【作者】 刘义程；

【导师】 司平平；

【作者基本信息】 华东政法学院 ， 国际法学， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 知识产权本身作为一种合法的垄断权,是近现代社会为推动科技进步、经济繁荣和社会发展而作出的一项重要的制度设计,因此,在反垄断法上,其一般是作为反垄断法的适用除外而存在的。但是,知识产权这种独占权往往会使得其拥有者在某一特定市场上形成垄断或者支配地位,从而限制该市场的竞争,尤其是,在某些情况下拥有知识产权的人可能会滥用其依法获得的独占权,通过不正当的行使知识产权来非法限制竞争,从而构成对反垄断法的违反。本文就以“知识产权拒绝许可”这种涉嫌不正当行使知识产权的行为作为研究对象,从学理与比较法的视角出发,探讨判定知识产权拒绝许可行为违反反垄断法的标准和相应的法律规则,并就如何规制滥用知识产权拒绝许可行为提出具体的处理意见,以丰富和完善反垄断法和知识产权法理论,同时为我国正在进行的反垄断立法及将来的知识产权领域的反垄断立法和司法提供相应的理论依据和具体的参考意见。本文认为,就知识产权特别是专利权而言,授权与否的决定自由是其核心的权利内容,因此,在一般情况,知识产权人的拒绝授权并不具有不法性。但当知识产权人的拒绝许可行为可能妨碍、限制甚至消除竞争,从而损害社会公共利益,反垄断法也就有介入的必要。然而,对于具体的知识产权拒绝许可行为,到底该如何认定其是否构成反垄断法的规制对象则始终是理论和实践争议的焦点,也是知识产权拒绝许可反垄断法适用的难点。本文即从知识产权拒绝许可的四类方式入手,探讨认定知识产权拒绝许可违法性的相关法律规则,以为知识产权拒绝许可行为的反垄断法违法性的认定提供一些指引。在知识产权拒绝许可的法律救济方面,本文认为主要途径是课以知识产权人强制许可的义务,包括积极的强制许可和消极的强制许可方式——通过法院拒绝颁发禁止令的方式以达到限制知识产权人垄断市场的目的。在结构上,本论文分为五章:第一章《许可、知识产权许可和知识产权拒绝许可》主要对许可、知识产权许可及知识产权拒绝许可的概念、性质、特点及其与反垄断法的关系作一简要介绍。第二章《知识产权拒绝许可行为反垄断法违法性的判定》是本论文的重点。该章从知识产权拒绝许可的两大类型出发,分析其各自违反反垄断法的构成要件。在知识产权拒绝许可行为的反垄断法违法性认定上,笔者认为,对联合拒绝许可、附条件拒绝许可、排他性交易等拒绝许可方式,传统的反垄断法原理足以提供理论依据,但对单方的纯粹拒绝许可行为的违法性认定,要引入“关键设施”理论、推定合理及其反证等理论及方法进行考察和论证。第三章《知识产权拒绝许可的法律救济》主要介绍认定知识产权拒绝许可行为后的法律规范措施。本文主要考虑的是救济层面的问题。本文认为对知识产权拒绝许可行为受害者的救济手段是强制授权,包括正面的强制许可和拒绝颁发禁止令。第四章《我国知识产权拒绝许可行为的反垄断立法问题探讨》主要剖析中国知识产权领域所遇到的垄断问题,提出解决这些问题的对策和方案。第五章《结论》主要总结本文的观点。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a legal monopoly right, the intellectual property right (IPR) is an important mechanism design to drive the progress of science and technology, economic prosperity and social development, so it is usually as an exception to the application of anti-monopoly law. However, the IPR as exclusive right often makes its owner get monopoly or dominant status in a certain market which restricts the market competition, especially in some circumstances the owner may abuse the exclusive right and perform unfairly the IPR to restrict the market competition illegally, as such violating the anti-monopoly law.Making the‘refusal of permission in the IPR’which is suspicious of performing the IPR unfairly as a research object, and from the of jurisprudence and comparative law, the thesis discusses the application of the unfair performance in the anti-monopoly law,and puts forward concrete advice on the control of abusing the refusal of permission in the IPR so as to make the theories of anti-monopoly law and the IPR law. In the meantime, the pertinent theoretical basis and concrete reference opinions are also brought forward on our on-going anti-monopoly legislation and its future legislation on the IPR field.The thesis holds that as for the IPR especially for the patent, the discretion to authorizing or not is its core right content, so in usual circumstance the refusal of authorizing by the owner of the IPR is not illegal. But once the owner’s such conduct may cumber, restrict or even eliminate competition and by thus damaging the social public interests, it is necessary for the anti-monopoly law to interfere.However, as to a concrete permission refused in the IPR, how to classify whether it constitutes the prescribed object or not is a disputed focus in the theory and practice, and it is also a rub in the application of anti--monopoly law of the permission refused in the IPR. Starting from the four modes of the permission refused in the IPR, the thesis discusses the relevant law and regulation on the cognizance of the illegality of the permission refused in the IPR to give some guidance to the cognizance. As for the legal remedy of permission refused in the IPR, the thesis thinks that the main approach is to exert the obligation of compulsory permission to the owner of the IPR, including the positive compulsory permission and passive compulsory permission- refusing to award the injunctive by the court to restrict the IPR owner’s monopolizing markets.The thesis is formed of five chapters in structure:The first chapter is‘permission, permission in the IPR and permission refused in the IPR’which briefly introduces their concepts, nature, characteristics and their relations with the anti-monopoly law.The second chapter‘the cognizance of the illegality in the anti-monopoly law of the permission refused in the IPR’is an emphasis in this thesis. The chapter, starting from the four kinds of the permission refused in the IPR, analyzes their respective conditions in the establishment of violating the anti-monopoly law. In the cognizance of the illegality in the anti-monopoly law of the four kinds of permissions refused in the IPR, the writer believes that for the modes of permission refused such as combined permission refused, conditional permission refused and exclusive transaction, the traditional theory of the anti-monopoly law can give enough theoretical support, but for the cognizance of the illegality of purely unilateral permission refused, it is necessary to introduce the theory or method of‘key establishment’, presumption of rationality and counter evidence to review and prove. The third chapter‘the legal remedy to the permission refused in the IPR’introduces in chief the legal norms after the cognizance of the permission refused in the IPR. This thesis mainly considers the issue in remedy level, holding that the remedy to the victims of the permission refused in the IPR is the compulsory authorizing, including the frontal compulsory permission and awarding the injunctive by the court.The fourth chapter‘the discussion on the issue of anti-monopoly legislation on our country’s permission refused in the IPR’analyzes chiefly the monopoly problems faced our country’s IPR domain and puts forward the countermeasures and schemes to these problems.The fifth chapter is Conclusion that summarizes the main opinions of the thesis.更多还原