普通共同诉讼的权限分配与范围界定

我国普通共同诉讼的实体要件过于单一,限于诉讼标的同一种类;程序要件较为僵硬,要求当事人与法院双重同意。这就使普通共同诉讼在司法实践中较难成立,适用范围比较狭窄,既难以发挥合并审理的诉讼效率功能,也无法承接必要共同诉讼的程序边界。普通共同诉讼的理论重构应当注重权限分配与范围界定。前者须合理协调当事人的程序异议权与法院的程序裁决权,限制合并管辖的适用情形,区分合并管辖与合并审理的不同定位。后者须明确普通共同诉讼与必要共同诉讼的进阶性顺位关系,必要共同诉讼应以合一确定的必要性而非诉讼标的共同为判断标准,普通共同诉讼须以诉讼标的同种且基础事实同种、基础事实同一或基础事实存在牵连关系三者作为合并审理的客观标准。     

Fundamental principles of the international protection system of intellectual property rights and the applications

Legal principle, which underlies the value of the legal system, is supposed to be the origin and basis of concrete legal rules. It has also resulted from abstracting and summarizing the value and spirit of these legal rules. In light of the universality and hierarchy of legal principle, the principles of the international protection system of intellectual property rights (IPR) can be divided into the following two types: one is the fundamental principles applied to the what, why and how a legal system shall be constructed, such as principles of sovereignty, equality and mutual benefit, joint development, and international cooperation, which also can be expressed as the principles of sovereignty, international coordination and cooperation, fairness and justice. The other type includes those existing in the legal system and capable of being applied directly, such as the principle of national treatment, principle of minimum standard, principle of independence (for industrial property right), principle of independent protection (for copyright), principle of compulsory implementing patent (for patent right) and doctrine of priority (for industrial property right), etc. In my opinion, the principles of the international protection system of IPR shall follow the latter model, indicating that they shall be provided and written in the international conventions on the grounds that they can be applied directly, and that they can be universally applied to the whole international protection system of IPR instead of exclusive application to one certain system. Hereupon, the author believes that principles concerning the international protection system of IPR should include the principles of national treatment, minimum protection standard and public interest.     

论民事起诉权

民事起诉权是当事人一项重要的诉讼权利,是公民的基本权利在民事诉讼领域的重要体现。它具有启动民事诉讼程序、维护当事人合法权益、制约法院审判权的滥用等多方面的功能。我国现行的一些制度诸如起诉和受理制度等对于民事起诉权的保障还存在许多不足,有待于进一步完善。     

Managing commercial risks in open source software licensing

Legal context: The article reviews the commercial risk allocation clauses intypical open source licence terms and discusses their enforceabilityand implications. Key points: The enforceability of warranty disclaimers and limitation ofliability clauses in common open source licence terms is questionable,particularly in a cross-border context, and commercial licensorsshould take additional steps to protect themselves from down-streamrisks. Practical significance: Open source software presents a number of unusual commercialissues, because it is available free of charge and the providerstry to disclaim warranties and liabilities. End users and resellershave to adjust their own in- and out-licensing models to accommodatethis situation.     

论专利权滥用行为的法律规制

随着科技的发展和技术贸易量的加大 ,专利权滥用行为的问题日益突出。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 ,构成对专利法等民事法律立法宗旨的违背和对反垄断法的违反。本文对专利权滥用行为理论进行了一般分析 ,并对世界主要国家与我国专利权滥用控制法律制度作了比较研究 ,在此基础上 ,提出了建立我国专利权滥用行为反垄断法控制制度的相关建议。     

论行政诉讼被告资格范式的重构

行政诉讼的被告资格一直是困扰行政法理论界和实务界的一个难题,笔者认为造成这种困境的主要原因是学术界错误地把行政主体资格作为认定行政诉讼被告的条件。事实上,从便于诉讼的角度出发,行政诉讼被告的认定规则完全可以简单化。值此我国《行政诉讼法》修改之际,参照世界各国行政诉讼的被告资格制度,重构我国行政诉讼被告资格范式,对于正确发挥行政诉讼的应有功效,理顺行政组织法研究体系具有重要的意义。     

诉讼欺诈行为研究——以刑法为视角的分析

诉讼欺诈是一种独特的危害社会的行为。我国刑法理论和司法实践对诉讼欺诈行为的定性分歧较大。事实上,诉讼欺诈完全符合诈骗罪的本质特征,因而应按诈骗罪定罪量刑。诉讼欺诈行为侵犯双重具体的社会关系,但其直接客体是单一客体。诈骗罪中的被骗人与被害人不必是同一人,但被骗人与财产处分者必须是同一人;在被骗人与被害人不一致的情况下,应当以被骗人为基准来判断处分意思和处分行为。     

完善我国未成年人犯罪司法保护制度

未成年人犯罪是一种特殊的犯罪类型,它在犯罪的成因与认定、刑罚的适用、诉讼的方式及犯罪的预防等方面都具有与成年人犯罪不同的特点,从而形成了相对独立的未成年人犯罪法律制度。从我国未成年人犯罪呈现的几大特点来看,现行未成年人犯罪法律制度存在着诸多不尽完善的地方,而且也越来越不能满足现实的要求。因此我们有必要加以重新审视,以进一步提高对未成年人的司法保护水平,完善中国的未成年人司法制度。     

证据排除规则的重构——以诉讼效率为视角

诉讼效率指诉讼收益与诉讼成本之间的差额。诉讼收益主要体现为发现真实,而诉讼成本主要体现为证据的收集与认定成本。证据排除规则既可以保障发现案件真实,亦可以保护其他合法利益,但我国目前的证据法没有能够从提供诉讼效率的角度去设计证据排除规则,我国诉讼法中不同的诉讼采用相同的证明标准是这一现象出现的重要原因。     

我国刑事被害人诉讼权利保护制度的完善

随着诉讼制度的发展,刑事被害人的诉讼地位经历了一个由高到低再逐渐提高的过程。我国修改后的刑事诉讼法提升了被害人的法律地位,并一定程度上强化了其诉讼权利,但在保护被害人诉讼权利方面仍存在着一些不足,应当采取相应的措施加以完善。