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
作 者:邓建志[1]
机构地区:[1]湖南师范大学法学院
出 处:《知识产权》2012年第3期68-74,共7页Intellectual Property
基 金:湖南省社科基金项目(11YBA205);湖南省哲学社会科学成果评审委员会项目(1011233B);湖南省教育厅青年项目(10B069);长沙市科技计划项目(K1104036-41)
摘 要:1984年《专利法》确立了专利行政保护制度,之后,该制度成为专利法历次修改的争议焦点。比较研究这些修改内容,可以发现该制度的以下发展趋势:专利行政裁决职能呈现出弱化趋势,而行政查处职能和行政调解职能则呈现出强化趋势;以第二次修改为标志,专利行政保护制度的重心已发生转移;该制度可以遵循以下发展路径:由过去的以行政裁决为重心——到现在的以行政查处为重心——再到将来的以行政服务为基本理念和重心。Chinese Patent Law in 1984 established the patent administrative protection system, which has been a controversial issue in the following three amendments. Based on the comparative study towards these modifications, the development tendency of the system can be discovered. It is as follows: the administrative adjudication function of Chinese patent administrative departments is lessening, but the administrative sanction function and the administrative mediation function is strengthening; with the second amendment of Chinese Patent Law, the focus of China's Administrative Protection System to Patent has changed; the focus of the system may follow the following basic path: from administrative adjudication in the past to administrative sanction at present, and to administrative service in the future.
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:216.73.216.9