發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-06-26 11:47

  本文選題：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán) + 反壟斷　； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著上世紀(jì)末知識(shí)經(jīng)濟(jì)的蓬勃發(fā)展,作為現(xiàn)代企業(yè)贏得競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的最有力武器,知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)為社會(huì)生產(chǎn)力的發(fā)展帶來(lái)巨大動(dòng)力,科技創(chuàng)新能力日益成為企業(yè)生存和發(fā)展的生命線。因此各國(guó)對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的保護(hù)愈加重視。但這同時(shí)也帶來(lái)了新的苦惱就是企業(yè)濫用知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的問(wèn)題也是越來(lái)越嚴(yán)重了。設(shè)置技術(shù)壁壘、故意閑置專利、技術(shù)捆綁銷售等行為屢見不鮮,嚴(yán)重限制了市場(chǎng)的自由有序競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。這不僅違背了知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)制度設(shè)計(jì)者的初衷,也給反壟斷法的執(zhí)行帶來(lái)了新的挑戰(zhàn)。 2002年,三星、LG等多家外企利用“專利池”對(duì)中國(guó)DVD企業(yè)收取高額專利費(fèi),由此帶來(lái)的利潤(rùn)驟降導(dǎo)致我國(guó)DVD企業(yè)幾乎遭受滅頂之災(zāi)。2003年思科訴華為侵犯知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)一案也對(duì)華為的北美市場(chǎng)造成巨大損失。一系列的利用知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)案件使我國(guó)認(rèn)識(shí)到自己在這個(gè)領(lǐng)域的立法缺失,并于2007年頒布了《中華人民共和國(guó)反壟斷法》。作為世界上最年輕的反壟斷法之一,其中第55條針對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題做出了專門規(guī)定,填補(bǔ)了我國(guó)在該領(lǐng)域的空白。但必須認(rèn)識(shí)到的是,我國(guó)在知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域適用反壟斷法的體系距離完善還相差甚遠(yuǎn),需要長(zhǎng)問(wèn)的摸索、研究才能發(fā)揮其真正作用。 為了研究解決這些問(wèn)題的途徑,本文從以下幾個(gè)部分進(jìn)行了探索：第一章分別對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)和反壟斷的基本理論進(jìn)行論述,并闡明了二者的辯證關(guān)系；第二章對(duì)利用知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)許可協(xié)議、市場(chǎng)支配地位和企業(yè)合并限制競(jìng)爭(zhēng)的一些典型行為進(jìn)行了比較詳細(xì)的評(píng)價(jià)；第三章是對(duì)世界上最發(fā)達(dá)的國(guó)家和地區(qū)——美國(guó)、歐盟、日本在該領(lǐng)域立法實(shí)踐的分析；第四章則在對(duì)我國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域反壟斷的立法規(guī)制進(jìn)行分析的基礎(chǔ)上,提出了改良方案。
[Abstract]:With the vigorous development of knowledge economy at the end of the last century, as the most powerful weapon for modern enterprises to win the competition, intellectual property rights bring great impetus to the development of social productive forces, and the ability of scientific and technological innovation has increasingly become the lifeline for the survival and development of enterprises. Therefore, countries pay more attention to the protection of intellectual property rights. But at the same time, it also brings new distress that the abuse of intellectual property rights is becoming more and more serious. The establishment of technical barriers, deliberately idle patents, technology bundling, and other behaviors have seriously restricted the free and orderly competition of the market. This not only violates the original intention of the designers of the intellectual property system, but also brings new challenges to the enforcement of the anti-monopoly law. In 2002, many foreign companies, such as Samsung and LG, used the "patent pool" to collect high patent fees on Chinese DVD companies. The resulting sharp drop in profits has caused China's DVD companies to be almost wiped out. The 2003 Cisco v. Huawei case of intellectual property infringement also caused huge losses to Huawei's North American market. A series of cases of using intellectual property rights to restrict competition make our country realize the lack of legislation in this field and promulgated the Anti-monopoly Law of the people's Republic of China in 2007. As one of the youngest antimonopoly laws in the world, Article 55 makes special provisions on intellectual property rights and fills the blank in this field. But what we must realize is that the system of applying antimonopoly law in the field of intellectual property in our country is still far from perfect, and it needs to be explored for a long time in order to play its real role. In order to study the ways to solve these problems, this paper explores the following parts: the first chapter discusses the basic theory of intellectual property and antitrust, and clarifies the dialectical relationship between them; The second chapter gives a detailed evaluation of some typical behaviors of using intellectual property licensing agreements, market dominance and merger of enterprises to restrict competition. Chapter three is about the most developed countries and regions in the world, the United States, the European Union, the European Union and the United States. The fourth chapter is based on the analysis of China's anti-monopoly legislation in the field of intellectual property, and puts forward the improvement scheme.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D923.4;D922.294

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前8條

1 祝紅霞;;專利權(quán)濫用的界定與分類研究[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2006年06期

2 王先林;仲春;;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域反壟斷的國(guó)際視角——《競(jìng)爭(zhēng)政策與知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)行使》介評(píng)[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2009年05期

3 楊松才;;美國(guó)反托拉斯法簡(jiǎn)析[J];法學(xué)雜志;2008年02期

4 宣煬;;簡(jiǎn)論我國(guó)《反壟斷法》第55條及其適用[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(下旬刊);2009年08期

5 王曉曄;國(guó)內(nèi)適用原則——知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利耗盡原則的適用及發(fā)展[J];國(guó)際貿(mào)易;2004年03期

6 郭宗杰;;日本禁止私人壟斷及確保公正交易法最新發(fā)展研究[J];價(jià)格理論與實(shí)踐;2010年08期

7 周黃河;;壟斷的時(shí)代——微軟壟斷案解析[J];現(xiàn)代商業(yè);2009年23期

8 王先林;潘志成;;反壟斷執(zhí)法與知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)之間的平衡——美國(guó)《反托拉斯執(zhí)法與知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán):促進(jìn)創(chuàng)新和競(jìng)爭(zhēng)》報(bào)告述評(píng)[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 張偉君;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)濫用規(guī)制制度研究[D];同濟(jì)大學(xué);2007年

2 饒愛民;專利聯(lián)營(yíng)反壟斷規(guī)制研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 高敏;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域的反壟斷問(wèn)題研究[D];上海社會(huì)科學(xué)院;2008年

2 李斌;跨國(guó)公司專利權(quán)濫用的法律規(guī)制[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2070290