参与制定标准的专利权人违反披露义务之民事责任研究

发布时间：2018-03-05 02:21

本文选题：标准　切入点：专利权人　出处：《中国计量学院》2015年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：参与制定标准的专利权人违反披露义务的责任研究,在2014年以前较多集中在《反垄断法》第五十五条,笔者结合2014年新施行的《标准中涉及专利的管理规定(暂行)》,从专利权人违反披露义务的行为本身出发,基于民事责任(包括缔约过失责任,违约责任及侵权责任)的三种研究视角,分别得出相应的结论。第一种视角:参与制定标准的专利权人违反披露信息的先合同义务,使标准使用者遭受信赖利益损失,因此应承担缔约过失责任,责任承担方式为赔偿标准使用者的信赖利益损失,这种责任承担方式只适用于推荐性标准。第二种视角:参与制定标准的专利权人作出的专利实施许可声明即是向标准使用者发出的要约,标准使用者开始实施标准即构成接受要约的承诺,专利权人与标准使用者已经形成事实上的专利许可合同关系。因此专利权人待标准使用者实施标准后,转而对其发出侵权告知,并索要巨额许可费的行为应承担违约责任,责任承担方式为赔偿损失或继续履行合同。此种责任承担方式分别适用于推荐性标准及强制性标准。当是推荐性标准,责任承担方式为赔偿损失,包括信赖利益损失及期待利益损失;当是强制性标准,责任承担方式为许可标准使用者继续使用专利,其包含两点要求:要求一,对标准使用者收取的许可使用费应低于正常许可费,具体削减的幅度由标准使用者与专利权人协商确定。要求二,对专利权人使用禁令救济给予限制,除非标准使用者不支付许可费,否则不得使用禁令。第三种视角:由于专利权人在标准制修订阶段故意违反其法定义务,致使标准使用者投入的财产利益变为沉没成本,因此应承担侵权责任,责任承担方式为赔偿标准使用者的财产损失或者继续允许标准使用者使用专利,责任承担方式适用于推荐性标准和强制性标准。当是推荐性标准,责任承担方式为赔偿损失,仅包括已经发生的财产损失;当是强制性标准,责任承担方式为许可标准使用者继续使用专利,具体要求同违约责任中强制性标准相关要求。因此,当是推荐性标准时,违约责任与侵权责任的损害赔偿请求权将发生竞合,如果从标准的公共利益考虑,建议选择违约责任的损失赔偿请求权。
[Abstract]:Prior to 2014, research on the liability of patentees involved in standard-setting violations of their disclosure obligations was concentrated on Article 55th of the Anti-Monopoly Law. According to the regulations of Patent Administration (temporary) in 2014, the author starts from the patentee's breach of disclosure obligation, based on civil liability (including liability for fault in contracting). The first angle of view: the patentee involved in setting the standard violates the prior contract obligation to disclose the information, which causes the standard user to suffer the loss of trust interest. Therefore, the liability for contracting negligence shall be borne in the form of compensation for the loss of trust interests of the standard users, This way of assuming responsibility applies only to recommended standards. Second perspective: a patent implementation license statement made by the patentee involved in setting the standard is an offer to the standard user. When the standard user begins to implement the standard, the acceptance of the offer is constituted, and the patentee and the standard user have already formed a de facto patent license contract relationship. Therefore, the patentee shall wait for the standard user to implement the standard. Instead, he should be liable for breach of contract by issuing an infringement notice and asking for a huge licence fee. The mode of liability is to compensate for the loss or to continue to perform the contract. This liability assumption applies to the recommended standard and the mandatory standard respectively. When it is the recommended standard, the mode of liability is to compensate for the loss, Including loss of trust interest and loss of expected interest; when it is mandatory, liability is assumed by the continued use of the patent by the user of the licensing standard, which contains two requirements: one, The royalties charged to standard users shall be lower than the normal licence fees, and the specific reduction shall be determined by the standard users through consultation with the patentee. A third perspective: because the patentee deliberately violated his legal obligations during the revision of the standard system, the property interest invested by the standard user becomes sunk cost. Therefore, the liability should be assumed by way of compensation for the loss of property of the standard user or by continuing to allow the standard user to use the patent. The mode of liability shall apply to the standard of recommendation and the mandatory standard. When it is a standard of recommendation, Liability is by way of compensation for losses, including only property losses that have occurred; when it is a mandatory standard, the mode of liability is the continued use of a patent by the user of the licensing standard, with specific requirements related to mandatory standards in liability for breach of contract. When it is a recommended standard, the liability for breach of contract will be competing with the right of claim for damages of tort liability. If the public interest of the standard is taken into account, it is suggested to choose the right of claim for damages of liability for breach of contract.
【学位授予单位】：中国计量学院
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D922.294

【相似文献】