游走在权利人与侵权人之间——对商业秘密侵权诉讼中“秘密性”证明责任分配的思考  

Wandering on the Edge of Obligee and Infringer:The Reflection on Distributing the Burden of proof of confidentiality in the Commercial Secret Litigation

作　　者：李希梁 LI Xiliang(School of Law,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China)

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院,北京100084

出　　处：《成都理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2021年第6期29-37,共9页Journal of Chengdu University of Technology:Social Sciences

摘　　要：在商业秘密侵权诉讼中秘密性证明责任的分配上,立法者始终“游走”在权利人与被诉侵权人之间,司法实践也未能形成一致意见。依据2019年《反不正当竞争法》和2020年《中美经贸协议》,我国正式明确在秘密性证明责任分配上采取法律推定规则。但该推定规则所依据的诸多论据并不是绝对的,其不合理增加被告的证明负担,无法有效平衡诉讼当事人之间的利益。经过与美国法的比较研究,发现美国并未采取法律推定规则,仍遵循权利人举证思路。我国可行的完善思路是对经贸协议与现行法律规定进行体系性解释,明确由商业秘密权利人承担秘密性证明责任,同时适当降低证明标准,综合权衡多项间接性证据证明秘密性。Legislators always wander between the obligee and the accused infringer in the distribution of the burden of proof of confidentiality in the commercial secret infringement litigation,and judicial practice has failed to reach a consensus.According to the Anti-Unfair Competition Law of 2019 and the Sino-US Economic and Trade Agreement of 2020,China formally and explicitly adopts the rule of legal presumption in the distribution of burden of proof of confidentiality.However,many arguments on which this presumption rule is based are not absolute,which unreasonably increases the burden of proof of defendants and cannot effectively balance the interests of litigants.After a comparative study of American law,it is found that the United States has not adopted the rule of legal presumption,but still follows the idea of proof by obligee.The feasible way to improve our country is to systematically explain the economic and trade agreements and the existing laws and regulations,making it clear that the obligee of trade secrets should bear the burden of proof of confidentiality,reducing the standard of proof appropriately,and comprehensively weigh a number of indirect evidence to prove confidentiality.

关 键 词：商业秘密 秘密性 法律推定 证明责任 证明标准 

分 类 号：D922.294[政治法律—经济法学]