竞争法对知识产权的保护与限制

竞争法是维护市场经济制度下竞争自由原则的基本法律。知识产权是对创造性智力成果及工商业标记所享有的权利。在知识经济时代,创新日益成为获得竞争优势的重要手段,而伴随着市场竞争的加剧、竞争手段的翻新,当某些类型的知识产权在难以受到传统知识产权法保护时,需要借助竞争法获得保护;由于知识产权可带来市场优势地位,权利人有时超出知识产权法所赋予的权利范围行使权利,此时则需竞争法对此加以限制。因此,竞争法在对知识产权提供保护的同时,约束知识产权的行使不超出法律规定的限度,以避免对竞争自由及创新带来不利影响。     

与技术标准相关的知识产权强制许可

在知识经济时代,知识产权在市场竞争中起着非常重要的作用,从而它的行使与竞争法包括反垄断法有着密切的关系。本文以技术标准为视角,以德国的Spundfass和美国的N-date两个案件为例,说明作为技术标准的知识产权有可能被强制许可的情况。本文指出,知识产权的行使须受竞争法的制约,解决知识产权与竞争法二者冲突的方法是衡量限制竞争的影响。我国反垄断法第55条对滥用知识产权限制竞争的行为作出了禁止性规定。为了使这个规定具有可操作性,我国应在这方面尽快制定相关的实施细则或者指南。     

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。     

中国反垄断法应如何对待知识产权问题

反垄断法和知识产权保护既存在基本的一致性,又在具体实施过程中存在冲突。这种冲突是由知识产权的不正当行使(滥用)行为而引起的,并违反了各国的竞争政策。中国需要利用正在制定《反垄断法》的契机,建立起对知识产权行使行为加以规制的制度,明确反垄断法律制度适用于滥用知识产权非法限制竞争的行为,并由竞争执法机关根据不同时期的具体情况制定专门的指南或规章解决适用中的具体问题。     

浅谈知识产权与反垄断法

知识产权作为一种合法的垄断权,一般是作为反垄断法的适用除外而存在。知识产权自有其存在的合理性,在协调知识产权法与反垄断法的关系时,一方面,知识产权法要对其所确认的独占权进行自我限制,另一方面,反垄断法也要对行使知识产权所产生的限制竞争的后果给予一定程度的宽容,最终达到一种利益平衡。     

试论知识产权的滥用

知识产权本身作为一种合法的垄断权,是近现代社会为推动科技进步、经济繁荣和社会发展而作出的一项重要的制度设计,它一般是作为反垄法的适用除外而存在的。随着以知识、信息为基础的新经济时代的到来,高科技日益成为各国竞争的核心力量,知识产权的研发与保护也越来越引起各国的普遍重视。但是,利益的驱使以知识产权本身所具有的专有独占性,导致了知识产权权利的滥用。     

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。     

知识产权与反垄断法的关系解读

知识产权本身是合法的垄断权,尽管存在一定的消极后果,但那是国家为实施知识产权制度以推动创新的必要代价。反垄断法是现代国家为弥补民商法调整之不足而自觉地干预市场,以维护自由、公平的竞争秩序和经济活力而制定的。知识产权与反垄断法在促进竞争、推动创新和保护消费者上具有一致性,但二者也存在冲突的可能性和协调的必要性:当知识产权的行使行为超出法律的界限,排除、限制竞争时,反垄断法就应当介入这种行为,并在反垄断审查中将知识产权与其他财产权同等对待。     

试论知识产权法和竞争法之间的关系

知识产权法通过保护权利人的合法权益,鼓励知识和技术创新促进社会进步。而竞争法中的反不正当竞争法是通过维护正当的竞争秩序,制止非法竞争行为,达到鼓励技术创新和促进社会进步的目的。本文通过阐述知识产权法和竞争法之间的关系,进一步探讨创造性成果类知识产权法及商业标识类知识产权法与反不正当竞争法的适用关系。     

论知识产权法与竞争法在促进有效竞争方面的平衡与协调

知识产权法不仅需要维护权利所有人的利益,而且需要服务于维护公平竞争的目标。在知识产权法与反不正当竞争法、反垄断法等竞争法之间,存在一种利益平衡问题,需要实现知识产权的行使与反垄断控制、反竞争控制间的平衡。这种平衡机制总的来说是平衡各种应当保护的利益,主要涉及知识产权的私人利益和促进公平竞争的社会利益。     

Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana on Avidyā

The concept of avidyā is one of the central categories in the Advaita of Śaṇkara and Maṇḍana. Shifting the focus from māyā, interpreted either as illusion or as the divine power, this concept brings ignorance to the forefront in describing duality and bondage. Although all Advaitins accept avidyā as a category, its scope and nature is interpreted in multiple ways. Key elements in Maṇḍana’s philosophy include the plurality of avidyā, individual selves as its substrate and the Brahman as its field (viṣaya), and the distinction in avidyā between non-apprehension and misapprehension. A closer investigation shows that Maṇḍana is directly influenced by Bhartṛhari’s linguistic non-dualism in developing the concept of avidyā. This study also compares other key constituents such as vivartta and pariṇāma that are relevant to the analysis of avidyā. As the concept of counter-image (pratibimba) emerges as a distinct stream of Advaita subsequent to Maṇḍana, this study also compares the application of pratibimba in the writings of Bhartṛhari and Maṇḍana.     

Unraveling the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Kāvyaprakāśa</Emphasis>: Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa’s idiosyncratic sequence of topics in the <Emphasis Type="Italic">Candrāloka</Emphasis>

In his twelfth century alaṃkāraśāstra, the Candrāloka, Jayadeva Pīyūṣavarṣa reverses the sequence of topics found in Mammaṭa’s Kāvyapr-akāśa, an earlier and immensely popular work. With such a structural revisionism, Jayadeva asserts the autonomy of his own work and puts forth an ambitious critique of earlier approaches to literary analysis. Jayadeva investigates the technical and aesthetic components of poetry in the first part of the Candrāloka, prior to his formal semantic investigations in the latter half of the text, thus suggesting that aesthetic evaluations of poetry beneficially inform scientific investigations of language. Jayadeva’s organization of his chapters on the semantic operations, moreover, intimates that the study of suggestive and metaphoric functions of language clarifies our understanding of denotation, which is conventionally understood to be the primary and direct path of verbal designation.     

The Supreme Array Scripture: A New Interpretation of the Title “Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra”

This article argues for a new interpretation of the Sanskrit compound gaṇḍa-vyūha as it is used in the common title of the Mahāyāna text the Gaṇḍavyūha-Sūtra.The author begins by providing a brief history of the sūtra’s appellations in Chinese and Tibetan sources. Next, the meanings of gaṇḍa (the problematic member of the compound) are explored. The author proposes that contemporary scholars have overlooked a meaning of gaṇḍa occurring in some compounds, wherein gaṇḍa can mean simply “great,” “big” or “massive.” This general sense is particularly common in the compound gaṇda-śaila (a “massive rock” or “boulder”) and is found in such texts as the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the Harivaṃśa and the Harṣacarita. Following the discussion of Gaṇḍa, the author examines the term vyūha (“array”) as it is used in the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra. The article concludes with the suggestion that a more appropriate translation of the Gaṇḍavyūha-sūtra would be “The Supreme array Scripture.”     

Evaluation of six presumptive tests for blood, their specificity, sensitivity, and effect on high molecular-weight DNA

Luminol, leuchomalachite green, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, Hemident, and Bluestar are all used as presumptive tests for blood. In this study, the tests were subjected to dilute blood (from 1:10,000 to 1:10,000,000), many common household substance, and chemicals. Samples were tested for DNA to determine whether the presumptive tests damaged or destroyed DNA. The DNA loci tested were D2S1338 and D19S433. Leuchomalachite green had a sensitivity of 1:10,000, while the remaining tests were able to detect blood to a dilution of 1:100,000. Substances tested include saliva, semen, potato, tomato, tomato sauce, tomato sauce with meat, red onion, red kidney bean, horseradish, 0.1 M ascorbic acid, 5% bleach, 10% cupric sulfate, 10% ferric sulfate, and 10% nickel chloride. Of all the substances tested, not one of the household items reacted with every test; however, the chemicals did. DNA was recovered and amplified from luminol, phenolphthalein, Hemastix, and Bluestar, but not from leuchomalachite green or Hemident.     

Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

Monks Who Have Sex: Pārājika Penance in Indian Buddhist Monasticisms

In the study of Buddhism it is commonly accepted that a monk or nun who commits a pārājika offence is permanently and irrevocably expelled from the Buddhist monastic order. This view is based primarily on readings of the Pāli Vinaya. With the exception of the Pāli Vinaya, however, all other extant Buddhist monastic law codes (Dharmaguptaka, Mahāsāṅghika, Mahīśāsaka, Sarvāstivāda and Mūlasarvāstivāda) contain detailed provisions for monks and nuns who commit pārājikas but nevertheless wish to remain within the saṅgha. These monastics are not expelled. Rather, they are granted a special status known as the śikṣādattaka. In this paper I explore the rules. concerning pārājika penance and the śikṣādattaka with specific regard to monastic celibacy. Given that five out of six extant law codes recognise this remarkable accommodation to the rule of celibacy, I argue that we must look to Vinayas other than the Pāli Vinaya if we are to arrive at a nuanced and representative view of Indian Buddhist monasticism.

Grant me chastity and continence, but not yet. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.)

     

Family breakdown and the ‘Welfare Child’ in 19th and 20th century Britain

This article traces new cycles of interest in past children as distinct from past childhood. Recent work highlighting that a conceptualisation of childhood existed even in periods with few written records closes the chapter begun by Philippe Ariès in 1960. Instead, there has been a new surge of interest in children on the edges of family life, as well as children in similarly liminal positions between the worlds of adults and children: runaways, delinquents and orphans. Several themes in the literature are identified, based on the conflicting ideas of ‘body/mind’, ‘victim/threat’, ‘needs/rights’. It is noted that researchers are using more imaginative ways of reaching the lived experience of children than the family or institutional framework, and that an increasing link is drawn between historical and modern concerns such as child abuse and the care of ‘at risk’ children.     

The Mūlāvidyā Controversy Among Advaita Vedāntins: was Śaṅkara Himself Responsible?

The concept of avidyā or ignorance is central to the Advaita Vedāntic position of Śȧnkara. The post-Śaṅkara Advaitins wrote sub-commentaries on the original texts of Śaṅkara with the intention of strengthening his views. Over the passage of time the views of these sub-commentators of Śaṅkara came to be regarded as representing the doctrine of Advaita particularly with regard to the concept of avidyā. Swami Satchidanandendra Saraswati, a scholar-monk of Holenarsipur, challenged the accepted tradition through the publication of his work Mūlāvidyānirāsaḥ, particularly with regard to the avidyādoctrine. It was his contention that the post-Śaṅkara commentators brought their own innovations particularly on the nature of avidyā. This was the idea of mūlāvidyā or ‘root ignorance’, a positive entity which is the material cause of the phenomenal world. Saraswati argues that such an idea of mūlāvidyā is not to be found in the bhāṣyas (commentaries) of Śaṅkara and is foisted upon Śaṅkara. This paper attempts to show that although Śaṅkara may not have explicitly favoured such a view of mūlāvidyā, his lack of clarity on the nature of avidyā left enough scope for the post-Śaṅkara commentators to take such a position on avidyā.     

Student mentoring to enhance graduates’ employability potential

This paper considers whether the adoption of a subject-specific, classroom-based, voluntary extra-curricular student mentoring scheme could provide an effective mechanism and andragogic approach to enhance higher education students’ employability potential pre-graduation.Over the three-year pilot, 26 more advanced (second to fourth year) undergraduate students actively mentored nearly 400 first year undergraduate students during workshops delivered annually within forensic and policing focused courses. In total, 17 mentors anonymously completed online, post-scheme surveys. Survey data was quantitatively analysed to evaluate the scheme, establish which skills and attributes mentors had developed and investigate whether mentors could appropriately identify example skills within professional terminology used during employer recruitment. In addition, this paper reflects on the implementation of remote student mentoring during the COVID-19 pandemic and its adoption within a blended learning framework.The results from this research strongly support mentoring as an effective mechanism to develop undergraduate employability skills, significantly developing mentors’ self-confidence and self-efficacy in their interpersonal and communication skills. Although mentors were aware of university graduate attributes and thought they could evidence these with appropriate examples, in practice this was not necessarily the case. As a result, a framework is proposed to enable mentors to identify their skills and how they may align with competencies sought by relevant forensic and policing employers. However, other andragogic practices may need to be implemented to maximise the potential for successful graduate employment.     

Vedic Language and Vaiṣṇava Theology:Madhva’s Use of Nirukta in his Ṛgbhāṣya

This article explores the way in which Madhva (1238–1317), the founder of the Dvaita Vedānta system of Hindu thought, reformulates the traditional exegetic practice of nirukta or “word derivation” to validate his pluralistic, hierarchical, and Vaiṣṇava reading of the Ṛgvedic hymns. Madhva’s Ṛgbhāṣya (RB) is conspicuous for its heavy reliance on and unique deployment of this exegetical tactic to validate several key features of his distinctive theology. These features include his belief in Viṣṇu’s unique possession of all perfect attributes (guṇaparipūrṇatva) and His related conveyability by all Vedic words (sarvaśabdavācyatva). Such an understanding of Vedic language invokes the basic nirukta presupposition that words are eternally affiliated with the meanings they convey. But it is also based onMadhva’s access to a lexicon entitled Vyāsa’s Nirukti with which his critics and perhaps even his commentators seem to be unfamiliar.While the precise status of this text is the subject of ongoing debate, Madhva’s possession of special insight into the sacred canon is established in part by his unique claim to be an avatāra of the wind god Vāyu and a direct disciple of Viṣṇu Himself in the form of Vyāsa₁. Thus, Madhva’s use of nirukta invokes his personal charisma to challenge not only conventional understandings of the hymns but traditional exegetic norms. Madhva’s provision of an alternative tradition of nirukta provoked sectarian debate throughout the Vijayanagara period over the extent to which one could innovate in established practices of reading the Veda. Articulating the Veda’s precise authority was a key feature of Brahmin debates during this period and reflects both the empire’s concern with promoting a shared religious ideology and the competition among rival Brahman sects for imperial patronage that this concern elicited. By looking at how two of Madhva’s most important commentators (the 14^th-century Jayatīrtha and the 17^th-century Rāghavendra) sought to defend his niruktis, this article will explore how notions of normative nirukta were articulated in response to Madhva’s deviations. At the same time, however, examining Madhva’s commentators’ defense of his niruktis also demonstrates the extent to which Madhva actually adhered to selected exegetic norms. This reveals that discomfort with Madhva’s particular methods for deriving words stemmed, in part, from a more general ambivalence towards this exegetical tactic whose inherent open-endedness threatened to undermine the fixity of the canon’s very substance: its language. Vyāsa’s Nirukti is one of several ”unknown sources” cited in Madhva’s commentaries whose exact status continues to be debated. Some scholars (e.g. Rao, Sharma, Siauve) maintain that these texts are part of a now lost Pāṅcarātra tradition that Madhva is attempting to preserve. This may be true for many of these citations. However, in addition to claiming to be both an avatāra of Vāyu and Viṣṇu-as-Vyāsa’s student, Madhva states in several places (e.g., VTN 42, RB 162) that the canon has suffered loss during transmission and that only Viṣṇu can reveal it in its entirety. Thus, it is possible that Madhva intends texts like Vyāsa’s Nirukti to be viewed as part of an ongoing and corrective revelation, a notion that is compatible with many Vaiṣṇava traditions (Halbfass, 1991: 4).