完善我國瑕疵擔(dān)保制度。 本文可分為四章：第一章緒論，對發(fā)起人瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)現(xiàn)狀研究和涉及主要問題做簡要概述。第二章是發(fā)起人瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)的相關(guān)理論分析，由于資產(chǎn)證券化的復(fù)雜性，對瑕疵擔(dān)保和資產(chǎn)證券化理論的簡要分析，對該證券化程序和載體的分析，有助于理解證券化中瑕疵的擔(dān)保的特殊性和復(fù)雜性。第三章對我國專利資產(chǎn)證券化中發(fā)起人的瑕疵擔(dān)保義務(wù)的研究現(xiàn)狀作簡要分析和對其中存在的主要問題有所論述，學(xué)界對資產(chǎn)證券化中涉及的瑕疵擔(dān)保問題少有研究，故現(xiàn)狀簡單，而問題多多，筆者對關(guān)鍵的三個問題進(jìn)行重點(diǎn)論述和分析。第四章是關(guān)于發(fā)起人瑕疵擔(dān)保制義務(wù)的構(gòu)建，是對問題提出的建議和意見，解決存在的問題，是本文撰寫的意義所在。
[Abstract]:Compared with the traditional way of patent financing, patent asset securitization is a new way of patent financing. The patentee, the initiator of patent asset securitization, The transfer of patent assets to SPV (Special purpose Agency) constitutes a "true sale", which should bear the corresponding defect guarantee obligation. According to the analysis of the process of securitization and the particularity of patent right, in the field of patent securitization, the definition standard of the scope of the sponsor's obligation to guarantee the defect in the field of patent securitization is defined. Legal issues such as the legal basis for assuming responsibility are not clearly stipulated in the existing laws and regulations, and many of them are unique. Therefore, at present, in our country, The problems existing in the legal basis for the sponsors to undertake the obligation of defective security are as follows: the first is the assignment of the right of future proceeds (i.e., the assignment of the future creditor's rights, the license or assignment of patent rights and the transfer of marketable securities), There is ambiguity and uncertainty in the basis of the defect guarantee of these assignors. Secondly, the research of the defect guarantee system in the patent asset securitization is mainly focused on the right defect guarantee, and the discussion is not comprehensive and systematic. Because the securitization involves many subjects and the legal relationship between them is complex, it is difficult to define the scope of the sponsor's defect guarantee; third, the patent law article 47 academic circle thinks that the application of the defect guarantee system is excluded. The author tries to assume the obligation of double defect guarantee from the initiator (to the special purpose organization, that is, the transferee, to undertake the right imperfection guarantee of the transfer of the right to gain in the future, Starting from the fact that the licensee of the patent right and the special purpose organization undertake the double defect guarantee related to the patent, including the obligation to guarantee the right and defect of the property and the obligation to guarantee the defect of the right), this paper discusses the above problems and puts forward some suggestions. This paper can be divided into four chapters: the first chapter is an introduction to the sponsors of the current situation of the status quo of the defect guarantee obligations and the main issues involved in a brief overview. The second chapter is the related theoretical analysis of the sponsors' obligation to guarantee defects. Due to the complexity of asset securitization, the brief analysis of the theory of defect guarantee and asset securitization, the analysis of the securitization process and carrier. It is helpful to understand the particularity and complexity of the guarantee of defects in securitization. The third chapter makes a brief analysis of the research status of the sponsor's defect guarantee obligation in China's patent asset securitization, and discusses the main problems in it. There is little research on the defect guarantee problem involved in the asset securitization. Therefore, the status quo is simple, and there are many problems, the author focuses on the three key issues and analysis. Chapter four is about the construction of the obligation of sponsor's defect guarantee system, the suggestion and opinion to the problem, and the solution to the existing problem, which is the significance of this paper.
【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】：2013
【分類號】：D923;D922.287

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 梁慧星;論出賣人的瑕疵擔(dān)保責(zé)任[J];比較法研究;1991年03期

2 袁曉東;;日本專利資產(chǎn)證券化研究[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2006年07期

3 李偉;劉宏光;;專利權(quán)瑕疵的類型及其法律責(zé)任——基于合同法的視角[J];法學(xué)雜志;2012年06期

4 崔建遠(yuǎn),韓海光;債權(quán)讓與的法律構(gòu)成論[J];法學(xué);2003年07期

5 王利明;;瑕疵擔(dān)保責(zé)任與不適當(dāng)履行[J];法制現(xiàn)代化研究;1995年00期

6 孫西汀;;論知識產(chǎn)權(quán)證券化中發(fā)起人應(yīng)承擔(dān)的義務(wù)[J];廣東行政學(xué)院學(xué)報;2009年01期

7 徐冬根;資產(chǎn)證券化中的基礎(chǔ)法律關(guān)系解析[J];廣州大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2005年04期

8 袁秀挺;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)在財產(chǎn)權(quán)體系中的定位[J];華中科技大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2003年02期

9 黃靜,袁曉東;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)信托與科技成果轉(zhuǎn)化[J];軟科學(xué);2004年02期

10 陳勇;;以證券化推進(jìn)專利實施與產(chǎn)業(yè)化[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2006年01期

本文編號：1995742