国家治理现代化进程中的知识产权体制改革

发布时间：2018-01-19 05:15

本文关键词： 知识产权体制治理结构行政管理公共事务现代化　出处：《法商研究》2017年01期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：我国现行知识产权体制依附于科技管理和市场监管等,缺乏整体性和自主性。知识产权体制改革的目标就是建立起知识产权体制的话语体系,实现我国知识产权治理结构和治理能力的现代化。实现这一目标,全球化是动力,法治化是手段,回应性是治理结构的基本特征。国家知识产权体制改革应该从行政、公共事务和司法三个方面展开:一是将专利、商标、著作权、地理标志、植物新品种等集中,构建统一的知识产权行政管理体制;二是从国务院、部委、社会及市场等多个层次,建立政府、大学或者科研机构、社会组织、企业、个体等多元主体参与的知识产权公共事务协调运行机制;三是在北京、上海、广州三家知识产权法院试点建设的基础上,进一步推动司法改革,促进知识产权大司法体制的形成。
[Abstract]:The current intellectual property system of our country is dependent on the management of science and technology and market supervision and lacks integrity and autonomy. The goal of the reform of the intellectual property system is to establish the discourse system of the intellectual property system. To realize the modernization of intellectual property governance structure and governance ability in China, globalization is the motive force and the rule of law is the means to achieve this goal. Responsiveness is the basic feature of the governance structure. The reform of the national intellectual property system should be carried out from the administrative, public affairs and judicial aspects: first, patent, trademark, copyright, geographical indications. Set up a unified administrative system of intellectual property rights by centralizing new plant varieties; Second, from the State Council, ministries, social and market and other levels, the establishment of government, universities or scientific research institutions, social organizations, enterprises, individuals and other multiple subjects involved in intellectual property rights public affairs coordination mechanism; Third, on the basis of the pilot construction of three intellectual property courts in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou, we should further promote judicial reform and promote the formation of a large judicial system for intellectual property rights.
【作者单位】：北京大学法学院;
【基金】：北京市社会科学基金重大项目(15ZDA05) 国家知识产权局国家知识产权强国建设2015年重大课题项目(684)
【分类号】：D923.4
【正文快照】： 一、引言习近平总书记指出:“法治是国家治理体系和治理能力的重要依托”。(1)现代国家的治理结构多是以立法、行政和司法这三种公权力配置的法治工作基本格局为依托的,尽管这三种公权力之间出现了一些模糊地带,如司法实践中出现的“法官造法”现象、行政执法中的“裁判化”(

【相似文献】