检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]武汉大学法学院 [2]国家土地督察成都局
出 处:《法学研究》2007年第6期63-75,共13页Chinese Journal of Law
摘 要:知识产权许可协议中的不争执条款既有阻碍竞争的消极影响,也有其积极的一面。美国、日本、欧盟在认定不争执条款的效力时采用了基本相同的方法,即一般指导原则下的个案分析。它们运用一套以反垄断法为基础的具体规则,将宏观经济背景、技术发展水平、市场结构状态、权利质疑成本等因素类型化、具体化,主要依合理原则进行考量,协调知识产权政策和竞争政策的变化。我国应当甄别性地借鉴国外的成熟经验,不断完善不争执条款的立法和执法。The no- challenge clauses in intellectual property license have negative effect of blocking competition, but they also have some positive effects. US, Japan and EU use basically the same method to judge the validity of the no - challenge clauses, which is to analyze particular cases according to general guidelines. They apply a suit of particular rules based on the antitrust law to classify and concretize the factors which affect the judgment of no- challenge clauses, such as macroscopic economic background, technology developing level, market frame, cost of challenge, and so on. They mainly use the rule of reasonableness to judge and harmonize the changes of IP policies and competition ones. Our country should perfect the legislation and execution about no - challenge clauses gradually in the level of antitrust law and guidelines.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.171