本文選題：海關(guān)監(jiān)管　切入點(diǎn)：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)　出處：《寧波大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：海關(guān)在進(jìn)出境環(huán)節(jié)對(duì)貨物進(jìn)行侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)監(jiān)管，具體來(lái)說(shuō)一個(gè)國(guó)家或地區(qū)的海關(guān)，在對(duì)貨物、物品進(jìn)行進(jìn)出境日常的監(jiān)督管理過(guò)程中，依照本國(guó)的法律法規(guī)確保所進(jìn)出境的貨物、物品不會(huì)侵犯受本國(guó)法律保護(hù)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)。海關(guān)監(jiān)管的目的，是為了保護(hù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利人的合法權(quán)利，更是為了維護(hù)國(guó)際貿(mào)易的公平公正，促進(jìn)本國(guó)與其他國(guó)家間的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)交流和發(fā)展。世貿(mào)組織的《與貿(mào)易有關(guān)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)協(xié)議》明確了知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)海關(guān)監(jiān)管的范圍，但由于其規(guī)定的模糊性，給各國(guó)在執(zhí)法過(guò)程中提供了選擇的機(jī)會(huì)。使得世界各發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家根據(jù)各國(guó)的具體情況進(jìn)行選擇性執(zhí)法。中國(guó)“入世”的時(shí)間較晚，且是一個(gè)發(fā)展中國(guó)家，在“入世”談判時(shí)不免被大國(guó)所綁架。中國(guó)海關(guān)對(duì)進(jìn)出境貨物進(jìn)行知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)監(jiān)管，法定范圍超出了《與貿(mào)易有關(guān)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)協(xié)議》的強(qiáng)制性最低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，立足點(diǎn)也高于歐盟、美國(guó)等世界上一些發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家，但如此高的立足點(diǎn)與中國(guó)海關(guān)的執(zhí)法能力不相適應(yīng)，，由此導(dǎo)致了中國(guó)海關(guān)在辦理侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)案件中一大堆疑難問(wèn)題的出現(xiàn)，面對(duì)這些疑難問(wèn)題，漸漸的我們遠(yuǎn)離了自己處事的基本原則。因?yàn)樵趯?shí)務(wù)中，通關(guān)效率也是海關(guān)考核的重要內(nèi)容之一，同時(shí)還要兼顧知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利人與進(jìn)出境貨物收發(fā)貨人雙方的權(quán)益。但是執(zhí)法過(guò)程中疑難案件的辦結(jié)是否預(yù)示著我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)海關(guān)監(jiān)管制度已經(jīng)達(dá)到了完美呢？我們可能還是無(wú)法樂(lè)觀。作者從海關(guān)現(xiàn)行的監(jiān)管模式切入，采用比較分析法，通過(guò)實(shí)例分析和法理研究進(jìn)行論述。因?yàn)橹袊?guó)海關(guān)在監(jiān)管范圍、監(jiān)管方式、司法協(xié)作等方面存在法律規(guī)定不明確、不合理的問(wèn)題，以及在平行進(jìn)口、定牌加工性質(zhì)上國(guó)人認(rèn)識(shí)不統(tǒng)一的問(wèn)題，還有原本應(yīng)該與海關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)監(jiān)管站在同一戰(zhàn)壕的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利人，其為追究個(gè)體利益，運(yùn)用監(jiān)管存在的漏洞，置海關(guān)于尷尬之境的問(wèn)題，使得中國(guó)海關(guān)維護(hù)公平正義的價(jià)值理念難以伸張。在這種情況下，中國(guó)海關(guān)應(yīng)當(dāng)從自身利益的長(zhǎng)足發(fā)展出發(fā)，根據(jù)國(guó)家的基本國(guó)情，從各個(gè)層面著手應(yīng)對(duì)，真正實(shí)現(xiàn)國(guó)際貿(mào)易的公平公正、和諧自由。在列舉了海關(guān)日常監(jiān)管中存在的問(wèn)題之后，作者提出了改良建議。最終也是想確立一個(gè)既符合國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，又能最大限度保護(hù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利人和國(guó)家正當(dāng)利益的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)監(jiān)管模式，在公平正義下趨利避害，努力建設(shè)一個(gè)國(guó)際與國(guó)內(nèi)、海關(guān)與社會(huì)、權(quán)利人與社會(huì)大眾共贏的環(huán)境，促使我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)制度的進(jìn)一步完善。
[Abstract]:In the entry and exit links, the Customs supervises the infringement of intellectual property rights on goods. Specifically, the customs of a country or region, in the course of daily supervision and administration of goods and articles in and out of the country, Ensure, in accordance with the laws and regulations of the State, that goods and articles entering or leaving the country do not infringe upon intellectual property rights protected by the law of the State... the purpose of customs control is to protect the legitimate rights of the person who has the right to intellectual property, In order to safeguard the fairness and fairness of international trade and to promote the exchange and development of intellectual property rights between China and other countries, the Agreement on Trade-Related aspects of intellectual property Rights of the World Trade Organization defines the scope of customs supervision of intellectual property rights. However, due to the ambiguity of its provisions, it provides countries with an opportunity to choose in the course of law enforcement and makes the developed countries in the world carry out selective law enforcement according to the specific conditions of each country. China's "accession to the WTO" is relatively late, and it is a developing country. During the WTO negotiations, they were inevitably kidnapped by big countries. The Chinese Customs has exercised intellectual property rights supervision over inward and outward goods. The legal scope of the law exceeds the mandatory minimum standards of the Agreement on Trade-Related aspects of intellectual property Rights (trips), and its foothold is also higher than that of the EU. Some developed countries in the world, such as the United States, but such a high foothold do not match the law enforcement capacity of the Chinese Customs, which has resulted in the emergence of a large number of difficult problems in handling intellectual property infringement cases by the Chinese Customs, and faced with these difficult problems. Gradually, we moved away from the basic principles of our own work. Because in practice, customs clearance efficiency is also an important part of customs assessment. At the same time, we should also take into account the rights and interests of both the owner of intellectual property rights and the consignor and consignee of inbound and outbound goods. However, does the conclusion of difficult cases in the course of law enforcement indicate that the customs supervision system of intellectual property rights in China has reached perfection? We may still be unable to be optimistic. The author uses comparative analysis, case analysis and jurisprudence to discuss from the current mode of customs supervision, because the Chinese Customs is in the scope of supervision and the mode of supervision. Judicial cooperation and other aspects of the legal provisions are not clear, unreasonable problems, as well as parallel imports, licensing processing in the nature of the Chinese people do not understand the problem of unity, There is also the problem of the holders of intellectual property rights who should have stood in the same trench as customs intellectual property supervision, in order to investigate the individual interests, use the loopholes existing in the supervision and put the customs in an awkward situation. This makes it difficult for the Chinese Customs to uphold the value of fairness and justice. In this case, the Chinese Customs should proceed from the rapid development of its own interests and proceed from various levels in the light of the basic national conditions of the country. After enumerating the problems existing in the daily customs supervision, the author puts forward some suggestions for improvement. Finally, he also wants to establish a system that conforms to the international standards. And the intellectual property supervision mode which can protect the intellectual property right holders and the legitimate interests of the state to the maximum extent, and seek advantages and avoid disadvantages under the condition of fairness and justice, and strive to build a win-win environment between international and domestic, customs and society, right holders and the general public. To promote the further improvement of intellectual property protection system in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：寧波大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：F752.5

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 曲三強(qiáng);平行進(jìn)口與我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)[J];法學(xué);2002年08期

2 梅毅之;;關(guān)于出口環(huán)節(jié)海關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)案例分析[J];科技與法律;2007年02期

3 吳靜箐;;我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)海關(guān)保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀與對(duì)策[J];科技情報(bào)開(kāi)發(fā)與經(jīng)濟(jì);2007年08期

4 孫曉芳;;中美知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)端與中國(guó)專(zhuān)利制度調(diào)整的研究[J];沈陽(yáng)工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2008年01期

5 曹艷華;;保護(hù)私權(quán)，還是維護(hù)公共利益?——對(duì)中國(guó)海關(guān)在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)邊境保護(hù)中角色定位的法律分析[J];上海海關(guān)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年03期

6 張嵐;廣州海關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)工作調(diào)查報(bào)告——兼論知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法律的本土化[J];廣東商學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年06期

7 丁凱;論中國(guó)海關(guān)在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)中存在的問(wèn)題與對(duì)策[J];煙臺(tái)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年01期

8 陳旭東;淺談“入世”后的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)海關(guān)保護(hù)[J];中國(guó)海關(guān);2000年10期

9 周培榮;化繁為簡(jiǎn) 知己知彼——中歐海關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)比較[J];中國(guó)海關(guān);2002年03期

10 李群英;;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)海關(guān)保護(hù)總擔(dān)保[J];中國(guó)海關(guān);2006年07期

本文編號(hào)：1615902