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]广州商学院,广东 广州 收稿日期:2024年8月7日 [2]录用日期:2024年8月29日 [3]发布日期:2024年9月13日
出 处:《争议解决》2024年第9期44-50,共7页Dispute Settlement
摘 要:在高新技术产业的快速发展中,标准必要专利(SEP)成为推动技术创新和产业升级的关键因素。然而,SEP保护过程中可能遭遇垄断风险、标准必要性界限模糊和司法裁决标准不一等诸多挑战。基于此,亟需构建一个更加健全的SEP保护体系。可以通过明确垄断行为责任规制、建立公正的SEP标准必要性评估机制以及完善司法裁决规则等方式,减少SEP诉讼纠纷并防止SEP权利人滥用市场支配地位。此外,还应重视否定默示许可制度,尝试建立高新技术产业SEP专属禁令救济机制,以期达到维持SEP权利人和潜在实施人之间的利益平衡,同时注重保护公共利益。SEP保护体系的完善有利于推动高新技术产业的发展,并为其创造一个更加公平和良好的知识产权保护环境,从而激励创新,促进我国高新技术产业的健康发展,提升我国专利的全球竞争力。In the rapid development of high-tech industries, Standard Essential Patents (SEP) have become a key factor in driving technological innovation and industrial upgrading. However, the protection process of SEP may encounter numerous challenges, such as the risk of monopolistic practices, the ambiguity of the boundaries of standard-essentiality, and the inconsistency in judicial decision-making criteria. In light of this, there is an urgent need to establish a more robust system for the protection of Standard Essential Patents (SEP). This can be achieved through clarifying the regulation of responsibilities for monopolistic conduct, establishing a fair mechanism for assessing the standard-essentiality of SEP, and refining the rules for judicial decisions. These measures aim to reduce disputes over SEP litigation and prevent SEP holders from abusing their market-dominant positions. Furthermore, attention should be given to the negation of the implied license system, and efforts should be made to establish an exclusive injunction relief mechanism for SEPs in the high-tech industry. Thi
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:216.73.216.49