技术标准化中的专利权滥用及其反垄断法规制

专利不断并入技术标准是当今技术标准发展的必然趋势。专利并入技术标准后,专利权更容易被滥用作为限制竞争的工具。在认定某种专利权行使行为是否构成权利滥用并受到反垄断法规制时,可以采取主客观相结合的标准,兼顾当时的知识产权政策。我国在对技术标准化中的专利权滥用进行反垄断法规制时,应当树立从严规制的指导思想,完善相关立法体系和制度体系。     

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。     

专利权滥用的法律规制

专利权作为一种合法的垄断权,其被滥用同样会损害他人及公共的利益。作为一种特殊的侵权形式,专利权滥用侵权在责任构成上有着自身的特点,其侵害行为的实施者往往是占据市场支配地位的主体,受害者处于不平等的地位。而且专利权滥用与垄断常常联系在一起。在法律规制上,我国的法律在针对该侵权的规定并不健全,因此需要通过对《反垄断法》、《专利法》等法律的完善来阻止专利权滥用行为的发生。     

标准化中专利权滥用行为的法律规制

在标准的制订和实施过程中,专利权人凭借标准的力量,有可能实施各种专利权滥用行为。对于这些专利权滥用行为,需要完善《标准化法》、《专利法》、《反垄断法》等的,以平衡专利权人与社会公众之间的利益。     

“专利权滥用抗辩”原则——由ITC飞利浦光盘案引出

对专利权滥用的法律规制,绝大多数国家依靠反垄断法,而美国采取的是以专利法和反垄断法双轨规制.在ITC飞利浦光盘案中,美国国际贸易委员会认定飞利浦6项专利的专利权强制性一揽子许可构成专利权滥用而不具执行力.美国以判例法发展出较为成熟合理的"专利权滥用抗辩"原则,在专利法框架内规制专利权滥用行为,值得我国借鉴.本文由ITC飞利浦光盘案引出专利权滥用抗辩原则,分析该原则与反垄断法的关系以及专利权滥用的各种类型,并提出我国专利法对专利权滥用规制的建议.     

滥用专利权的内涵及其制止措施

通过论述在我国建立制止滥用专利权体系的必要性,围绕滥用专利权行为的内涵以及制止滥用专利权行为的措施这两个核心问题,介绍了《巴黎公约》和《TRIPS协定》的有关规定以及美国制止滥用专利权行为的实际做法,在此基础上分析我国反垄断法和专利法有关规定的含义.     

简论我国《反垄断法》第55条及其适用

我国《反垄断法》第55条对知识产权领域的垄断行为做出规制。对该法条的理解,主要基于理论分析,并依照《反垄断法》的分类对滥用知识产权的垄断行为作出解释。在此基础上,文章分析了我国知识产权反垄断的立法现状,并对建设《反垄断法》第55条的适用制度提出建议。     

简论我国《反垄断法》第55条及其适用

我国《反垄断法》第55条对知识产权领域的垄断行为做出规制。对该法条的理解，主要基于理论分析，并依照《反垄断法》的分类对滥用知识产权的垄断行为作出解释。在此基础上，文章分析了我国知识产权反垄断的立法现状，并对建设《反垄断法》第55条的适用制度提出建议。     

知识产权滥用反垄断立法规制的现状与重构

知识产权滥用源于在现有法律框架下权利人对其知识产权的不恰当行使。总体来说,规制知识产权滥用的反垄断法律制度在我国还处于萌芽状态,从严格、完整意义上来说,甚至还近于空白。为了规制知识产权滥用行为,应着力完善我国的知识产权制度体系;改变《反垄断法》多头执法局面,设立有执行力的执法机构;完善诉讼程序,增强《反垄断法》的可实施性;尽快出台《反垄断法》实施细则和《知识产权滥用的反垄断规制指南》。     

对DVD事件中知识产权滥用的法律思考

DVD专利权联合许可在一定条件下属于对知识产权的正常行使。但当它妨碍了竞争时就不仅是对知识产权的滥用,而且还会进入反垄断法适用的范围,即可能构成限制竞争协议或滥用市场支配地位。然而,由于我国目前尚无一部独立的反垄断法,我们无法对这种行为进行规制,其结果将是我们对不断出现的类似事件失去控制,并制约我国市场经济的发展。为遏制跨国公司对知识产权的滥用,制订我国反垄断法已刻不容缓。     

The private value of patents by patent characteristics: evidence from Finland

I use renewal rates and fees to estimate the private value of Finnish patents by patent characteristic. I disaggregate the value estimations by applicant, patent breadth, and technology. Firm patents are 1.5 times more valuable than patents owned by individuals. This holds also when controlling for technology and breadth. There are large differences in values between technologies but in contrast to the usual assumption made in the theoretical literature, broader patents are not necessarily more valuable than narrower ones. Patent value is skewed and therefore the number of patents should be weighted by an index when measuring technological change. I construct this index for Finnish patents and find that renewing a patent one more year signals a 1.5 times more valuable patent.      

特许经营在反垄断法上的豁免

从表面上看,特许经营所采用的分割销售市场、固定转售价格等措施违反了《反垄断法》的规定,但是其具有享受豁免的理论和法律理由。理论的理由在于特许经营本身作为一种商业模式,其发展仰仗于这些措施的采用;法律的理由在于《反垄断法》提供了多种豁免条件,可以适用于特许经营。但特许经营在反垄断法上的豁免存在例外,《反垄断法》调整特许经营应当谨慎并保持克制。     

《中华人民共和国反垄断法》析评

The Anti-Monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China has provided to prohibit monopoly agreements and abuse of dominant market position, control concentration of business operators and fight against administrative monopoly. The transformation of China’s economic system is incomplete, and the Anti-Monopoly Law has many flaws. At the initial stage of enforcing the Anti-Monopoly Law, severe challenges will occur in legislative purposes, enforcement authorities, fighting against administrative monopoly and handling of the relationship between anti-monopoly enforcement and industry supervision. Thus, the promulgation of the Anti-Monopoly Law is only the first step in the legislation on anti-monopoly. Wang Xiaoye held a bachelor’s degree of philosophy from Inner Mongolian Normal University (1981), LL.M. from Renmin University of China (1984) and Doctor Juris magna cum laude from the University Hamburg (1993). Since 1984, she works at the Institute of Law, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS). From 1988 to 1993, she studied in Germany based on Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Private Law. As visiting scholar she spent a year at Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Intellectual Property and Competition Law, and a year at Max-Planck Institute for Comparative Social Law in Munich. In 2004, she was invited to the US by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice. In 2005, she was invited to the European Union Visitors Program, and awarded a Fulbright Scholarship to spend a year at the Chicago-Kent College of Law. Prof. Wang works in the areas of economic law, international economic law, and focuses on competition law. Her publications include: Monopoly and Competition in the Chinese Economy — A conception for merger control in China in view of the American and German practices (J C B Mohr, 1993); Monopoly Problem in the Merger of Enterprises (Law Press, 1996); On Competition Law (China’s Legal Publishing House, 1999); Competition Law of European Community (China’s Legal Publishing House, 2001); Economic Law (Social Sciences Academic Press, 2005); Competition Law (Social Sciences Academic Press, 2007). She also has over 200 papers published in Chinese, German and English languages. Prof. Wang has served as vice president of National Association for Economic Law of China, the head of the Consultant Committee for WTO Trade and Competition Policy of the Ministry of Commerce, and member of the Expert Advisory Board for Anti-Monopoly Legislation of the State Council and the National People’s Congress. In her honor, she once lectured on competition law for the Standing Committee of the Ninth and Tenth People’s Congress. In international academic activities, she is a founding member of Academic Society for Competition Law (ASCOLA) and of the Asian Competition Forum, and member of International Advisory Board of the CUTS C-CIER. She lectured on Chinese law at ABA, IBA, IPBA, ACF, Harvard University, Columbia University, Washington University (St. Louis), New York University, KFTC, Chatham House, LIDC, IDRC and other institutions.     

网络型公用企业竞争的法律规制

规制法治化是网络型公用企业竞争的必要前提,以事业法和反垄断法规制为其主要内容。事业法规制包括市场准入与退出规制、价格规制、互联互通与接入费规制、禁止交叉补贴与普遍服务规制、不对称规制等,其价值取向为涵盖在位生产者、潜在竞争者、交易者和消费者的福利在内的经济效率与社会公平之间的均衡;反垄断法规制包括滥用网络优势行为规制、合并与拆分规制、联合限制竞争规制、行政垄断规制等,其价值取向为“有限竞争自由→适度竞争自由→充分竞争自由”的发展。就法律位阶体系而言,反垄断法应为“基本法律”,而事业法为“非基本法律”,反垄断法应优于事业法。     

论我国技术创新法制的“社会本位”重构

技术创新法制主要涉及专利法和相关竞争法。在我国的专利法即将修改、反垄断法已经实施的新形势下,我国现有的技术创新法制将面临总体上的重构,鉴于该重构异常复杂,我们有必要从法理学的视角进行较深入的思考。从我国的基本国情出发,借鉴国外的成功经验,并考察相关的哲学和经济学根据,我们认为:我国技术创新法制的重构应坚持"社会本位"的立场,以维护与技术创新有关的社会性创新、社会性竞争以及消费者福利等社会利益为根本任务。而该定位要求:专利法应通过修订回归于社会本位,也就是要确立"准弱化"的专利法;相关竞争法应强化其原有的社会本位,也就是要确立"最强化"的相关竞争法;二者皆以增进消费者的经济福利为最终诉求。     

Erasing the misunderstanding on China��s Anti-Monopoly Law: A comparative study

As to the development of global competition law, China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (AML), being considered as a milestone for legalizing the institution of Chinese socialist market economy, has attracted a lot of attention from international communities. To improve the AML, it depends on self-constructing anti-monopoly law and absorbs foreign experiences by way of heated comments on the AML from international society and similar situations of China’s AML to the US Antitrust Law and the EU Competition Law.     

REVIEWS

Book reviewed in this article: The Control of Commercial Fraud . By L. H. Leigh . Striking a Balance ?—Employment Law After the 1980 Act . By Roy Lewis and Bob Simpson . Law and Economics . Edited by Ross Cranston and Ann Schick . Mental Health Law : Major Issues . By David B. Wexler . Fragile Freedoms . By Thomas R. Berger . Sentencing . By Hyman Gross and Andrew Von Hirsch . Law and Religion : The Jewish Experience . By Z. W. Falk . Mac Gillivray and Parkington on Insurance Law relating to all risks other than marine . Seventh edition by Michael Parkington , Anthony O'Dowd , Nicholas Legh -Jones and Andrew Longmore . Crime and the Criminal Law . Second edition, by Barbara Wootton . United States , Common Market and International Antitrust : A Comparative Guide . By Barry Hawk .     

Reviews

Books reviewed:
Byers (ed) The Role of Law in International Politics: Essays in International Relations and International Law
Jones Private Enforcement of Antitrust Law in the EU, UK and USA
Waldron Law and Disagreement
Forte (ed) Good Faith in Contract and Property Law
Lucy Understanding and Explaining Adjudication
Jones Speaking for the Dead: Cadavers in Biology and Medicine     

专利许可中价格限制的反垄断法分析

专利许可中的价格限制是许可人对被许可人实施许可专利而制造的专利产品销售价格的限制。专利许可中的价格限制可能对竞争产生影响,多数国家的反垄断法对这一行为表现出不同形式的关注。但多数坚持合理原则,即在界定相关市场的基础上,详细分析诸多涉案因素,综合衡量限制竞争与相关效率之利弊,做出最终判断。我国在制定相应指南时,应在坚持合理原则的基础上,强化指南的可操作性,寻求立法一般规定的具体化,形成有针对性的特殊规则,对初次销售价格限制与转售价格限制做区别对待,并在宏观上恰当协调和衔接价格法、专利法与反垄断法的相关规定。