论标准制定中美欧专利权人诈欺行为的反垄断规制

发布时间：2018-06-27 23:16

本文选题：标准制定 + 专利权人诈欺　；参考：《浙江学刊》2017年04期

【摘要】：技术标准制定进程中,专利权人违反专利信息披露义务,故意诈欺的行为,会误导标准的选择与设定、阻碍市场竞争,从而导致各国的反垄断规制。美国《谢尔曼法》第2条对标准制定中所有参与人的诈欺行为进行规制,而不考虑参与人最初的市场支配力水平。当原告有充分的证据证明专利权人的诈欺行为对市场竞争造成损害,并通过反竞争的方法获得市场支配地位时,专利权人需承担反垄断责任。欧盟竞争法对标准制定中反垄断的规制对象分两类进行规制,即诈欺时具有市场支配地位的专利权人和诈欺时无市场支配地位的专利权人。同时,在反垄断规制中,要求原告灵活举证专利权人存在不良行为、专利权人的诈欺行为具有反竞争效果、并将专利权人因缺乏反竞争意图而不披露相关专利信息的行为排除在反垄断规制之外。
[Abstract]:In the process of technical standard-making, the patentee violates the obligation of patent information disclosure and defraud intentionally, which will mislead the choice and setting of standard, hinder the market competition, and lead to the anti-monopoly regulation of various countries. Section 2 of the Sherman Act of the United States regulates the fraud of all participants in standard-setting, regardless of the participants' initial level of market power. When the plaintiff has sufficient evidence to prove that the patentee's fraud damages the market competition and obtains the dominant position of the market through the anti-competitive method, the patentee should bear the antitrust responsibility. EU competition law regulates the anti-monopoly objects in standard-setting, that is, the patentee with market dominant position in fraud and the patentee without market dominant position in fraud. At the same time, in the anti-monopoly regulation, the plaintiff is required to prove flexibly that the patentee has bad behavior, and the patentee's fraud has anti-competitive effect. And the patentee does not disclose the relevant patent information because of the lack of anti-competitive intention.
【作者单位】：西南政法大学;浙江工业大学法学院;
【基金】：2017年度浙江省软科学研究计划项目“标准必要专利禁令救济的反垄断规制——以案例考察为视角”(2017C35009) 2016年教育部人文社科基金青年项目“清洁能源跨境协同创新和成果转化中的知识产权障碍识别及应对机制研究”(16YJCZH062)的前期成果
【分类号】：D912.29;D913

【相似文献】