我国知识产权确认不侵权之诉研究

发布时间：2018-03-16 04:30

本文选题：知识产权　切入点：确认不侵权　出处：《华南理工大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：在国际上,知识产权不盆权确认之诉,是应对侵权滥诉的重要救济途径,是侵权警告函收受方,进行主动出击的手段,发达国家制定各种各样的知识产权法保护其企业的知识产权,企图以此垄断市场,遏制发展中国家的发展,井从中牟取利益,在现实生活中,权利人还经常寄送侵权警告函,虚构事实,诋毁竞争对手的商誉,但其既不积极解决纠纷,也怠于向司法行政机关主张权利,使得利害关系人的权利处于不确定的状态,严重扰乱了市场经济秩序。而这个时候,知识产权确认不侵权之诉是防止权利人滥用权利的重要手段。知识产权不侵权确认之诉是近年来才在国内出现的诉讼,学界公认的最早的法律依据是高高人民法院在2002年7月12日作出的一份批复,该批复明确了原告苏州龙宝生物工程实业公司可以以“请求确认不侵犯专利权纠纷”为案由,起诉滥发侵权警告函的苏州郎力福公司,开辟了我国此类案件的先河,但是,相关制度的立法意图并没有在该批复得到体现,因此随后人民法院在处理同类案件的时候也产生了不同意见,直到2008年生效的《民事案件案由规定》,此类才正式得到人民法院的认可,将其第152个案由确定为确认不仅权纠纷,担对于受理的法律依据,至2010年1月1日起实施的《最高人民法院关于审理侵犯专利权纠纷案件应用法律若干问题的解释》(以下简称《专利纠纷解释》)第十八条,才第一次对确认不授权之诉的受理条件予以明确。在商标、著作权领域还未做出类似规定,亟待完善。本文从知识产权确认不侵权之法理基础入手,较为全面的横向探析了多个国家的相关规定,全面分析我国司法实践的现状以及相关问题,并针对性地提出了相关完善意见。
[Abstract]:Internationally, the action of the confirmation of the intellectual property right is an important remedy to the abuse of the infringement and a means for the recipient of the infringement warning letter to take the initiative to launch an attack. Developed countries have enacted various intellectual property laws to protect the intellectual property rights of their enterprises in an attempt to monopolize the market, curb the development of developing countries, and profit from it. In real life, the right holders often send infringement warning letters. Fictitious facts, which denigrate the goodwill of competitors, neither actively resolve disputes nor claim rights to judicial administrative organs, so that the rights of interested parties are in a state of uncertainty. It seriously disturbs the market economy order, and at this time, the intellectual property right affirms that the non-infringement action is an important means to prevent the obligee from abusing his rights. The lawsuit for non-infringement of intellectual property rights is a lawsuit that has only appeared in China in recent years. The earliest legal basis recognized by the academic circle is a written reply made by the High people's Court on July 12th 2002. The reply made it clear that the plaintiff Suzhou Longbao Bioengineering Industrial Company could sue Suzhou Langlifu Company, which had issued an abusive infringement warning letter, on the basis of a "request for confirmation of a non-infringement patent dispute", opening a precedent for such cases in our country. However, The legislative intent of the relevant system was not reflected in the written reply, so the people's courts subsequently had different opinions when dealing with similar cases. It was not until the Civil case provisions that came into effect on 2008 that such cases were formally recognized by the people's Court. The 152nd case was determined to be not only the right dispute, but also the legal basis for accepting it. 18th articles of the Supreme people's Court on the Application of Law in adjudicating cases of Patent infringement disputes (hereinafter referred to as "interpretation of Patent disputes"), which came into effect on January 1st 2010, For the first time, the conditions for accepting the action of confirmation of non-authorization have been clarified. No similar provisions have been made in the field of trademark and copyright, which need to be improved urgently. This paper begins with the legal basis of the recognition of intellectual property rights and not infringing. This paper comprehensively analyzes the relevant regulations of many countries, analyzes the present situation of our country's judicial practice and the relevant problems, and puts forward some relevant suggestions.
【学位授予单位】：华南理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923.4;D925.1

【参考文献】