专利当地实施要求的法律思考

各国专利法中的“当地实施要求”条款与TRIPS协议是否存在冲突 ,发达国家与发展中国家各执一词。但从立法史上来看 ,《巴黎公约》对其最初予以确认 ,其后历次大会经剧烈争论后仍将其保留 ,说明其具有历史的合理性 ;从条约解释学上看 ,根据《维也纳条约法公约》 ,TRIPS第 2 7条并不能构成禁止当地实施的“绝对条款” ,TRIPS对此问题没有明确的规定意味着应该适用《巴黎公约》的规定和TRIPS“平衡发明者与使用者之间的权利和义务”的立法宗旨 ,因此“当地实施要求”并不违反TRIPS的规定 ,具有合法性 ,是发展中国家对自己的合理保护。

Legal Reflections of the Requirement of Local Working of Patents

It has been intensely debated whether the requirement of local working of patents under domestic lawof the WTO''s member states is in conformity with the TRIPS agreement. This is exemplified by the recent conflict between the USA and Brazil over local working provisions under article 68 of Brazilian Intellectual Property Law. This paper first discusses the issue of local working in terms of legislative history, concluding that both the Paris Convention on the Protection of Intellectual Property and the TRIPS agreement do not prohibit member states from adopting the requirement of local working. It also examines the device of local working from the perspective of treaty hermeneutics, and concludes that the local working of patents is permissible if the relevant provisions of the Paris Convention and the TRIPS agreement are interpreted literally and purposively. In conclusion, the local working system is fully consistent with the requirement of the TRIPS agreement, thus it is the legal and reasonable protection of themselves by the developing countries.