美国337调查与TRIPS协议实体规定冲突问题研究

发布时间：2018-01-16 06:24

本文关键词：美国337调查与TRIPS协议实体规定冲突问题研究　出处：《河北法学》2013年07期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：337条款的ITC诉讼与地区法院诉讼间在程序和实体方面的差异是GATT专家组异议的中心和争议双方分歧的焦点问题之一,GATT/WTO迄今尚无明确裁决结果。该条款存在一定合理性,但在某些方面不符合TRIPS要求。美国国内专利持有人在与国内生产者间关于专利侵权的争端中,仅能从美国国内法院寻求救济,而该专利持有人在同外国生产者的专利争端中却享有救济途径"选择权",实际上获得双重救济机会。外国生产者被剥夺了救济途径的选择权,且增加了讼累,事实上造成不公平结果,构成对外国产品和国民的歧视。国民待遇应是实质上而非仅是形式上。应依WTO协定判断该条款的合条约性,而非仅依其实施效果。二者在立法目的、价值选择、基本原则等方面存在差异。TRIPS本身并不禁止337条款之类的边境措施,但该措施应符合WTO协定。使国内外被告人适用于相同机制是解决冲突的可能途径。
[Abstract]:The procedural and substantive differences between the ITC litigation of Section 337 and that of the District Court are the focus of the disagreement between the GATT panel and the parties to the dispute. To date, the GATT/WTO has not made a clear decision. This clause has some reasonableness. In some respects, however, it does not meet the requirements of TRIPS. In a dispute over patent infringement between the United States and domestic producers, patent holders in the United States can only seek redress from the domestic courts of the United States. However, the patent holder has the right of choice in the patent dispute with foreign producers. In fact, he has got the opportunity of double relief. The foreign producer is deprived of the right to remedy and has increased the burden of litigation. In fact, it results in unfair results and constitutes discrimination against foreign products and nationals. National treatment should be substantive, not merely formal, and the treaty character of the clause should be judged on the basis of the WTO Agreement. There are differences between them in legislative purpose, value choice, basic principle and so on. Trips itself does not prohibit the border measures such as Section 337. However, this measure should conform to the WTO agreement, and it is a possible way to solve the conflict by applying the same mechanism to the defendants at home and abroad.
【作者单位】：南京信息工程大学公共管理学院法律系;
【基金】：中国法学会课题《美国337调查与TRIPS协议一致性问题研究》(CLS2011 D87)
【分类号】：D971.2;D997.1
【正文快照】： 在国外,337条款是否与TRIPS协议一致,WTO并未有定论。许多美国学者认为,ITC的裁决是公正的,没有偏袒美国产业。这些学者的研究结论与TRIPS协议的规定存在诸多矛盾之处。337条款在若干方面违反了GATT相关法律规定,包括程序规则和实体规则。对337调查之合法性,应具体问题具体分

【相似文献】