期刊文献+

论“专利劫持”的法律属性及其司法救济 被引量:6

Study on Legal Properties and Judicial Remedy of “Patent Hijacking”
下载PDF
导出
摘要 标准必要专利是行业标准的必要技术,专利劫持产生的原因是专利与标准之间的利益冲突。专利权人不当申请禁令救济,破坏市场自由竞争,损害标准实施者合法利益。标准必要专利权人负有对外许可的义务,应当向所有标准实施者进行许可,而专利劫持却是一种违约行为。只有依据利益平衡的原则考虑签发禁令,确定标准必要专利的合理许可费,才能使标准专利的各方当事人对峙或冲突中走向相互协调,在法律规则的制定与完善中,实现司法禁令救济的正当性。 Standard essential patents are the necessary technologies for industry standards. The interest conflict between patent and standard is the reason of patent hijacking. Improper application of the patent holder will undermine the competition in the market and damage the legitimate interests of the standard implementers. The standard necessary patent holder has the obligation to license to the world, but patent hijacking is a breach of contracts. The interests of all parties can be coordinated on conditionthat a ban is issued on the basis of interest balance principle and the licensing fees of standard necessary patentsare determinedproperly. The legitimacy of the ban will be achieved by perfecting the laws and regulations.
作者 周莳文 邓钰玮 Zhou Shiwen;Deng Yuwei(Law School, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou 510006, China)
出处 《科技管理研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2018年第8期180-186,共7页 Science and Technology Management Research
基金 广东省知识产权局软课题"知识产权运用与管理制度的设计"(GDIP2016-K04) 国家知识产权局课题"战略性新兴产业专利联盟的构建及运作模式研究"(SS12-A-01)
关键词 标准必要专利 专利劫持 司法救济 standard essential patent patent hijacking judicial remedy
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

二级参考文献36

  • 1李龙.民事诉讼标的的基本概念与民事诉讼的基本理念[J].现代法学,1999,21(1):37-42. 被引量:22
  • 2乔栋.标准发展能否逾越专利的束缚?——AVS在平衡标准公权和专利私权关系中的探索[J].WTO经济导刊,2005(7):44-45. 被引量:3
  • 3there was no commercially and technically feasible non - infringing alternative. IEEE-SA, IEEE-SA Standards Board Bylaws, http: //standards. ieee. org/guides/bylaws/sb - bylaws. pdf, 2008.3.3. 被引量:1
  • 4ESSENTIAL as applied to IPR means that it is not possible on technical ( but not commercial) grounds, taking into account normal technical practice and the state of the art generally available at the time of standardization, ETSI, ETSI Guide on Intellectual Property Rights, http:// www. etsi. org/WebSite/document/Legal/ETSI Guide_on_IPRs. pdf, 2008.3.3. 被引量:1
  • 5日本《专利法》第101条. 被引量:1
  • 6日本《实用新型法》第28条. 被引量:1
  • 7Daniel A. Crane, Patent Pools, RAND Commitments, and the Problematics of Price Discrimination, Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law Jacob Burns Institute for Advanced Legal Studies April 2008 Working Paper No. 232, http://papers. ssm. com/sol3/papers, cfms? abstract_id = 1120071,2008.7.16. 被引量:1
  • 8Pat Treacy and Sophie Lawrance, FRANDly Fire: Are Industry Standards Doing More Harm than Good? ,Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 2008, Vol. 3, No. 1,23. 被引量:1
  • 9GB/T20000.2-2009《标准化工作指南第2部分:采用国际标准》. 被引量:2
  • 10http: //isotc. iso. org/livelink/livelink/fetch/2000/2122/3770791/customview, html func = ll&objId = 3770791&objAction =browse,20100808访问. 被引量:1

共引文献151

同被引文献63

引证文献6

二级引证文献27

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部