论文部分内容阅读
关于知识产权权利冲突的解决,无论是学术界的主流观点,还是人民法院的审判实践,都强调以保护在先权利的原则作为解决冲突的首要原则。其实,知识产权的“无形性”这一重要特征决定了在后权利人即使尽了合理的注意义务,也可能进入在先权利人的权利范围,因此,在权利冲突的解决问题上不宜过分强调尊重在先权利。在解决知识产权权利冲突时,既要坚持尊重在先权利的原则,也应遵循国家利益和社会利益最大化原则,在保护在先权利人的合法权益的同时,应对在后权利人的正当权益给予关注,否则,将可能导致实质上的不公平。本文将以一则案例为切入点,从“公平”、“效益”的角度出发,反思当今司法实践中解决权利冲突的“禁令救济”方式的缺陷,探讨如何建立公平解决知识产权权利冲突的机制。
With regard to the resolution of conflicts over intellectual property rights, both the academic mainstream viewpoints and the people’s court trials emphasize the principle of the protection of prior rights as the primary principle for resolving conflicts. In fact, the important feature of the “intangibles” of intellectual property determines that the right holders in the future may enter the right range of the prior obligee, even if they make reasonable due diligence. Therefore, it is inappropriate to solve the conflict of rights Overemphasize respect for prior rights. In resolving the conflicts of intellectual property rights, we should not only insist on the principle of respecting the prior rights, but also follow the principle of maximizing the interests of the state and the society so as to protect the legitimate rights and interests of the previous rights holders and at the same time meet the legitimate rights and interests of the later rights holders Give attention, otherwise, it may lead to substantial inequity. This article will take a case as a starting point, from the perspective of “Fairness ” and “Benefit ”, to reflect on the defects of “injunctive relief ” method of solving conflicts of rights in current judicial practice and to explore how to establish a fair solution Mechanism of Conflicts of Intellectual Property Rights.