我国民事诉讼中的商业秘密保护问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-17 08:25

本文选题：商业秘密保护 + 恶意诉讼　；参考：《吉林大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着经济发展方式的转变,商业秘密逐渐成为企业竞争的核心因素。为保证本企业在激烈的市场竞争中立于不败之地,企业也尽最大努力来保护其拥有的商业秘密。诉讼作为当事人维权的一种重要方式,也应逐渐完善诉讼进程中对商业秘密的保护。但在我国目前法治环境下,即使是商业秘密权利人的合法权益被侵害之后,在涉及商业秘密的民事案件的审理过程中,也由于我国目前诉讼程序制度的不健全,而使诉讼成为商业秘密二次泄露的原因。我国目前法律体系下对侵犯商业秘密行为的规制大多是从实体法方面对侵犯商业秘密的行为予以制裁,程序性立法方面仍十分欠缺。我国目前法律对审理涉及商业秘密案件的程序性规定主要体现在《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》第68条不公开质证、第134条不公开审理以及《最高人民法院关于适用中华人民共和国民事诉讼法的解释》第255条限制对涉及商业秘密内容的裁判文书的查阅。一方面,上述立法仅是原则性的规定,缺乏具体的可操作程序,不能为具体司法实践的操作提供指导;另一方面,上述制度仅规定涉及商业秘密的案件不得对当事人以外的第三人公开,并没有把对方当事人作为禁止或者限制的对象。由此以来,不可避免会出现一方当事人通过恶意诉讼方式将竞争对手诉至法院以窥探其商业秘密的情形。虽然我国目前法律对商业秘密保护的程序性立法仍不完善,但在实践中,各地司法机关已充分发挥主观能动性解决上述问题,如签署审前保密承诺书等。上述做法在避免权利人的商业秘密在诉讼中二次泄露发挥了一定的积极作用,但仍有许多需要完善的地方。我国厦门中院首创的“保密令制度”是在借鉴了国外及我国台湾地区相关制度的基础上,结合我国大陆实际情况的一次大胆尝试,有其合理性与创新性。美国、日本及我国台湾地区在长期司法实践中就民事诉讼中商业秘密的保护问题形成了相对完备的制度及实践经验,通过对国外相关制度的探究与我国目前司法实践的总结来解决涉及商业秘密案件的诉讼发现案件事实、公正审理与商业秘密保护之间的冲突,对完善我国民事诉讼中商业秘密保护制度有着重大意义,也是推进我国法治进程的题中之义。本文先是对我国目前民事诉讼中商业秘密保护的现状及面临的困境进行分析进而引出本文所要研究的问题,通过对美国、日本及我国台湾地区在司法实践中商业秘密保护先进经验的借鉴,分析保密令制度与我国司法环境与社会环境的契合性并加以引进同时提出具体的制度设计,意在有效的避免商业秘密在诉讼中的二次泄露,平衡“当事人正当程序权的保障”与“诉讼中商业秘密的保护”之间的冲突。
[Abstract]:With the change of economic development mode, trade secret gradually becomes the core factor of enterprise competition. In order to ensure that the enterprise in the fierce market competition in an invincible position, enterprises also do their best to protect its own trade secrets. As an important way for the parties to protect their rights, litigation should gradually perfect the protection of trade secrets in the process of litigation. However, in the current legal environment of our country, even after the legitimate rights and interests of the owners of trade secrets have been infringed, in the trial process of civil cases involving trade secrets, the current procedural system of our country is not perfect. And make lawsuit become the reason that trade secret divulges twice. At present, the regulation of infringing trade secrets under the current legal system of our country is mainly from the aspect of substantive law to punish the infringement of trade secrets, but the procedural legislation is still very deficient. The procedural provisions of the current law of our country concerning the trial of cases involving trade secrets are mainly reflected in Article 68 of the Civil procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, which is not open for cross-examination. Article 134 closed hearings and the interpretation of the Supreme people's Court on the Application of the Civil procedure Law of the people's Republic of China Article 255 restricts access to judicial documents concerning the content of trade secrets. On the one hand, the above legislation is only a provision of principle, lacking specific operational procedures, which cannot provide guidance for the operation of specific judicial practices; on the other hand, The above system only stipulates that cases involving trade secrets may not be made public to any third party other than the party concerned, and the other party is not regarded as the object of prohibition or restriction. Since then, it is inevitable that one party will bring a competitor to court through malicious litigation to spy on its trade secrets. Although the procedural legislation on the protection of trade secrets in our country is still not perfect, in practice, the judicial organs in various places have taken full advantage of their subjective initiative to solve the above problems, such as signing the promise of confidentiality before trial, and so on. The above practice has played a positive role in avoiding the second disclosure of the obligee's trade secret in the lawsuit, but there are still many areas that need to be improved. The "secrecy order system" initiated by Xiamen Intermediate people's Court is a bold attempt based on the reference of relevant systems in foreign countries and Taiwan region and combining with the actual situation in mainland China. It has its rationality and innovation. In long-term judicial practice, the United States, Japan and Taiwan have formed relatively complete systems and practical experience on the protection of commercial secrets in civil proceedings. Through the exploration of the relevant systems abroad and the summary of the current judicial practice in our country, the conflict between the discovery of the case facts, the fair trial and the protection of the trade secret is resolved. It is of great significance to perfect the protection system of commercial secrets in civil litigation in our country, and it is also the meaning of promoting the process of rule of law in our country. This paper first analyzes the current situation and difficulties of the protection of commercial secrets in China's civil litigation, and then leads to the problems to be studied in this paper. Through the analysis of the United States, Japan and Taiwan learn from the advanced experience in the protection of commercial secrets in judicial practice, analyze the compatibility between the secrecy order system and the judicial and social environment of our country, and put forward the concrete system design at the same time. The purpose is to effectively avoid the secondary leakage of trade secrets in litigation and balance the conflict between the protection of due process rights of the parties and the protection of trade secrets in litigation.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】