论知识产权请求权
发布时间：2018-08-12 11:32
【摘要】：知识产权侵权救济体系,其内容包括具有绝对权请求权性质的知识产权请求权和债权请求权性质的侵权损害赔偿请求权以及不当得利请求权。知识产权请求权,作为保护知识产权的防卫性权利,其之于整个权利体系的重要地位毋庸置疑,本文将从知识产权请求权的理论和实践意义开始,逐步对知识产权请求权的概念、性质和特征进行阐述,并且对比分析我国知识产权救济体系的现状和不足,最后提出笔者对于构建我国知识产权请求权制度的建议。 研究知识产权请求权,首先,探讨知识产权请求权在实践上和理论上的立足之本。即实践中,由于知识产权侵权行为的特征,要求知识产权请求权必须成为知识产权人所应当被赋予的一项重要的救济性权利。理论上,知识产权请求权与其他债权请求权共同组成了完整的知识产权侵权救济体系,两者从内容和功能上相得益彰。厘清二者之间的区别和联系,有助于明确知识产权请求权所应当具有的概念和特征,以引出下文的讨论。 其次,要明确其基本框架,包括知识产权请求权的概念性质和特征。由于知识产权请求权从性质和功能上与同为绝对权请求权的物权请求权有很多异曲同工之处,因此,方法上通过两项请求权的对比研究,来明确知识产权请求权自身的理论体系。知识产权请求权,其概念应当包含了权利行使的条件、内容以及目的,即当知识产权受到现实侵害或有侵害之危险时,知识产权人得以请求侵害人为或不为一定行为,来恢复对知识产权客体的独占性支配的权利。知识产权请求权,是为一项对知识产权侵权行为的救济性权利,要求其本身依附于知识产权而生,但是,知识产权请求权的诸多特征又使得其在一定程度上独立于知识产权,因此其是一项独立的请求权。在与物权请求权的进一步比较中,发现知识产权请求权的内容上并不具有诸如恢复原状、返还原物等传统的绝对权请求权的内容,但包含有废弃请求权、获取信息请求权等独具特色的内容。 明确了知识产权请求权的基本理论之后,进而要对立法现状进行分析。通过对各国知识产权立法实践的比较分析,找到我国知识产权请求权相关制度的缺陷和不足,以期引出对于我国知识产权请求权制度构建的方向和目标。 在确定了知识产权请求权制度的特征和其应当具有的内容之后,下一步就要对知识产权请求权制度的构建进行详细的阐述。知识产权请求权,其制度的构建,应当遵循私权自治、利益平衡以及禁止权利滥用的原则。并且从整个知识产权体系以至民法体系的角度出发,进行立法模式的探讨。通过对各国立法模式的借鉴,以及我国相关学者对于知识产权制度构建的建议,笔者认为,构建统一的知识产权请求权制度,并将其置于今后的民法典中更为合适。一方面体现知识产权在整个民法体系的地位,另一方面也对整个知识产权救济体系进行系统归纳。在明确了知识产权请求权制度构建的基本模式之后,就要详细讨论知识产权请求权所应当包含的内容。如前文所述,知识产权请求权不仅具有诸如其他绝对权请求权所包含的停止侵害请求权、排除妨害请求权以外,还应当包括废弃请求权、获取信息请求权以及赔礼道歉、消除影响请求权。权利的生命在于行使,知识产权请求权,其行使的主体应当包括通过创造等活动而原始取得知识产权的权利人,以及通过许可合同等方式而继受取得知识产权的各类被许可人。在各项请求权行使的过程中,还应当满足一定的条件。普遍意义上,应当存在现实侵害或者侵害之虞,而各项具体的请求权,还要求满足其具体的行使条件。同时,任何权利的行使都不是毫无边际的,知识产权请求权的行使,也应当受到公共利益等的限制,才能准确体现知识产权请求权的价值。 综上所述,本文主要探讨了知识产权请求权从理论和实践意义到制度分析和构建的前世今生,在整个论述的过程中,嵌入了笔者的些许见解,行文重点在于厘清知识产权救济体系的结构和知识产权请求权所应包含的内容,以及该权利在行使过程中的所应受到的限制,并且在制度构建之处提出了自己的建议。
[Abstract]:Intellectual Property Rights Infringement Remedy system, which includes the absolute right of claim for intellectual property rights and claims for damages and unjust enrichment claims. Doubt, this article will start from the theoretical and practical significance of intellectual property rights claims, and gradually expound the concept, nature and characteristics of intellectual property rights claims, and comparative analysis of the current situation and shortcomings of China's intellectual property relief system, and finally put forward the author's suggestions for the construction of China's intellectual property rights claims system.
To study the right of claim for intellectual property, first of all, to explore the practical and theoretical basis of the right of claim for intellectual property. In practice, because of the characteristics of intellectual property infringement, the right of claim for intellectual property must become an important relief right that the intellectual property owner should be granted. The right to claim for other's rights constitutes a complete remedy system for intellectual property rights infringement, which complements each other in content and function. To clarify the difference and relationship between the two is helpful to clarify the concept and characteristics of the right to claim for intellectual property rights, so as to lead to the following discussion.
Secondly, it is necessary to clarify its basic framework, including the conceptual nature and characteristics of intellectual property rights claims. As there are many similarities and differences between intellectual property rights claims and real rights claims which are absolute claims in nature and function, the method is to clarify the intellectual property rights claims themselves through the comparative study of the two claims. Theoretical system. The concept of intellectual property claim should include the conditions, contents and purposes of the exercise of the right, that is, when the intellectual property rights are actually infringed or in danger of infringement, the intellectual property owner can request the infringer to do something or not to restore the exclusive control over the object of intellectual property rights. Right is a remedial right for infringement of intellectual property rights, which requires that it be attached to intellectual property rights. However, many characteristics of intellectual property claim make it independent of intellectual property rights to a certain extent, so it is an independent claim. The content of the right of claim does not contain the traditional absolute right of claim such as restoring the original state and returning the restored objects, but it contains the unique contents such as the right of abandonment and the right of obtaining information.
After clarifying the basic theory of intellectual property rights claims, we should analyze the current situation of legislation. Through the comparative analysis of the legislative practice of intellectual property rights in various countries, we can find the defects and deficiencies of the relevant systems of intellectual property rights claims in China, so as to lead to the direction and objectives of the construction of the system of intellectual property rights claims in China.
After defining the characteristics and contents of the intellectual property claim system, the next step is to elaborate the construction of the intellectual property claim system. The construction of the intellectual property claim system should follow the principles of private autonomy, balance of interests and prohibition of abuse of rights. From the point of view of the system and the civil law system, this paper discusses the legislative mode. Through the reference of the legislative mode of various countries and the suggestions of the relevant scholars on the construction of the intellectual property system, the author thinks that it is more appropriate to construct a unified intellectual property claim system and put it in the future civil code. On the one hand, it reflects the intellectual property. The position of right in the whole civil law system, on the other hand, it systematically summarizes the whole intellectual property remedy system. After clarifying the basic model of the system of intellectual property claim, it is necessary to discuss in detail the content of intellectual property claim. The right to claim includes the right to stop infringement, excluding the right to infringement, and it should also include the right to abandon the claim, the right to obtain information, the right to apologize and the right to cancel the influence of the claim. The obligee and all kinds of licensees who acquire intellectual property rights by means of licensing contracts should also satisfy certain conditions in the process of exercising each claim. Generally speaking, there should be a danger of actual infringement or infringement, and each specific claim should also satisfy its specific exercising conditions. The exercise of any right is not limitless. The exercise of the right to claim for intellectual property rights should also be restricted by the public interest, so as to accurately reflect the value of the right to claim for intellectual property rights.
To sum up, this paper mainly discusses the theoretical and practical significance of intellectual property rights claims to the system analysis and construction of the past and present life, in the whole process of discussion, embedded some of the author's views, the focus of the text is to clarify the structure of the intellectual property rights relief system and the content of intellectual property rights claims, as well as the rights in the The restrictions in the course of exercising the system are put forward and some suggestions are put forward.
【学位授予单位】：东北财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.4
本文编号：2178924
[Abstract]:Intellectual Property Rights Infringement Remedy system, which includes the absolute right of claim for intellectual property rights and claims for damages and unjust enrichment claims. Doubt, this article will start from the theoretical and practical significance of intellectual property rights claims, and gradually expound the concept, nature and characteristics of intellectual property rights claims, and comparative analysis of the current situation and shortcomings of China's intellectual property relief system, and finally put forward the author's suggestions for the construction of China's intellectual property rights claims system.
To study the right of claim for intellectual property, first of all, to explore the practical and theoretical basis of the right of claim for intellectual property. In practice, because of the characteristics of intellectual property infringement, the right of claim for intellectual property must become an important relief right that the intellectual property owner should be granted. The right to claim for other's rights constitutes a complete remedy system for intellectual property rights infringement, which complements each other in content and function. To clarify the difference and relationship between the two is helpful to clarify the concept and characteristics of the right to claim for intellectual property rights, so as to lead to the following discussion.
Secondly, it is necessary to clarify its basic framework, including the conceptual nature and characteristics of intellectual property rights claims. As there are many similarities and differences between intellectual property rights claims and real rights claims which are absolute claims in nature and function, the method is to clarify the intellectual property rights claims themselves through the comparative study of the two claims. Theoretical system. The concept of intellectual property claim should include the conditions, contents and purposes of the exercise of the right, that is, when the intellectual property rights are actually infringed or in danger of infringement, the intellectual property owner can request the infringer to do something or not to restore the exclusive control over the object of intellectual property rights. Right is a remedial right for infringement of intellectual property rights, which requires that it be attached to intellectual property rights. However, many characteristics of intellectual property claim make it independent of intellectual property rights to a certain extent, so it is an independent claim. The content of the right of claim does not contain the traditional absolute right of claim such as restoring the original state and returning the restored objects, but it contains the unique contents such as the right of abandonment and the right of obtaining information.
After clarifying the basic theory of intellectual property rights claims, we should analyze the current situation of legislation. Through the comparative analysis of the legislative practice of intellectual property rights in various countries, we can find the defects and deficiencies of the relevant systems of intellectual property rights claims in China, so as to lead to the direction and objectives of the construction of the system of intellectual property rights claims in China.
After defining the characteristics and contents of the intellectual property claim system, the next step is to elaborate the construction of the intellectual property claim system. The construction of the intellectual property claim system should follow the principles of private autonomy, balance of interests and prohibition of abuse of rights. From the point of view of the system and the civil law system, this paper discusses the legislative mode. Through the reference of the legislative mode of various countries and the suggestions of the relevant scholars on the construction of the intellectual property system, the author thinks that it is more appropriate to construct a unified intellectual property claim system and put it in the future civil code. On the one hand, it reflects the intellectual property. The position of right in the whole civil law system, on the other hand, it systematically summarizes the whole intellectual property remedy system. After clarifying the basic model of the system of intellectual property claim, it is necessary to discuss in detail the content of intellectual property claim. The right to claim includes the right to stop infringement, excluding the right to infringement, and it should also include the right to abandon the claim, the right to obtain information, the right to apologize and the right to cancel the influence of the claim. The obligee and all kinds of licensees who acquire intellectual property rights by means of licensing contracts should also satisfy certain conditions in the process of exercising each claim. Generally speaking, there should be a danger of actual infringement or infringement, and each specific claim should also satisfy its specific exercising conditions. The exercise of any right is not limitless. The exercise of the right to claim for intellectual property rights should also be restricted by the public interest, so as to accurately reflect the value of the right to claim for intellectual property rights.
To sum up, this paper mainly discusses the theoretical and practical significance of intellectual property rights claims to the system analysis and construction of the past and present life, in the whole process of discussion, embedded some of the author's views, the focus of the text is to clarify the structure of the intellectual property rights relief system and the content of intellectual property rights claims, as well as the rights in the The restrictions in the course of exercising the system are put forward and some suggestions are put forward.
【学位授予单位】：东北财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.4
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 王鹏;谢冬慧;;论侵害知识产权的不当得利请求权[J];东北大学学报(社会科学版);2009年05期
2 刘红兵;;知识产权侵权物的司法处置——以知识产权请求权为中心的思考[J];电子知识产权;2009年01期
3 吴汉东;试论知识产权的“物上请求权”与侵权赔偿请求权——兼论《知识产权协议》第45条规定之实质精神[J];法商研究(中南政法学院学报);2001年05期
4 唐昭红;论人格权请求权与知识产权请求权的确立——对侵权的民事责任制度的再次诘难[J];法商研究(中南政法学院学报);2002年02期
5 李扬;;知识产权请求权的限制[J];法商研究;2010年04期
6 龚赛红;;关于侵权责任形式的解读——兼论绝对权请求权的立法模式[J];法学杂志;2010年04期
7 崔建远;绝对权请求权抑或侵权责任方式[J];法学;2002年11期
8 郑成思;私权、知识产权与物权的权利限制[J];法学;2004年09期
9 房素素;;物权请求权与债权请求权的异同分析[J];经营管理者;2011年22期
10 季蓉;;绝对权请求权与侵权请求权的竞合问题[J];广西政法管理干部学院学报;2011年04期
，本文编号：2178924
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/zhishichanquanfa/2178924.html
