论涉电商知识产权侵权案件地域管辖规则——以《民事诉讼法司法解释》第二十五条为中心  

Discussion on Regional Jurisdiction Rules in Cases of E-commerce Intellectual Property Infringement:Centred on Article 25 of the Judicial Interpretation of Civil Procedure Law

作　　者：周立勤 ZHOU Li-qin(Law School,Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《福建金融管理干部学院学报》2021年第1期56-64,共9页Journal of Fujian Institute of Financial Administrators

基　　金：重庆知识产权保护协同创新中心2020年知识产权专项研究项目(项目编号:20IP010);西南政法大学法学院2021年度学生科研创新项目(项目编号:FXY2021112)。

摘　　要：在司法实务中,涉电商知识产权侵权案件在确定地域管辖时存在争议,主要原因在于对民事诉讼法司法解释第二十五条存在不同理解。从该条的历史演变可见该条主要针对的案件类型应当是因信息网络侵权导致侵权行为地和结果发生地难以确定的案件。但“信息网络侵权”一词含义过于泛化导致对该行为的认定存在分歧。同时,涉电商知识产权案件的特殊性在于其销售行为包括“信息发布”与“交付行为”两部分,虽两部分侵犯了不同权利,但在管辖确定之时存在“捆绑效应”;此外,虽然地方法院为了解决这一问题进行了探索,但是仍然存在不足。要使得司法审判在这一点上得到统一,可以从立法目的出发对第二十五条进行区别适用。In judicial practice,there are disputes in the determination of regional jurisdiction in the e-commerce infringement cases of intellectual property right,the main reason is that there is different understanding of Article 25 of the Judicial interpretation of Civil Procedure Law.From the historical evolution of the article,it can be seen that the main types of cases dealt with in the article are certain,which should be where the infringement occurred and where the result was difficult to determine.However,the overgeneralization of the meaning of the word information network infringement leads to differences in the determination of the behavior.At the same time,the particularity of e-commerce intellectual property cases lies in the fact that their sales behavior includes"information release"and"delivery".In addition,although the local court has explored to solve this problem,there are still shortcomings.In order to unify the judicial trial on this point,article 25 can be used differently through legislative purposes.

关 键 词：信息网络侵权 《民事诉讼法司法解释》第二十五条 地域管辖 原告住所地 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]