欧盟专利产品平行进口规则研究

在专利领域,欧盟把平行进口分为两类:一是共同体内成员国间的平行进口;二是自共同体外向共同体内的平行进口.为了确保商品在共同体内的自由流动和市场的正常竞争,对成员国间专利产品的平行进口,欧盟所坚持的态度是允许和促进平行进口.但是,对共同体外的专利产品的平行进口,由于共同体尚未存在类似<商标指令>那样协调成员国问专利立法的条约,因此,共同体外专利产品的平行进口规则通常取决于成员国的法律或判例,共同体本身并没有有关这一问题的统一规则.     

欧洲共同体商标权利用尽原则对平行进口商品的法律适用

海牙上诉法院在ParfumsChristianDior,SAv.Etos ,BV案中对来自共同体市场外的商标商品的平行进口问题进行了解释。在本案的判决中 ,荷兰法庭适用了《欧洲商标指令》(theEuropeanTradeMarksDirective)第 7条 ,《统一布鲁克斯商标法》(theUniformBeneluxMarksAct)第 13条A款 ,《欧洲共同体条约》有关商品自由流动条款以及欧洲法院现存的判例法。荷兰法庭最关心的是各成员国商标法的充分协调问题。这在商品首次销售后商标权人权利用尽方面显得特别敏感。这是平行进口案的核心问题。     

《欧共体条约》对协调成员国版权法的影响

从80年代中期,欧洲共同体开始对成员国的版权法进行了一系列的协调工作。 1985年,欧共体委员会在《关于实现共同体内部市场的白皮书》中指出,各成员国在知识产权立法方面的差异已对共同体内的贸易及共同市场内的经济活动能力造成直接的负面影响。 1988年,欧共体委员通过了《关于版权和技术挑战的绿皮书》。《绿皮书》充分肯定了版权保护对共同体日益增长的重要性:(1)单一内部市场的要求意味着必须消除由国内版权法的差异而引起的贸易障碍;(2)高水平的版权保护是欧共体改善与其贸易伙伴经济竞争力的保证;(3)保证共同体内部投入巨大人力、财力…     

试析版权领域的不正当竞争行为

不正当竞争行为,是指在市场经济活动中,违反诚实信用原则,采取虚假、欺诈、损人利己等不正当手段谋取经济利益,以致损坏国家、生产经营者和消费者利益,扰乱社会经济秩序的行为。制止不正当竞争行为,早在1883年缔结的《保护工业产权巴黎公约》中就被视为对成员国国内立法的一项最低要求。随着科学技术的迅速发展,当代世界经济技术贸易的重心日渐移向知识产权领域,在这一领域内的竞争也越来越激烈,制止知识产权领域的不正当竞争行为因此而显得越来越重要和迫切。然而,在反不     

欧共体流动人员社会保障立法的特点及启示

解决流动人员的社会保障问题是欧共体真正实现人员自由流动的关键一环。欧共体成员国经济社会发展不平衡,社会保障制度差异很大。欧共体在尊重成员国现有社会保障制度的前提下,通过原则性规定、制定冲突规范和采取开放式协调等立法方式,使各成员国的相关立法趋于一致,有效地解决了流动工人的社会保障问题,促进了欧洲经济一体化。这方面的经验值得我们借鉴。     

从TRIPs协议第40条谈知识产权滥用的竞争法规制

TRIPs协议第40条授予了各成员国对知识产权许可协议中的限制竞争行为进行规制的权利.主要西方国家根据各国的经济竞争政策制定了相应的反垄断法及知识产权许可的反垄断指南,有力地解决了知识产权滥用的问题.通过对TRIPs协议该条关于知识产权滥用规定的分析,结合该条规定所体现的立法精神与法律价值,认为我国也有必要制定相应的反垄断规则,并尽力保持知识产权的政策性与灵活性,从而对国际知识产权贸易特别是技术贸易领域中存在的知识产权垄断问题进行规制.     

欧盟所得税法初探

欧盟所得税是协调成员国所得税法的欧共体基础条约、二级立法以及欧洲法院判例的总称。欧盟所得税法对于欧共体市场实现人员、资本和服务自由流动具有重要意义。通过欧盟理事会、委员会和欧洲法院的努力 ,欧盟层面上的所得税法已经初具规模。但是 ,由于欧洲法院的作用有限 ,欧盟成员国所得税法的趋同还需要在立法上予以统一。欧元的启动对欧盟所得税法提出了新的要求。     

知识产权与反垄断法关系的思考

知识经济时代要求加强对知识产权的保护,但经济全球化又要求打破各种制约因素,包括知识产权给商品、技术自由流动带来的限制。由此形成了知识产权与反垄断法之间扩张与反扩张,制约与反制约的关系。知识产权是一种由国家赋予的合法垄断权,这种垄断性权利会产生限制竞争的效果,与反垄断法促进"竞争"的目标相悖,因而,知识产权与反垄断法之间天然的存在矛盾。本文通过分析,阐明了知识产权法和反垄断法之间的使用关系。     

欧洲统一市场的建立与对国家干预的规制

为了促进欧洲统一市场的建立,《欧共体条约》确定了竞争规则和自由流动规则,对成员国制定的不利于统一市场建立的政府干预措施,如授予公用企业独占权、给予国家援助、制定歧视性贸易措施、对私人破坏竞争的行为不作为等进行规制。在欧共体法院的有力保障下,这些规则在推动欧洲一体化进程中发挥了重要作用,特别是其中的竞争规则,因其具有中立、开放之品格而成为规范经济和政治关系、促进共同体市场建立的核心手段和"发动机"。     

知识产权保护与维护自由竞争——由欧洲法院的IMS案为探讨基点

IMS Health v NDC Health一案是近两年来欧洲法院审理的涉及知识产权人滥用市场支配地位的典型案件之一.法院对何种情况下权利人拒绝许可行为构成市场支配地位的滥用等问题给出了指导性意见.通常情况下,欧洲法院对成员国知识产权法给予尊重,但是,当知识产权被滥用以致影响成员国间正常贸易与自由竞争的时候,后者将优先得到保护.在欧共体各成员国知识产权法尚未统一的情况下,欧洲法院通过司法审判,已经较为成功地将知识产权滥用行为纳入共同体竞争法约束之下.     

欧盟法中的商标权权利穷竭原则

欧盟的货物自由流动原则与商标权的地域保护存在内在冲突。为了解决冲突 ,欧洲法院通过诸多判例在欧共体条约第 30条和欧共体商标指令第 7条法律框架下导入、发展、完善了商标权权利穷竭原则。欧洲法院在货物自由流动原则和权利穷竭原则下分别开设了两个例外 ,对原则和例外的解释旨在寻求商标所有权人合法权益与欧共体共同市场内的自由流动这一基本利益的平衡。贯穿在法院判决思路中的是对商标的完整性与主要功能的呵护和对欧洲一体化的极力推进。     

社区作为传统知识权利主体的基本理论问题研究

传统知识的法律保护是当今知识产权国际保护的前沿问题之一,其权利主体具有一定的特殊性。社区作为传统知识的权利主体并不违背知识产权的私权属性,在这一点上传统知识权和知识产权本质上是相同的。但是,一般知识产权的正当性解释中隐含的前提是＂消极社区＂理论,而传统知识的权利主体确立过程中隐含的前提是＂积极社区＂理论,在这一点上存在着根本区别。     

Free Movement of Goods and Property Law

Although usually considered a national competence, there is an effect of internal market law on property law. When a property right is validly created in one Member State and the object on which it rests is moved to another Member State, an internal market dimension arises. Such has been the case in the ECJ's Krantz decision 25 years ago, dealing with the question on whether the rules allowing a seizure of goods owned by someone else in another Member State and leading to a potential loss of right is in conformity with EU law. More than 25 years have passed and our thinking about the internal market as well as the free movement case‐law has changed significantly. A re‐examination of this decision leads to a different conclusion: the refusal to recognise property rights validly created in another Member State violates the free movement of goods under Article 34 TFEU.     

Reforming the Market or the State? Article 30 and the European Constitution: Economic Freedom and Political Rights

This article takes as its starting-point the relationship between Article 30 of 30 of the EC Treaty (general rule on the free movement of goods) and the European Constitution. On the one hand, it examines Article 30 in the context of the constitutional dilemmas facing the European Union, particularly the balance of powers to be defined between Member States and the Union, between public power and the market, and between the legitimacy of Community law vis à vis that of national law. On the other hand, it reviews different conceptions of the European Economic Constitution by analysing the role of Article 30 in the review of market regulation.     

欧共体法中的相称性原则

相称性原则是欧共体法中的一项一般法律原则。其适用范围不仅包括共同体措施 ,而且包括成员国国内措施 ;不仅适用于行政行为 ,也适用于立法行为。适当性、必需性和最小限制性是相称性原则的三个构成要素。相称性原则与从属原则既有密切联系 ,也有本质区别。就其功能而言 ,相称性原则是欧共体法院司法审查的基础 ,是支配共同体行使权能的原则 ,是建立内部市场的指导原则     

Shifting Boundaries of Membership: The politicisation of free movement as a challenge for EU citizenship

This article discusses freedom of movement under the lens of shifting boundaries of membership and traces the tension between the political and the economic rationale of European integration. It first reflects on the normativity of free movement and links it to the foundations of modern democratic citizenship. Subsequently, it discusses the role of free movement in the construction of EU citizenship and argues that the genesis in market integration casts a long shadow which hinders EU citizenship's potential to fully display the logic of political and social equality. Under current conditions of huge wealth discrepancies between member states, the prevailing form of horizontal integration necessarily brings about a tension between mobility and solidarity, which in turn creates a barrier for further developing EU citizenship. It is concluded that strengthening an intra‐European dimension of solidarity is needed in order to substantiate the right to move as an equal European citizenship right.     

Geographical indications outside the European Regulation on PGIs, and the rule of the free movement of goods: lessons from cases judged by the Court of Justice of the European Communities

Several recent cases judged by the Court of Justice of the European Communities (the Court) have raised interesting issues related to the possibility for operators of food chains to use national quality signs to indicate territory of origin, which are different from the regulatory European ??Protected Geographical Indications??. The various attempts by France (a list of quality signs), Germany (??Markenqualit?t aus deutschen Landen?? sign) and Belgium (??Walloon?? sign) have all been condemned as protectionist policies contradicting the free movement of goods in the European Market. These national quality signs can be seen as attempt to defend the viability of specific kinds of activities (involving small enterprises) in specific places (rural areas). These cases are a good illustration of the difficulties that a Member State of the European Communities (Member State) faces in trying to protect its traditional activities and/or rural areas in a way that is compatible with free markets. The paper analyses the recent court decisions underlining economic aspects such as information delivery and the cost of alternative protection mechanisms for these activities. We highlight in particular the collective trademarks and the kind of intellectual property right they form by the economic theory of clubs, and make some comparisons with protected geographical indications.     

A Disabled Market: Free Movement of Goods and Services in the EU and Disability Accessibility

Individuals with a disability who wish to use goods and services can have a variety of specific needs, ranging from accessible written information to standard products and services which have disability accessibility features built into them. In light thereof, this article focuses on the impact which Community law has had, and could potentially have, on ensuring an EU‐wide market in products and services which are accessible to consumers with a disability. The article examines the (possible) impact of a variety of provisions, including the rules relating to the free movement of goods and services (Articles 28 and 49 EC, respectively), the internal market (Articles 94 and 95 EC), non‐discrimination (Article 13 EC), EU citizenship provisions, and the work of the European standardisation bodies such as CEN. The central question throughout the article is does EC law allow for, or discourage, the establishment of mandatory disability accessibility standards at the national or EU level, and have the provisions been used to permit or establish such standards to date?     

欧盟知识产权海关保护条例——Council egulation （EC） No.1383/2003评析

知识产权海关保护是随着国际贸易出现大量盗版和假冒商品等非法货物贸易的情况下产生并发展起来的一种行之有效的知识产权保护制度。欧盟知识产权海关保护条例的实施有效地遏制了盗版和假冒商品对国际贸易秩序的危害,对欧盟知识产权权利人利益的维护起到了至关重要的作用。但其不足也很明显：Council Regulation（EC） No.1383/2003的执行很大程度上是依赖于各成员国政府和海关当局,另外Council Regulation（EC） No.1383/2003允许成员国对其相关内容做出细化或作出不同的规定,这将导致各国海关对知识产权保护出现不同的执法效果。     

论《欧盟运行条约》第102条在知识产权领域的扩大适用——以阿斯利康公司诉欧盟委员会一案为视角

自由竞争和知识产权保护是现代国家建立和完善市场经济制度,保护消费者利益的两把利剑。以往判例所确立的原则是欧盟竞争法在特殊情形下被有限的适用于知识产权行使过程中的某些行为,竞争法的适用通常要满足非常严格的条件。而在新近作出的一份判决中,欧盟普通法院首次将《欧盟运行条约》第102条①适用于知识产权的申请行为,而且在适用过程中,明显放宽适用条件。这种在知识产权领域扩大适用竞争规则的行为有损知识产权法律体系的独立性,而且在今后类似案件中也不具有较强的可操作性,其仅具有特例性,而非普遍意义。