论文部分内容阅读
知识产权制度与竞争法律制度有着相同的终极目标,但却有着近乎完全背离的实现路径。如何在“保护知识产权”和“维护自由竞争”之间寻求最大的平衡,在激励创新的同时最大限度的增进消费者福利,成为几乎所有市场经济国家都必须要面对和解决的问题。禁令救济权是标准必要专利持有人享有的保持专利独占性的重要权利,但由于标准必要专利进一步强化专利权的固有垄断性,专利权人获得更大的市场力量,禁令会给市场竞争带来更加直接的影响。因此必须对禁令救济权进行竞争法规制,特别是当标准必要专利权人在相关市场占有市场支配地位时,要格外关注其行为的竞争合法性。2015年欧盟法院就历时两年之久的华为与中兴专利纠纷案中涉及的一些与标准必要专利相关的竞争法问题作出初步裁决,为我国反垄断执法机构对滥用知识产权行为的有效监管提供了有价值的思路。
The intellectual property system has the same ultimate goal as the competition law system, but it has a path of almost complete departure from its realization. How to seek the maximum balance between “protecting intellectual property rights” and “safeguarding free competition” and maximizing the welfare of consumers while stimulating innovation has become an issue that almost all market economy countries must face and solve The problem. The right to injunctive relief is an important right for the holder of the standard essential patent to keep the exclusive right of the patent. However, since the essential essential patent further strengthens the inherent monopoly of the patent and the patentee gains greater market power, the ban will give the market a competitive belt To more direct impact. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate the injunctive relief right in competition law, especially when the standard essential patent holder possesses market dominance in the relevant market, paying special attention to the competition legitimacy of his behavior. In 2015, the EU court made a preliminary ruling on some competition law issues related to the standard essential patents involved in Huawei and ZTE Patent Dispute over a two-year period, which provided the antitrust law enforcement agencies in our country with effective supervision over the abuse of intellectual property Valuable ideas.