集成电路领域英特尔公司在华专利布局状况分析

通过简要介绍英特尔公司在华专利布局状况，重点分析英特尔公司在华集成电路领域的专利布局总体情况及在集成电路四个技术领域的专利申请和授权状况，剖析英特尔公司的在华专利战略，及其在技术和市场取得双重成功的原因，为国内相关企业制定知识产权发展战略提供经验借鉴。     

集成电路领域超威半导体公司在华专利布局状况分析

简要介绍超威半导体公司在华专利布局状况,重点分析超威半导体公司在华集成电路领域的专利布局总体情况及在集成电路四个技术领域的专利申请和授权状况,深入剖析超威半导体公司的在华专利战略,及其在技术和市场取得双重成功的原因.为国内外相关企业制定发展战略提供经验借鉴.     

中美知识产权200指数:指向何方

2012年1月24日至25日, "全球技术影响论坛"在瑞士举行.深圳新产业技术产权交易所与美国Ocean Tomo公司也在会议期间联合发布了全球第一个基于上市公司无形资产价值的"中美知识产权200指数".据深圳新产业技术产权交易所董事长常进勇介绍, "中美知识产权200指数"中样本股由无形资产(知识产权)价值最高的100家在中国内地、香港、美国上市的中国企业与100家在美国本土上市的美国企业构成,指数聚集了中美两国拥有最高知识产权价值的200家上市公司,突出反映了代表世界两大经济体在科技创新、专利布局和科技产业化的中坚力量的上市公司在资本市场上的整体表现.     

我国高校专利布局结构性问题探析

数据显示,我国高校在专利活动方面呈现专利申请数量高速增长、海外布局高度不足、主要技术领域高度集中等特点,反映出一定的结构性问题,需要引起关注并做好以下工作:完善以企业为主体的专利技术创新制度环境,构建有助于产学研结合的高校知识产权运营平台,推动高校做好海外专利布局.     

集成电路领域韩国三星电子公司在华专利布局状况分析

通过重点分析韩国三星电子公司在华集成电路领域专利申请的总体分布情况、专利授权状况、专利申请年度分布情况及在集成电路四个技术领域的专利申请和授权状况,剖析三星电子公司在技术和市场取得双重成功的原因,为相关竞争企业制定发展策略提供借鉴.     

佳能公司在中国的专利布局状况分析(续前)

(接上期)二、近年来,佳能公司在中国的专利布局状况及趋势分析(一)专利申请总体情况分析根据中国国家知识产权局专利信息中心公布的专利申请文件统计,从2000年至2005年,佳能公司在中国专利申请共计3451件,占总申请量的72.90%。其中,发明专利所占比重为94.26%,PCT申请量为124件。通过表1对比分析可以发现,该公司近年来的专利申请总体呈现以下三大趋势:1、专利申请力度增强,发明专利比重加大;2、外观专利比重减少;3、PCT专利申请比重增大。(二)专利布局重点技术领域分析1、专利布局重点技术领域总体情况通过专利文献反映的技术主题,近年来…     

第21届中国电子信息百强企业专利状况调查与分析

调查第21届中国电子信息百强企业在华专利申请的总体情况，对专利成本、企业专利综合竞争力等指标进行专利分析，对比国有企业和民营企业在华专利申请状况、国内电子信息10强企业和国际电子信息10强企业在华专利申请状况，分析我国电子信息企业自主创新能力的现状，并进一步提供合理化建议。     

中药专利保护刍议

由于现代技术的介入和认识水平的提高,从药材到药品已经有了不同程度的技术含最,因而为中药的专利保护提供了可能并日益凸显重要性.技术竞争正通过专利权的占有表现出来.目前,欧洲、美国、日本等发达国家和地区进入中国的涉及中药的专利申请呈明显的上升势头.     

MEMS陀螺仪技术专利态势分析

MEMS陀螺仪具有体积小、功耗低等多种优势,在消费电子、生物医疗和工业领域具有广泛应用。随着我国在MEMS传感器领域技术水平以及市场份额的提高,专利布局从应用向核心技术领域转移,以歌尔声学、瑞声科技为代表的中国MEMS传感器厂商崛起,知识产权风险日益突显。本文对MEMS陀螺仪全球以及中国专利数据进行全面分析,深入研究该项技术的发展现状和趋势,技术研发和应用热点,以及行业内主要竞争者的研发动态和专利策略,为我国MEMS产业政策的制定提供参考,为行业内的企业和科研机构利用专利信息进行技术研发、制定知识产权竞争策略、规划专利布局提供支撑。     

我国银行业专利保护现状研究

我国银行业专利申请量逐年增多,商业方法专利的出现使专利成为银行业竞争的重要手段之一。美国＂州街银行案＂判决以来,商业方法专利申请对各国银行业产生了很大影响。通过对我国银行业专利特别是商业方法专利的保护现状进行实证研究,分析我国银行业专利保护的特点及其问题,进而提出相关建议。     

技术标准中专利权垄断行为的理论分析及其法律规制

在专利的标准化及其实施过程中,有可能出现专利权的滥用现象,特别是专利权的垄断行为。技术标准中专利权垄断行为导致专利制度的异化,破坏了知识产权制度的利益平衡原则,并扭曲了公平自由的国际市场经济秩序。美国的反托拉斯法、欧盟的竞争法和日本反垄断法体现了对该种垄断行为的基本态度和解决路径,起到积极的规制作用。我国的《反垄断法》一定程度上加强了对滥用知识产权行为的规制,但并不能全面解决国际贸易中产生的众多垄断行为或者限制竞争行为。在技术标准越来越成为新的技术壁垒的背景下,积极借鉴欧盟和美国等的相关立法,根据我国的国际竞争政策需要,构建我国规制技术标准中的专利权滥用行为的法律体系已成当务之急。     

Sustainability of patent-based competitive advantage in the U.S. communications services industry

Patents have long been assumed to provide firms with competitive advantage, but longitudinal results suggest that some types of patent content provide more enduring advantage than others do. The duration of advantage appeared to wane with time in the highly-dynamic U.S. communications-services industry during a period when technological changes occurred rapidly within it (1998–2012). Results suggest patents integrating technology streams that were different from the technologies of focal-patents’ grants contributed more to sustaining firms’ profit margins during this period than did focal patents that exploited extant technological knowledge. We found that firms who continually pushed their organization’s knowledge envelope outward to incorporate more unknown technologies sustained higher profit margins for a longer duration of time than did firms whose patented inventions were predominantlyincremental—even within difficult settings where competition grew so intense that firms’ average operating margins were deteriorating.     

Patenting and Invention Activity of U.S. Scientists and Engineers in the Academic Sector: Comparisons with Industry

Analyses have been performed of the patenting and invention activity of U.S. scientists and engineers (S&Es) in the academic sector and comparisons have been made with their counterparts in industry. The analyses are based upon survey questions concerning patent applications, grant awards and commercialization outcomes from two 1995 National Science Foundation (NSF) nationally representative workforce surveys. A series of new indicators – patent activity rates, patent activity shares and patent success rates – has been defined and utilized to examine patent activity by employment sector, educational field, demographic variables, status and location of university faculty, technological area, and selected S&E job characteristics. It is recommended that NSF collect data on patenting activity, including commercialization outcomes, in its surveys of the S&E workforce at least every four years. Data should also be collected on university-industry collaboration in patent activity in the U.S., and between S&Es in the U.S. and other countries.     

以融合正义重构人工智能司法的逻辑

我国的人工智能司法发展具有明显的突变特色,缺乏足够的制度和理论调适,广泛应用会带来司法逻辑的内在冲突。司法的社会技术特性和人工智能的自然技术特性之间具有天然的亲和性,为我国人工智能司法广泛应用提供了工具理性基础。但人工智能介入司法会带来原有社会黏合基础改变,无法完全应对司法过程的随机性和偶然性因素,并且会因为技术竞争带来新的不正义。需要扩展法律正义的蕴含,将法律正义的纯粹道德内核扩展为功利-道德内核,将司法从社会技术转换为技术-社会技术;在司法结构上设置技术-社会的双重竞争性机制,以维护基本的演化平衡;通过技术-社会互动的重构实现人工智能介入后的融合正义司法模式。     

Linking technological and educational level diversities to innovation performance

In this study, we explore the extent to which diversity of educational levels among research scientists and engineers (RSEs) in the context of a firm’s level of technological diversity influences innovation performance. We used data from the 2004–2008 National R&D Survey in Singapore. The results from 366 firms across different industries indicate that when a firm’s technological domains are heterogeneous, those firms with an RSE workforce comprising similar educational levels have positive innovation performance, measured as the number of patent applications, while those comprising diverse educational levels have negative innovation performance. Our further exploration of the positive interaction between technological domain heterogeneity and similarity of educational levels suggests that firms that had a high ratio of RSEs with lower educational levels had more positive patent outcomes compared to those that had a high ratio of RSEs with higher educational levels. The results show that there are limits to the strength of technological diversity in a firm’s absorptive capacity as explained by organizational demography.     

美国专利蟑螂的新近立法评析及其启示

专利蟑螂已经成为美国专利制度中一个十分严峻的问题,美国政府不断出台专利法修订草案和政策,意图遏制专利蟑螂,并取得了不错的成效。然而,从近期美国参众两院提交的诸项法案来看,尽管存在分歧,但其整体立场已经发生明显转变,倾向于优待专利蟑螂。由此,以设立双方复审程序、提高禁令颁发标准以及限制司法管辖为代表的诸多重要专利司法改革成果,都将可能遭到弱化。结合美国的经验教训,我国应当尽早认识专利蟑螂并着手应对,从考察开放许可专利实施情况、增加"权利人商业模式"作为判赔考量因素、细化司法管辖规则、完善专利无效制度以及构建全面打击专利假冒行为制度等多个维度,预防和遏制专利蟑螂。     

Dilemmas of U.S. export control of technology to China [1]

Technology transfer from the U.S. and its allies to China is basically a combination of West-East and North-South characteristics. China's “unbalanced” development strategy for the past several decades has resulted in some technologically advanced military fields, like strategic nuclear forces, and a strikingly backward civilian sector. This uniqueness confounds U.S. decisions on export control of potential military technology to China, whereas western Europe and Japan can take full advantage of the economic opportunities beginning in the late 1970s. The U.S. relative disadvantage in economic terms as compared with its allies in dealing with China is hypothesized to be more serious than when dealing with the Soviet group. Meanwhile, the U.S. policy to ban some critical technologies to China may also be eroded by China's concerted efforts to get access to them and the informal channels rooted in the extensive Chinese network in the U.S. science and technology community.     

远程在线销售的课税问题与中国的对策

远程在线销售具有区别于传统商业交易方式的特点,对中国现行的以增值税和营业税为代表的一般流转税制度提出了问题和挑战。从目前各种在线交易的内容和现行增值税与营业税的课税对象以及适应电子商务国际税收协调的发展趋势看,我国应明确认定此类交易在性质上属于现行营业税意义上的销售劳务或无形财产。对在线销售交易,中国现行营业税制度应区分境内交易和跨境交易,对前者实行提供方所在地课税原则,对后者适用接受方所在地课税原则。在跨境远程在线交易的营业税征管方式上,对B-to-B交易应适用境内接受方申报纳税的逆向课税机制,对B-to-C交易宜适用非居民企业境内税务登记代为收缴营业税的征管机制。     

The “state-led-economy” issue in the BIT negotiations and its policy implications for China

The state-led-economy provisions in the U.S. model BIT, which was released in April 2012, aims to impose strict regulations on the SOEs and exert great influence on state-led economy model. China and the U.S. are now in the midst of negotiating a BIT, and the U.S. government insists on negotiating on the basis of its 2012 model BIT. If China is to accept the 2012 U.S. model for the proposed BIT between the two nations, unprecedented international obligations will be placed in the field of international investment. In this context, in order to provide a reference for the BIT negotiation, the author will analyze, from the perspective of normative jurisprudence, which economic activities are included in the scope of state-led economy provisions, whether China should accept the clauses and the possible impact of accepting it. China’s economy has indivisible relationship with State-owned enterprises (SOEs). At present, most of these SOEs have clustered in those sectors that play crucial roles in the national economy such as energy, telecommunication and finances. Despite several rounds of reform on the SOEs aiming at a separation of governmental functions from corporate management, and a modern market-oriented governance structure, Chinese SOEs remain monopolies or de facto monopolies with exclusive access to many important industries relevant to national economy and people’s livelihood. Further, SOEs can enjoy a lot of privileges in their operation, some even have certain regulatory authority which is supposed to be exercised by the government. This kind of economic model is called State-led economy. The 2012 U.S. model for bilateral investment treaties (BIT) is characterized by the inclusion of the state-led economy provisions, which means that there are more restrictive regulations governing SOEs and their special treatment, and countervailing their competition implication in the host country and their home country. Apart from creating a fair and impartial environment for the investors, this international investment regime, represented by 2012 U.S. BIT model, is in some way, intended to alter the host country’s economic governance regime. In accordance with the decision of the 5th round of the U.S.–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, both parties are dedicated to proceeding the BIT negotiations (The 5th Round of the U.S.–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue: broad consensus achieved and positive progress made, People’s Daily, p 3, 2013). The U.S. government has insisted that they would base its 2012 model as a blueprint of BIT text negotiation. Seemingly to illustrate, the 6th round of the U.S.–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue has reached a consensus that an earlier launch of negotiation on the negative list will be expected in 2015 (The 6th Round of the U.S.–China Strategic and Economic Dialogue: broad consensus achieved and positive progress made, People’s Daily, p 3, 2014; Ministry of Commerce of the People’s Republic of China, The 14th Round of the U.S.–China Investment Treaty Negotiation is Held in Washington, D.C., 2014). If China is to accept the new BIT model, it will bring China a bundle of increasing obligations under this system and an unprecedented impact on China’s mode for economic development. As a contracting party, China will have to carry out a comprehensively economic reform to comply with the disciplines specified in the BIT. It is also understandable that the incorporation of the state-led economy provision in the China–U.S. BIT will in turn accelerate the domestic economic reforms. In this context, research on the issue of state-led economy in the BIT negotiation will be of significance to China’s dealing with the core issue in the BIT, China’s fulfillment of treaty obligations and its promotion of domestic economic reform via BIT negotiations. In order to provide a reference for the BIT negotiation, the author will identify from the perspective of normative jurisprudence, the economic activities that fall within the scope of state-led economy provisions, project the possible impact of state-led economy provisions and how China should handle negotiation surrounding the state-led economy issue.

     

美国2011年专利法第一案Myriad案评——人类基因可专利性的再思考

Myriad公司从人体DNA中分离的两种基因片断(BRCA1,BRCA2)获得了专利。美国分子病理协会等提起诉讼,宣称人类基因不是可专利性客体,该专利无效。上诉法院判定该基因片断是合法的专利客体,但该判决与最高法院的先例并不完全吻合。在成文法及司法先例对基因类专利都没有明确规定的情况下,公共政策的分析是更适当的切入角度。从政策性角度分析,否认人类基因的可专利性是对社会最有利的政策。专利制度是工具,不是目的。加拿大的有益实践启示我国也应坚持否认人类基因类专利的政策。