知识产权边境保护法律制度研究

【作者】 姜春杰；

【导师】 王莲峰；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法律， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 为遏制国际贸易领域侵权活动的进一步发展，世界各国在加强知识产权的立法和司法保护的同时，也把保护的重点转向行政保护，特别是海关的边境保护方面。与此同时，世界贸易组织框架下的《与贸易有关的知识产权协议》(英文简称TRIPS)也明确赋予海关知识产权边境保护职能。 我国已正式成为世界贸易组织的成员国，TRIPS对我国已产生法律约束力。目前，我国海关对知识产权实施边境保护的主要执法依据是1995年国务院颁布的《知识产权海关保护条例》(以下简称《条例》)。由于当时立法时间仓促，加之缺乏必要的实践积累，该《条例》存在许多问题。为进一步完善我国的知识产权边境保护制度，本文着重研究了TRIPS及新修订的《中华人民共和国海关法》的相应规定，以期对构建我国的知识产权边境保护制度有所裨益。 文章正文分为四个部分： 第一部分为边境保护概述。首先，本文介绍了知识产权边境保护的含义，分析了实施边境保护措施的必要性。之后，本文研究了国际条约中有关知识产权边境保护的相关规定，并重点分析了TRIPS中有关边境保护的特别要求。最后，本文介绍了日本在签订TRIPS后，对边境保护制度所作的修改。 第二部分为中美知识产权谈判与我国边境保护立法。本部分研究了我国边境保护制度的立法背景和主要内容。首先，本文介绍了美国“特别301条款”的背景、内容及协商程序。之后，结合美国对中国发起的“特别301条款”的调查和由此引发的三次知识产权争端，分析了我国边境保护立法从无到有，从行政规章到法律规定的不断完善发展的过程。最后，本文认为，随着中国加入世界贸易组织，中美知识产权争端将更多地在TRIPS的实施上展开。 第三部分为我国边境保护特点分析。本文在边境保护适用的知识产权范围，进口和出口环节及执法程序三个方面与TRIPS、美国及我国香港地区进行比较，分析了我国大陆边境保护的特点。一是我国在对商标和版权保护的同时，还将专利纳入边境保护范围。但本文认为，相对于我国目前的专利权状况和海关的执法实践，此非明智之举。二是在进口和出口环节同样保护。我国海关除了禁止侵权货物进口之外，还有责任对自中国出口的货物采取禁止措施。此外，对于，平行进口的货物，本文建议，在版权和专利领域进行限制，而在商标领域原则上允许平行进口，更有利于维护我国民族产业的发展。三是采取不同的边境保护执法程序，且在海关职能划分上，我国海关拥有相当大的主动权，可“依职权”扣留侵权嫌疑货物。 第四部分为我国边境保护立法的不足与完善。本文结合海关保护知识产权的基本程序分析了我国边境保护立法中的不足，并提出了相应的解决办法。 一是在知识产权备案阶段。《条例》将“备案”作为获取海关保护的前置条件，不仅有悖于TR于S规定，也给申请人增加了不合理负担。本文认为，“备案”仅应作为海关依职权扣押货物的前提，且配合年审制度，以解决备案失效的问题。 二是在扣留侵权嫌疑货物阶段。《条例》规定，权利人请求海关扣留侵权货物时，应提交与进出口货物等值的担保金。而一律等值的担保金制度在很大程度上限制了权利人合法权利的行使。本文建议，在适当拓宽当事人提交担保期限的同时，对于无力提供定额现金担保的权利人，可以银行保函的方式进行担保，或采取总担保的方式。 三是在对货物的侵权状况进行调查阶段。TK于S规定了“检查权和信息权”，旨在使权利人在主张权利时或相对人行使抗辩权时获得相应的证据。这无疑是边境保护程序中极为重要的一环。然而，在此方面我国《条例》却未规定。因此，本文建议，我国海关在调查期间，应为知识产权权利人、收货人或发货人提供足够的检查被扣侵权嫌疑货物的机会，并在可能的情况下提供样品。收货人或发货人未在规定的期间对扣留侵权嫌疑货物提出异议的，海关可以将收货人或发货人的姓名或名称、地址、有关货物的性质及数量通知知识产权权利人。 四是在对侵权货物和收发货人进行处理和处罚阶段。依据《条例》规定，应当销毁的侵权货物范围过大，而对专利侵权货物又未规定处理方式。本文建议，对专利侵权货物和侵权标识难以消除的侵犯商标专用权的货物，有害公共安全、卫生、健康、文化、道德或其它原因不宜利用的货物，予以销毁:其余货物，可视情况变卖给权利人或捐献给社会公益事业。《条例》规定了收发货人的刑事责任，但《刑法》却未规定具体的移送标准。本文建议，应尽早制定“其处罚的严厉程度与所犯罪行的严重程度相符”的移送标准。此外，对于《条例》中海关责任形式的不连续，建议增设海关的行政赔偿责任。更多还原

【Abstract】 In order to contain the further development of infringing acts in international trade fields, all the countries in the world intensify the legislation and judicature of intellectual property rights, at the same time, they focus on administrative protection, especially border protection by the Customs. Meanwhile, the WTO’s Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS is an abbreviation.) definitely accords the Customs the function of protecting intellectual property rights.With our entry into WTO, the TRIPS have taken effect on China. Currently, the main legal basis on which the Customs carry border protection of intellectual property rights is the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China Regarding Customs Protection of Intellectual Property Rights (Referred to below as the Regulations), stipulated by the State Council in 1995. Owing to the short legislative time and inadequate experience, there are many problems in the Regulations. In order to further perfect the system of border protection in China, the paper studies the TRIPS and the related regulations in America, to help the constitution of the system of border protection hi ChinaThe paper is divided into four parts.The first part briefly introduces the border protection. Firstly, it briefs the meaning of border protection in intellectual property rights, the necessity of executing border protection measures. Then it studies the related regulations hi international conventions. Moreover, it emphatically analyzes the special requirements related to border protection in the TRIPS. Finally the paper introduces the rectification in border protection in Japan.The second part studies the negotiation on intellectual property rights between China and America and the legislation of border protection in China. The part introduces the legislating background and the main contents of the system of border protection. Firstly, the paper introduces the legislating background, contents and negotiating process of "Special Article 301" . Then, combining with the three conflicts between China and America arising from the investigation of American "Special 301", the paper analyzes the constantly perfect process of our border protection from nothing to existence, from regulations to law. Finally, the paper anticipates the conflicts between China and America will focus on the enforcement of the TRIPS.The third part analyzes the characteristics of the border protection in our inland, by comparing the difference of the border protection among the TRIPS, Hong Kong and America.Firstly, at the aspect of the scope of intellectual property to which border protection apply, the Regulations apply to intellectual property rights related to import and export goods including the exclusive right to use a trademark, copyright and patent right. Secondly, at the aspect of import and export of goods, besides prohibiting to import infringing goods like other Customs, our Customs specially have the responsibility of prohibiting export of infringing goods.Thirdly, at the aspect of enforcement procedures of border protection, our Customs have the right to act upon their own initiative and to suspend the release of suspected infringing goods.The forth part analyzes the problems and perfection in legislation of border protection, combining with the basic procedures of border protection by the Customs. This part is the innovations.Firstly, any owner of rights requesting the Customs to protect his intellectual property rights should apply beforehand for putting the protection of intellectual property rights on record. However, this compulsory stipulation not only violates the TRIPS, but also increases undue burden to applicants. Thereby, the text considers that "Putting the protection of intellectual property rights on record" is only a premise the Customs act upon their own initiative, matching the system of yearly examination, in order to solve the invalid problem.Secondly, while the applicant requests the Customs to detain the suspected更多还原