【作者】 李向东；

【导师】 吕明瑜；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法律， 2011， 硕士

【摘要】 专利权滥用是指专利权人或其被许可人,将专利权扩张至法律允许的范围之外,损害他人合法权益或社会公共利益的行为。其构成要件包括五个方面：专利权滥用的主体为专利权人、须有专利权的存在、主观上存在过错、专利滥用行为造成了损害结果。以下几种为典型的专利权滥用行为：拒绝许可、恶意闲置专利、滥收专利费用、搭售、恶意诉讼、滥发警告函、利用专利进行技术标准垄断。在现实中,专利权滥用的问题的危害日益扩大和加剧,表现在中国企业自主创新能力成为国外公司专利战略的扼杀重点,同时专利权已成为外国企业打击民族品牌的利器。我国通领集团在美国遭受的一系列专利诉讼充分说明了对专利权滥用行为进行规制的必要性和紧迫性。规制专利权滥用行为有三种理论依据支持,分别是：禁止权利滥用理论、利益平衡理论和竞争理论。禁止权利滥用理论指出：权利的存在具有社会性,不仅存在于人与人间,也存在于人与社会之间。在复杂社会关系之中行使权利,难免会出现影响他人或整个社会利益的可能,因此需要对权利做出限制。利益平衡理论认信息财产具有有专有性和共有性的特点。如果专有性过强,不仅不利于信息的传播,还将会对社会科学文化的发展产生极大的阻碍,损害社会公众利益。但共有性过强,则不利于激励创造者的积极性与创造性,影响智力产品的创新速度和技术发展,故二者之间必须保持一种平衡。竞争理论认为滥用专利权行为往往都超出了合法的界限,权利人借助法律赋予的特殊地位进行搭售、限价等行为,不仅加强了其垄断地位,更严重的影响了社会效率与机会公平,因此需要进行规制。这三种理论分别支持了民法、专利法、反垄断法的适用。但通过对这三种法律规制模式的分析比较可以发现：尽管其都能够对专利权滥用行为进行规制,但单独适用任何一部法律都不能很好的解决专利权滥用的问题。这是因为,专利法和反垄断法在规制范围上均大于民法,但民法原则作为补充又是不可或缺的；反垄断法虽较民法、专利法的制裁更具威慑性,但存在部分行为尚不足构成垄断的程度,进而不可以适用反垄断法的问题。面对这种矛盾,运用多轨制的方法是最佳的选择。通过对美国、欧盟、日本和我国台湾地区规制专利权滥用行为的实践比较可以发现,不管是采用专利法和反垄断法同时适用的美国,还是强调反垄断法规制的欧盟、日本,其经验证明采用专利法和反垄断法同时规制的效果是可行的,同时应当强调反垄断法在规制专利权滥用行为中的重要作用。因此,笔者认为有效规制专利权滥用这个问题应当从以下几个方面进行考虑：采取以《反垄断法》为核心,《专利法》同时适用的多轨制规制方式；修改完善《反垄断法》相关规定,尽早出台《专利权滥用的反垄断执法指南》；继续完善《专利法》,对专利权滥用行为做出明确的规定以强化内部规制；加强专利权滥用的司法和行政执法力度。更多还原

【Abstract】 For the definition of patent misuse there are different perspectives, for example, that the scope and purpose. Through the analysis of different theories, the definition should be:the abuse of patent rights is the patentee or his licensee, the patent rights to expand the scope permitted by law, damage the legitimate rights and interests of others or the public interest. Its constituent elements include five areas:the main body of patent abuse of the patentee, there must be the existence of patent rights, the existence of subjective fault, caused damage to patent the results of abuse. Following a typical patent abuse behavior:refusal to license, malicious idle patents, patent fees overcharging, tie-ins, malicious litigation, spam warning letter, the use of technology standards patent monopoly. In reality, the patent abuse problems to expand and intensify the situation, as follows:First, China’s independent innovation capability has become an overseas company’s patent strategy will focus on killing. Second, foreign companies against patent has become a tool of national brands. Group of links leading article example, which shows that abuse of patent rights to regulate the necessity and urgency.Regulation of patent abuse, I believe that there are three theoretical basis for the support, namely:the prohibition of abuse of rights theory, the interests of the equilibrium theory and competition theory. These theories are supported by civil law, patent law, the application of antitrust laws. But through these three modes of legal analysis and comparison of regulation can be found:While the abuse of patent rights can be regulated, but a law alone can not apply to any perfect solution to patent abuse. This is because patent law and antitrust in the scope of regulation were more than civil law, but civil law is essential; anti-monopoly law is far more civil law, patent law more deterrent sanctions, but there is still some lack of behavior the degree of monopoly and thus constitutes antitrust laws may apply. Faced with this contradiction, the use of multi-track system is the best option.Through the United States, European Union, Japan and Taiwan of China regulation compared the practice of patent abuse can be found, the use of patent law and antitrust regulatory approach is both feasible and should also be emphasized in the regulation of anti-monopoly law in an important position.Therefore, I believe that effective regulation of patent abuse issue should be considered from the following aspects:to take the "anti-monopoly law" as the core, the "Patent Law" applies to both the two-tier regulatory approach; revise and improve the "anti-monopoly law," the relevant provisions of the early introduction of a "patent abuse of antitrust enforcement guidelines"; continue to improve the "Patent Law", to make a clear abuse of the patent provisions to strengthen the internal regulation; to strengthen the judicial and administrative patent abuse law enforcement.更多还原