【摘要】：知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性問(wèn)題一直是阻礙知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議通過(guò)仲裁解決的巨大障礙。理論界有很多的專家學(xué)者認(rèn)為知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)是一項(xiàng)公權(quán)屬性的私權(quán)利，國(guó)家存在專門(mén)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)確權(quán)機(jī)構(gòu)，如果允許知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議通過(guò)仲裁方式解決的話就會(huì)對(duì)這些國(guó)家機(jī)構(gòu)的機(jī)能造成損害，同時(shí)錯(cuò)誤的裁決結(jié)果也會(huì)對(duì)社會(huì)公共利益造成損害。而筆者經(jīng)過(guò)研究論證后認(rèn)為，知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議的仲裁解決非但不會(huì)對(duì)社會(huì)公共利益造成損害，相反還會(huì)對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)事業(yè)的發(fā)展起到推動(dòng)作用，有利于保護(hù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利人的合法權(quán)利。本文撰寫(xiě)共有四章，分別從爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性、國(guó)內(nèi)外立法體系以及我國(guó)制度構(gòu)建等多個(gè)角度對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性做出論證和分析。 本文第一章主要內(nèi)容是對(duì)爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性問(wèn)題概述，，筆者對(duì)爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性進(jìn)行理論界定，進(jìn)而提出爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性可以按照其性質(zhì)分為主客觀兩方面可仲裁性，接著探討一項(xiàng)爭(zhēng)議要具備可仲裁性所必須的基本要素。最后闡述和列舉世界各國(guó)在爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性方面所采取的立法體系。本文第二章主要對(duì)世界各國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性的立法態(tài)度進(jìn)行分類，在世界各國(guó)中美國(guó)、瑞士對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議仲裁全面支持；英國(guó)、德國(guó)、法國(guó)等國(guó)家采取的是有條件的支持態(tài)度。知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議可仲裁范圍的不斷擴(kuò)大已經(jīng)是全世界所不可逆轉(zhuǎn)的趨勢(shì)。本文第二章還將知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議的類型劃分為合同型、侵權(quán)型和有效性爭(zhēng)議，并依次對(duì)上述幾種類型爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性做出分析。本文第三章將重點(diǎn)介紹知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)有效性爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性,許多專家學(xué)者認(rèn)為由于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)是一項(xiàng)影響社會(huì)公共利益的權(quán)利并且存在專門(mén)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)確權(quán)機(jī)構(gòu)，所以知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)有效性爭(zhēng)議并不適宜通過(guò)仲裁的方式解決。在該章中筆者將會(huì)對(duì)上述觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行分析和批判，從理論和案例兩個(gè)角度來(lái)論證知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)有效性爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性。本文第四章將會(huì)結(jié)合我國(guó)國(guó)情對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性在我國(guó)的發(fā)展提出一些建議，在本章中會(huì)對(duì)現(xiàn)階段我國(guó)有關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性的相關(guān)法律制度和仲裁規(guī)則進(jìn)行闡述和分析。筆者認(rèn)為我國(guó)立法應(yīng)當(dāng)明確規(guī)定知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性范圍,并實(shí)現(xiàn)制度和人才培養(yǎng)兩方面的國(guó)際接軌。
[Abstract]:The arbitrability of intellectual property disputes has been an obstacle to the settlement of intellectual property disputes. There are many experts and scholars in the theoretical circle who believe that intellectual property is a private right with the attribute of public power, and that there are specialized institutions for confirming the right of intellectual property in the country. Allowing intellectual property disputes to be settled by arbitration would damage the functioning of these national institutions and the public interest would be harmed by erroneous decisions. After studying and demonstrating, the author believes that the arbitration settlement of intellectual property disputes will not harm the public interest, but on the contrary will promote the development of intellectual property rights. It is conducive to the protection of the legal rights of the holders of intellectual property rights. There are four chapters in this paper, which demonstrate and analyze the arbitrability of intellectual property disputes from the perspectives of the arbitrability of disputes, the domestic and foreign legislative system and the construction of our country's system. In the first chapter, the author defines the arbitrability of disputes theoretically, and then points out that the arbitrability of disputes can be divided into two aspects according to its nature. Then it discusses the basic elements necessary for a dispute to have arbitrability. In the end, the legislative system adopted by countries all over the world in dispute arbitrability is expounded and listed. In the second chapter, the author classifies the legislative attitude of the countries in the world on the arbitrability of intellectual property disputes. In the world, the United States and Switzerland fully support the arbitration of intellectual property disputes. Britain, Germany, France and other countries have adopted a conditional attitude of support. The expansion of the scope of arbitrability of intellectual property disputes is an irreversible trend all over the world. In the second chapter, the types of intellectual property disputes are divided into contract type, tort type and validity dispute, and the arbitrability of the above types of disputes is analyzed in turn. The third chapter will focus on the arbitrability of the validity of intellectual property rights. Many experts and scholars believe that intellectual property rights are a right that affects the public interest of society and that there are specialized institutions for the confirmation of intellectual property rights. Therefore, the validity of intellectual property disputes is not suitable for arbitration. In this chapter, the author will analyze and criticize the above views, and prove the arbitrability of the validity of intellectual property from two angles of theory and case. The fourth chapter will put forward some suggestions on the development of arbitrability of intellectual property disputes in China. In this chapter, the relevant legal system and arbitration rules on the arbitrability of intellectual property disputes in China are expounded and analyzed. The author thinks that the legislation of our country should clearly stipulate the scope of arbitrability of intellectual property disputes and realize the international integration of system and talent training.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D923.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李正華;中美知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)制度比較研究[J];比較法研究;2003年02期

2 羅東川;;國(guó)家知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)戰(zhàn)略背景下的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)司法保護(hù)[J];法律適用;2006年04期

3 吳友明;論知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)仲裁[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1999年04期

4 何艷華;;質(zhì)疑與回應(yīng):國(guó)際商事仲裁的保密性[J];法治研究;2010年09期

5 鄒林X;;論爭(zhēng)議可仲裁性的概念與性質(zhì)[J];公民與法(法學(xué)版);2011年11期

6 徐琳;;國(guó)際商事仲裁裁決承認(rèn)與執(zhí)行中的公共政策[J];河北法學(xué);2009年07期

7 馬德才;論國(guó)際商事仲裁中爭(zhēng)議事項(xiàng)的可仲裁性問(wèn)題[J];江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2000年03期

8 倪靜;;論知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)有效性爭(zhēng)議的可仲裁性——對(duì)公共政策理由的反思[J];江西社會(huì)科學(xué);2012年02期

9 李曉桃;袁曉東;;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)糾紛的可仲裁性研究[J];科技管理研究;2012年16期

10 吳漢東;關(guān)于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)私權(quán)屬性的再認(rèn)識(shí)——兼評(píng)“知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)公權(quán)化”理論[J];社會(huì)科學(xué);2005年10期

本文編號(hào)：2368466