中菲知识产权刑法立法比较研究

发布时间：2018-04-05 23:23

本文选题：知识产权犯罪　切入点：菲律宾　出处：《法学杂志》2012年11期

【摘要】：菲律宾知识产权刑事立法采用混合型模式,有利于调节刑法典的稳定性与其对频繁变动的社会关系的适应性;罪名体系比较完整;原则上任何故意侵犯知识产权行为都构成犯罪,仅将犯罪目的作为个别侵犯知识产权犯罪的主观要素,并且该目的要素并非唯一的选项,相对而言比中国著作权犯罪"以营利为目的"的规定要宽松;行为方式可谓形式多样、种类丰富,而中国侵犯知识产权犯罪的行为方式则比较狭窄;虽然都规定了一定的刑事门槛,但中国规定的"违法所得数额"等情节设置不科学,不利于司法认定;两国侵犯知识产权犯罪的刑罚设置以短期自由刑为主,并设立罚金刑,有利于该类犯罪的惩治与预防,但在罚金数额的设定上,都需要借鉴限额罚金制与倍比罚金制相结合的方式。
[Abstract]:The criminal legislation on intellectual property in the Philippines adopts a mixed model, which is conducive to regulating the stability of the criminal code and its adaptability to the frequently changing social relations.In principle, any intentional violation of intellectual property rights constitutes an offence, and only the criminal purpose is considered as a subjective element of an individual infringement of intellectual property rights, and that element of purpose is not the only option,Comparatively speaking, it is looser than the stipulation of "profit for profit" of copyright crime in China, and the ways of behavior can be described as diverse and varied, while the ways of infringing intellectual property rights in China are relatively narrow.Although certain criminal thresholds have been set, the establishment of "illegal income" and other circumstances prescribed by China is not scientific and is not conducive to judicial cognizance. The penalties for crimes against intellectual property rights in both countries are mainly set as short-term free sentences, and fines are established.It is beneficial to the punishment and prevention of this kind of crime, but in the setting of the amount of fine, it is necessary to draw lessons from the combination of quota fine system and double ratio fine system.
【作者单位】：中国人民大学法学院;
【分类号】：D934.1;D924.3

【参考文献】