从国际知识产权保护看当今WTO体制的成功与挑战

当前发达国家和发展中国家在利益博弈下各自开展体制转移造法活动、多哈回合谈判停滞不前、美国301条款继续实施,均给TRIPs协定带来一系列挑战与质疑.但同时TRIPs协定实现了知识产权争端解决由“权力导向”到“规则导向”转移、在公共健康领域做出了第一次修订努力、当前成员国仍通过立法措施、争端解决及裁决遵守等方面积极遵守TRIPs协定下的义务.未来国际知识产权保护走向未卜,对WTO体制抱有过于悲观的态度为时尚早,当前我们仍应当重视WTO体制在国际知识产权保护中的作用.     

浅析TRIPs协定中的"地理标志"概念

地理标志的概念是我们研究和执行TRIPs协定对地理标志的保护规范的起点,本文将TRIPs协定中的"地理标志"概念从内容要素、法律性质两方面来对TRIPs协定中的"地理标志"概念进行分析,最后指出了该概念表述中的模糊之处。     

浅析美国知识产权国际保护

美国的知识产权国际保护的法律体系主要由国内贸易法中的"特别301条款"和"337条款"、WTO框架下的TRIPs协议、双边自由贸易协定中的知识产权保护条款等组成,形成了一个多层次的保护网络。美国知识产权国际保护的法律体系及其特点,对我国知识产权保护、对提高我国自主创新能力、对积极应对国际知识产权诉讼,有一定的启示作用。     

金融危机下高新技术产业发展的难题探析——以知识产权保护标准为视角

金融危机全球肆虐,正深刻影响着中国产业政策的制定和企业市场的转型.目前,我国高新技术产业在政府资金支持方面受到诸如<补贴与反补贴措施协定>等国际条约的严重制约,在知识产权保护上受到比TRIPs协议要求还严格的保护标准的影响.因此,要发展我国拥有自主知识产权的高新技术,应高度重视国际通行的制度原则,充分利用国际市场的运行规则,合理规避国际条约的不利因素,积极修改国内法律中不合时宜的地方,切实为高新技术产业的发展创造良好的客观环境.     

TRIPs协定与中国知识产权的法律保护

知识产权是人们对智力劳动成果所享有的权利,TRIPs协定将知识产权保护纳入多边贸易体制 整体的WTO框架之中,因而TRIPs协定在WTO中具有特殊的地位和意义。TRIPs协定是形成 企业技术创新机制的外在动力,是完善中国知识产权立法保护的基础,是强化中国知识产权执法 的契机,必须根据WTO规则TRIPs协定的要求,进一步改革知识产权的审判方式,完善证据制 度,设立经济安全防范机制,确认知识产权损害赔偿责任。     

地理标志保护的国际格局、争端案例及我国取向

本文考察了地理标志国际谈判的背景与格局,分析了TRIPs协定框架下地理标志保护措施争端的典型案例,并提出我国实施地理标志知识产权保护的原则取向以及参与国际谈判的策略选择.     

TRIPs协定下药品专利的强制许可制度与公共健康

TRIPs提高了全球知识产权保护水平,并明确将药品纳入专利保护的范围,其对发生公共健康危机时药品的可获得性及其公民健康权的影响受到了国际社会的广泛关注。本文通过对TRIPs协定下第31条及其新发展的分析,提出发展中国家应如何提高自身水平和利用TRIPs协议框架下的相关规定保护自身的权益。     

审慎的反思与理性的建构——评《知识产权国际保护制度研究》总论部分

在我国，对知识产权国际保护制度的研究还很薄弱，加强其研究是当务之急。《知识产权国际保护制度研究》总论部分考察了知识产权国际保护制度变革与发展的历史轨迹，建立了知识产权的国际保护原则。通过对《知识产权协定》的反思，该书论证了后TRIPs时代知识产权国际保护制度的应然状态。     

植物新品种权法律保护:比较与启示

品种权是一种新型的知识产权。对植物新品种提供保护是育种人品种权保护的需要,也是我国履行国际条约义务的需要。在当前品种权侵权行为时有发生的情况下,以及中国市场开放的要求下,通过比较TRIPs 协定、UPOV条约、欧美、日本等法律并结合实践可知:     

TRIPs协定在国际上执行的理论与实践——兼评协定在我国的执行

本文以条约与国内法关系的基本理论为线索 ,分析了美国、欧共体及其成员国和日本等其他国家关于执行TRIPs协定的理论与实践。在分析了TRIPs协定特点的基础上 ,对我国在成为WTO成员国之后将如何执行协定提出了对策。     

和谐世界视野下共赢性国际知识产权法律制度的构建

以TRIPs协议为核心的国际知识产权法律制度存在诸多问题,已经引发国际社会一系列重大矛盾冲突,如TRIPs协议妨碍了技术向发展中国家转移,TRIPs协议没有有效制止生物海盗行为,TRTPs协议损害了各国当地社会尤其是土著社会控制他们自己的基因资源、自然资源和文化资源的能力.TRIPs协议限制了获取专利药品的机会和能力并关涉到健康权的合理有效享有等.通过检视国际知识产权法律制度的嬗变,揭示发达国家种种极端利己主义行为及由此产生的严重后果,从建立和谐世界的角度,借助博弈论透析构建共赢性国际知识产权法律制度对建立和谐世界的重大意义,论证了知识产权国际保护应遵循的"共同而有差别"的指导原则,从体制内修订规则和体制外造法两个方面探讨了共赢性国际知识产权法律制度的构建.     

发达国家知识产权保护的新动向及我国的应对

发达国家制定的《反假冒贸易协定》已于2011年11月1日生效,其对知识产权的保护设置了新规则,由于知识产权与国际贸易的密切联系,使得该规则将对我国国际贸易产生重大影响.在对《反假冒贸易协定》与《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》进行比较的基础上分析该协定可能产生的影响,及发达国家知识产权保护战略的新动向,进而提出中国在此问题上应有的立场和应对措施.     

Intellectual Property Enforcement in Asia: A Reality Check

In recent decades, Asian nations have raced against each otherin enacting the latest intellectual property (IP) laws borrowedfrom the West on the assumption that the laws would functionin the same manner as those in the West. However, the Asiannations’ dismal record of implementation of IP laws hasbecome apparent and turned into a source of dispute with theirtrading partners, chiefly the US, the European Union (EU) andJapan. The fundamental reason for the impasse in enforcement of IPin Asia, as elsewhere in the non-industrial world, lies in thehuge economic and technological gap between them and those ofthe industrial nations. Historically, the need for internationalprotection of IP grew out of the desire of a few West Europeanstates in the early 19^th century to stop imitations of creativeproducts of their citizens beyond national borders. The firstform of such protection was therefore an attempt to suppress,within national borders, illegitimate products affecting businessesoperating beyond those borders. The major concern of countriesthat became parties to IP treaties (whether bilateral, earlieron, or multilateral, from the 1880s onwards) was not howeverabout providing the same level of protection among treaty-membersbut extending any available measure or form of protection tonon-nationals. The recognition and extent of international protectionultimately hinged on the assimilation of non-national goodsto those produced within the national borders. The forms and scope of international IP protection changed dramaticallywith the introduction of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspectsof Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs). What TRIPs did wasto provide a level of cross-border protection that may or maynot have been existing previously within the national setting.In other words, TRIPs substituted a structure and mode of protectionthat never considered the necessity of linking with or extendingnational IP forms and scopes as a pre-condition. In short, TRIPsbecame instrumental in planting a veritable disconnect betweenthe IP laws of non-industrial countries (Non-ICs) and theirsocial and economic conditions. It did not proceed from thenation-state’s willingness or determination to have formsof protection adequate for its needs (with the discretion ofnot introducing any if it did not deem such to be necessary)but regardless of such needs. The pressure on Non-ICs to legislateon a par with the major industrial nations (disguised as compliancewith TRIPs requirements), lest they be treated as outlaws andpirates or the like, burdened them with an obligation unheardof in international law—that nations must be willing totake on board legal standards and measures even if the lattermight be detrimental to their own domestic interests. The obligationto adopt standards and measures consonant with the requirementsof the major industrial states but not necessarily with thoseof the Non-ICs was not only a major blow to the pursuit of developmentin Non-ICs but also a deadweight they have to carry forever. The circumstances in which most non-industrial nations wereforced to forego their domestic interests and accede to treatyobligations without being given corresponding minimal benefitsdeserving of sovereign contracting parties lies at the bottomof the disconnect in the protection of IP internationally. Thedenial of the prerogative of non-industrial nations as purportedlyfull sovereigns in international law to demand or foster mutuallybeneficial arrangements in IP protection has generated the disconnectand fuelled the continuity of so-called piracy across the non-industrialworld. This paper attempts to examine whether and how Asian nationshave succeeded in managing the disconnect. It starts, in section1, with a survey of the common misperceptions about the roleof IP. Section 2 then attempts a brief appraisal of the conflictinginterests and forces that condition the level, or lack, of IPlawmaking and enforcement in Asia. Section 3 briefly looks atthe external pressure on Asian Non-ICs in both IP lawmakingand enforcement. Section 4 traces the signs of change in IPenforcement in Asia. The paper concludes that, despite someemerging signs of change in attitudes and levels of IP enforcement,the very same issues will remain at the forefront of IP in Asiaand as a major source of dispute with the US and, to a lesserextent, the EU and Japan. It stresses that progress will continueto elude all parties, whether Asian or foreign.     

公共健康和强制许可制度

TRIPS协定将传统的专利保护客体扩大到所有技术领域的任何发明,将医药产品及方法纳入了专利保护的范围,以致受专利保护的药品价格大幅上扬,在一些国家尤其是发展中国家和不发达国家产生健康危机。本文试图在分析《多哈宣言》及其《执行决议》中关于强制许可制度规定的基础上,提出我国可将其作为解决公共健康危机的基本途径。     

我国知识产权法律与国家发展政策的整合

内容提要:我国就知识产权保护议题在与发达国家谈判的过程中屡遭挫败,甚至制定出“超国际标准”的知识产权保护规范。知识产权法的立法意旨在于奖励创造与发明,进而促进科学及文化的进步,但是与发达国家一致的知识产权保护标准,并不能使发展中国家从中获益。然而并非所有的发达国家或国际组织在思考国际间知识产权保护政策的走向时均固守本位主义,他们的许多支持发展中国家利益的研究成果,对我国未来制定新的知识产权法规与政策均甚有助益。应就知识产权与人权之间发生的冲突,及其与宪法基本权冲突时的优位选择理论做出探索,以此作为我国日后制定知识产权法律及与发达国家进行相关谈判的政策依据。     

全球化环境下我国知识产权制度的完善——以维护国家经济安全为视角

在全球化环境下知识产权国际保护体系中,趋同的保护规范和标准对处于不同科技经济发展阶段的国家,在利益得失方面具有明显的差异.发达国家利用知识产权国际保护规则和自身在知识产权方面的优势,制约发展中国家新兴产业的发展,威胁中国等发展中国家的经济安全.为此,为维护全球化环境下的国家经济安全,需要从内外两方面完善知识产权制度环境.     

刑事司法国际准则对我国法治建设的价值思考

刑事司法国际准则是联合国及其下属机构为各国刑事诉讼程序所建立的基本权利保障标准,准则产生的理论基础是自然法思想,现实动因是人们对二战的反思以及人权保障运动的国际化。学习、借鉴准则对于我国法治建设具有重大的意义,从宏观层面而言,准则有助于促进我国司法制度的法治化建构;从微观层面而言,准则有助于实现个案的审判正义。     

论数据使用保护的国际知识产权制度

商业组织在全球范围内使用数据获得法律保护是数据经济进一步发展的基石。对数据使用的知识产权保护意味着保护“数据”的各种外在呈现形式,尤其是数据集合。数据经营者对数据经济的贡献、数据主权和数字人权带来的现实障碍提出了迫切要求。以德国、美国和日本为代表的主要国家对数据使用保护进行的知识产权立法为数据跨境流动相关制度研究提供了基础。世界贸易组织、世界知识产权组织以及欧盟对数据使用提供了现实保护,但是现有国际法律制度无法对大量存在的非独创性数据集合提供充分保护。其原因包括各国发展水平不一致、数据主权和个人数据保护受到更多关注、国际法碎片化发展趋势等。对此,应在数据相关制度和实践中坚持促进数据使用为指导原则;在TRIPs体系内构建非独创性数据集合制度,该制度在保护数据集合专有权的同时应注重平衡个人数据保护、数据主权和公众信息获取权。立足中国参与全球数据治理现状,中国应在著作权法体系下构建非独创性数据集合有限排他权,并完善相关立法和实施以促进跨境数据流动。     

Intellectual property laws integrated with the national development policies in China

As a developing country, China has been pressured by the developed countries to increase the levels of intellectual property (IP) protection and to adopt IP rules that even go beyond the minimum international standards. IP regimes are established to promote advances in science and culture by rewarding creation and invention. However, developing countries do not necessarily appropriately share the benefits from the harmonization of IP protection standards over the world. Fortunately, not every developed country or international organization is concerned only with its own interest when evaluating the tendency of international IP protection policies. In fact, they have made many studies or findings in favor of the concerns and interests of developing countries. This paper investigates the conflicts between IP rights and human rights, as well as the validity of IP laws under constitutional arguments, with the purpose of providing new strategic policy arguments in China’s future amendments to IP laws, and related negotiations with developed countries. __________ Translated from Faxue Yanjiu 法学研究 (Law Research), 2005, (6): 105–115