从日本专利法修订谈滨海新区的知识产权驱动政策

天津滨海新区作为国家重点高新开发区,在＂十二五＂期间要加快转变经济发展方式,必需从知识产权法角度对职务发明加以保护,以完善滨海新区的知识产权驱动政策。文章在研究日本专利法相关修订经验的基础上,提出完善产权激励和奖酬激励等利益驱动模式,建议制定《滨海新区职务发明保护办法》;同时建设良好的职务发明企业文化,配合税收优惠政策,更好的鼓励发明人进行职务发明,创造出更多的社会经济效益。     

质疑实用新型与发明专利的“衔接式”保护

现行的《专利审查指南》赋予同一申请人就相同的发明创造享有实用新型专利和发明专利的“衔接式”保护。这种“衔接式”保护不仅违反了禁止重复授权原则,而且造成了专利申请量的虚高和专利审查程序的复杂化,加重了专利局的审查工作负担,延长了同一发明创造的保护期。因此,必须废除《专利审查指南》所创设的“衔接式”保护机制。     

虚拟仪器与电子实验教学

作者在文中介绍了虚拟仪器在电子虚拟实难。虚拟仪器不但功能多样、测量准确，而且图形界面好、操作简易、经济实惠；利用虚拟仪器进行电子实验教学是实验教学的发展方向；电子技术虚拟实验步骤简单，教师教是轻松，学生学得主动。     

Re-inventing invention: new tendencies in capitalist commodification

Abstract

This paper argues that a shift is taking place in the fabric of capitalism as a result of a change in how the business of invention is understood. Using theoretical approaches that rely on the notion that capitalism increasingly tries to draw in the whole intellect, in the first part of the paper I argue that the new understanding of innovation currently shows up as three associated developments: as the mobilization of forethought, as the deepening of the lure of the commodity through the co-creation of commodities with consumers, and as the construction of different kinds of apparently more innovative space suffused with information technology. The second part of the paper then argues that these disclosures are leading to new forms of value, based on generating moments of rightness. There is a brief conclusion.     

对职务发明成果归属的新思考

新修改的专利法在职务发明成果归属问题上确立了合同优先原则，这是相对的进步，但我们应更进一步，按照谁投入谁受益的原则，确立在本职工作中或单位交付的任务中作出的发明创造，应“归于”发明人和单位共有，而仅仅利用单位的物质条件所完成的发明创造，应直接“归于”发明人个人所有，单位享有优先有偿实施权的新制度。     

Policy Transfer Over Time: A Case of Growing Complexity

The article indicates that policy transfer has played an important role in the development of policy and legislation in Australia. Indeed, much of what is regarded as Australian policy is borrowed, usually in small part, but sometimes in its entirety, from elsewhere. One of the implications of this view is that Australian policy making processes are often, at least in part, dynamic, policy processes that draw upon a number of sources, both domestic and international. The focus of this article is upon the sources of transfer in the Australian context, both domestic and international, and how the sources drawn upon by Australian state and federal governments have changed over time. The article also indicates that on the evidence available the Australian experience with transfer can be divided into a number of phases. The first, from European colonisation to approximately the middle of the nineteenth century, the second from roughly the middle of the nineteenth century to federation at the beginning of the twentieth century, the third from the establishment of the Australian federation in 1901, to the Second World War, and the fourth phase, from the Second World War to the present.     

Jiaozi

正No dish is better known in China than jiaozi,dumplings with meat and vegetable fillings wrapped in thin pastry and served boiled,steamed or fried.There are many stories about the origins of jiaozi.One widely cited is that the delicacy is the invention of Zhang Ji(Zhang Zhongjing,150-219),author of Treatise on Cold Pathogenic and Miscellaneous Diseases and one of the greatest practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine in history.After retiring from his official post,Zhang established a clinic in his hometown of Nanyang that would open every winter with a kitchen serving a soup     

国家资助项目职务发明权利配置的法经济探析

国家资助项目中职务发明权利配置面临诸多法律法规与行政规章的规范竞合,其规范适用效果须以其能否有效促进其职务发明权利流转为判定基准,其效率价值实现有赖增进其职务发明权利流转、减小其交易成本、确保利益受损者获得有效补偿,完善其有关制度安排须明晰其职务发明权属的法定范围,完备其职务发明人的优先申请、优先受让与优先实施专利等法定权利,强化其职务发明人的法定义务。     

基因专利保护的利弊分析

基因专利保护的问题由来已久,而争论的焦点大多集中在基因是发明还是发现的问题上。实际上,基因是发明还是发现并不是基因是否应该受专利法保护的关键。任何制度的设计都是为了促进社会发展的,如果用专利制度保护基因利大于弊,能够更好地促进基因技术的发展,就应该授予基因专利权,否则就不应该授权。通过分析可以得出,基因应该属于发现,但是以专利制度保护基因利大于弊,所以我国应该授予基因专利。     

非法实施发明专利入罪的认识误区及克服

加强专利权保护是形势使然。专利权具有无形性、公开性和非竞争性,容易受到侵害。专利民事司法保护存在刚性不足、赔偿数额认定难等局限。专利行政执法对效率的追求造成程序监督弱化。刑法具有制裁手段的严厉性和“二次保障性”特征,遏制专利侵权优势明显。以专利权系私权、专利权具有不确定性、专利案件审理存在技术性难题为由反对非法实施发明专利侵权入罪的主张并不成立。专利刑事立法应当从“权利救济”转向“法益救济”,重构有关专利犯罪客体,增设非法实施发明专利罪,把故意侵犯发明专利且情节严重的行为规定为犯罪。