【作者】 孙磊；

【导师】 陈建民；

【作者基本信息】 清华大学 ， 法律， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 没有垄断,就没有足够的知识产生;有了垄断,知识就不能被充分的传播。知识产权领域往往出现这种困境,这就需要法律很好地对其利益进行平衡,既要照顾权利人的利益,对其权利进行合理的保护;同时也要兼顾传播者、使用者的利益,使知识产品能够广泛传播,造福于社会。在专利许可过程中,权利人往往利用法律允许其垄断的优势,对被许可人进行“搭售”。专利许可中的搭售行为是一般商品交易中搭售行为的一种表现形式,因此,它往往成为国内外反垄断法关注的对象,我国《反不正当竞争法》对一般商品经济领域的“搭售”行为作出规定。同时,2007年8月30日通过的《中华人民共和国反垄断法》也对商品经济领域的“搭售”作出限制性规定。能够在一定程度上起到限制不合理的搭售行为。但是,本文认为,同国外立法相比,我国立法还很不完善。首先,规定过于原则,操作性不强;其次,没有专门针对知识产权领域里反垄断法规,如《条例》或《指南》与之相衔接,并对专利许可搭售行为构成要件进行规定;再次,没有对专利许可中“搭售”行为除外进行规定,如“合理性分析”、“赦免制度”、“灰色条款”等。所以,与国外立法相比,略显不足。美国对专利许可“搭售”行为规制实行双重规制,首先,《谢尔曼法》和《克莱顿法》对垄断行为作出原则性的规定;其次,在专利法中规定“专利权滥用原则”,另外制定《知识产权许可的反托拉斯指南》对专利许可中的“搭售”性质加以具体规定,欧盟和日本也有专利许可中的相关指南,并把“灰色条款”列入其中,对“搭售”的合法性进行具体分析。专利许可中过程中,构成违法必须满足四个要件,即市场支配力的存在、产品可分并相互独立、强迫的存在和对竞争产生不利影响。另外对专利许可过程中,根据具体情况,法律也应当允许某些专利许可过程中的合法搭售,这主要是基于公共利益的考虑。对比国外相关立法,指出我国立法不足的基础上,提出完善我国相关立法:第一,在即将修改的《专利法》中,规定“专利权滥用原则”,并对搭售行为性质作出界定;第二,制定《知识产权反垄断条例》及《专利许可合理性分析指南》,对专利许可过程中,搭售行为合法与违法进行深入分析。更多还原

【Abstract】 No monopolising, no enough knowledge creating. However, with monopolising, the knowledge can not be spread well. Intellectural property often meets the plight, It is necessary that law balances respective interests of intellectual property, not only right holders, protect their rights reasonably; but also desseminators, users, let intellectual products spread abroadly, and benefit society.In the process of patent license, right holders usually make use of advantage of monopoly to carry on“tying”for licensee. The patent license’s tying is a type of general tying in the general commercial trade. The patent license’s tying means patent holders demand licensee to receive products and service as a license condition that licensee don’t want to buy, use. If the licensee don’t accept it, patentee will refuse the license. Not only domestic antitrust law, but alse foreign antitrust law sometimes focuses on the irratinal phenomenion. Anti-Unfair Competition Law of the People’s Republic of China provides“tying action”about the general commercial trade. Otherwise, Anti-monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China that was passed in August 30, 2007 also restrictly provides“tying action”in the commercial economy area. The law is known as“economic constitution”. It can restrict irrational“tying action”in a certain extent. But compared to foreign relative legislition, our country legislation is imperfect. Firstly, the provision is too principle and have poor manipulation; Secondly, there is no anti-monopoly act aimed to intellectural property field, for example,“act”or“guide”matching the prior anti-monopoly law, that provides composing factors of patent license tying; Thirdly, there is no exception about“tying action”of patent licence in the anti-monopoly law of china, for example,“reasonable analysis”,“exempt system”,“grey article”and so on. So compared to foreign legislation, our country is a little deficient. American has“dual systems”way to regulate patent license tying. (1)“The Sherman Antitrust Act (1890)”and“The Clayton Antitrust Act (1914)”provide monopolization action principly; (2) Patent Law provides“misuse principle of right”; (3)“Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property”concretely regulates“tying nature”in patent license. Europe and Japan also have“concrete analysis”,“exempt system”, and“grey article”entering into the guide of patent license. The guide concretely analyses legality of“patent license tying”.In all, according to the chance that Anti-monopoly Law of the People’s Republic of China which was passed in August 30, 2007 , and the carrier of typical cases about patent license tying in domestic and foreign countries, patent license tyings are renewedly cleared up and classfied by the text. At the same time, it analyses composing factors of patent license tying that law should restrict or prohibit. In the course of patent license, the tying that breaches law must meet four factors: existing of dominent market, tying product and tied product being detachable and independent; existing of coercing; adverse influences to market competition. According to concrete cases, in addition, relative laws should consent to some legal tying in the patent license, mainly for public interests. Compared to relative foreign legislation, the text points out legislation of China is deficient, and advises China should perfect relative legislation, In the first place , patent law that will be amended should regulate“misuse principle of patent”, and provide tying action nature; In the second place,“Anti-Monopoly Act of Intellectual Property”and“Reasonable Analysis Guideline of Patent License”should be legislated, and deeply analyse whether tying is legal about patent license or not.更多还原