知识产权惩罚性赔偿的移植溯源与适用调试  

Transplantation and Application of Punitive Damages for Intellectual Property

作　　者：黄宇杰 Huang Yujie

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院

出　　处：《电子知识产权》2023年第10期53-65,共13页Electronics Intellectual Property

摘　　要：我国知识产权惩罚性赔偿制度是移植美国法的产物,其伴随着《著作权法》的修改完成已经被全面地引入了知识产权法的领域。然而,我国在法律移植的过程中存在一定的认知偏差,具体表现为忽视了美国普通法上的惩罚性赔偿和知识产权领域特有的加重赔偿之间的区别。这使得我国知识产权惩罚性赔偿构成要件更为严格,但是也埋下了扩张适用的种子。对此,应当在借鉴美国知识产权惩罚性赔偿的司法实践基础之上,对现有规则进行一定的调整。在明确知识产权惩罚性赔偿的核心功能是预防功能的前提下,知识产权惩罚性赔偿的适用宜采用综合性的考察方式。同时,为了避免知识产权惩罚性赔偿的滥用,应当排除惩罚性赔偿在某些与创新无关场景的适用,同时应当严格限制惩罚性赔偿对网络服务提供者的适用。The punitive damages system for intellectual property rights in China is a product of transplanting US law,and has been fully introduced into the field of intellectual property law with the completion of the revision of the Copyright Law.However,there is a certain cognitive bias in China’s legal transplantation process,which is manifested in the neglect of the difference between punitive damages in US common law and the unique enhanced damages in the field of intellectual property.Although this makes the constituent elements of punitive damages for intellectual property rights in China more stringent,it also sows the seeds of expansion and application.Therefore,on the basis of referring to US judicial practice in punitive damages for intellectual property rights,some adjustments should be made to the existing rules.With the premise of clarifying that the core function of punitive damages for intellectual property rights is prevention,a comprehensive standard should be adopted for the application of punitive damages for intellectual property rights.At the same time,in order to avoid the abuse of punitive damages for intellectual property rights,certain scenarios unrelated to innovation should be excluded from the application of punitive damages,and strict limitations should be imposed on the application of punitive damages for internet service provider.

关 键 词：惩罚性赔偿 法律移植 预防 综合性考察 

分 类 号：D923.4[政治法律—民商法学]