【作者】 徐红；

【导师】 艾佳慧；

【作者基本信息】 南京大学 ， 法学理论， 2014， 硕士

【摘要】 知识产权是私权,是民事权利的重要组成部分,在培养市民社会、强化权利意识的中国法治进程中,对知识产权的研究和保护显得尤为重要。同时,创新是一个民族进步的不竭动力,而知识产权作为鼓励创新、保护创新的法律机制,对中国在知识经济浪潮中占据技术创新和科技发展的制高点更具有全局性和战略性的重要作用。然而在强调加强对知识产权保护的同时,实践中也出现了越来越多的知识产权滥用的现象,权利人对知识产权的不正当行使对创新和竞争带来许多负面的影响。对知识产权的保护和限制是保证知识产权制度健康有序发展,平衡各种利益,协调各种冲突所需要的不可偏废的两个方面。这个问题在当下的中国有其特别的意义。我国并没有一部统一的知识产权法,对知识产权的保护和限制也更大程度上需要在动态的竞争法框架内解决。知识产权保护与限制,实际上是法律在个人与社会之间对知识所产生的利益进行的界定、分配和调整。笔者试图从外部性尤其是科斯定理的产权理论对我国反不正当竞争法下知识产权保护与限制这一更细化的命题进行法经济学分析。文本的框架为提出问题——分析问题——解决问题(解决的可行性思路)。具体来说,即：问题的提出——外部性分析——外部性内部化——寻找保护与限制的界限——划定界限。在结合案例提出本文的议题即反不正当竞争中知识产权保护与限制问题后,运用外部性理论的法律经济学工具进行了反不正当竞争的正负外部性及其内部化分析。新制度经济学代表人物科斯,为外部性问题的解决开辟了广阔的道路,在政府力量之外,其以交易成本为分析工具提出了解决外部性问题的市场途径。笔者在科斯产权理论的基础上提出反不正当竞争中知识产权保护与限制的外部性问题的解决思路：界定产权(是否不正当竞争)、允许交易,政府仅起导向型作用,而私人的谈判和交易会在法律框架内自然地修正并解决外部性所造成的问题。外部性问题的分析是为了引出私人产权与公共利益的平衡问题,该问题是划定知识产权保护与限制界限的关键。反不正当竞争法中体现了保护私权与维护公共利益(市场秩序)的双重价值目标,这种双重价值目标是以激励机制为基础、以利益平衡的调节机制为手段加以实现的。本文讨论的意义不在于提出立法或修法对策,而是试图为法官裁判提供法经济学的工具以划分产权保护的界限。结合对本文前言案例的分析,笔者提出法官决策对外部性理论的运用可以分为两个方面：静态上,法官在决策过程中运用经济学分析方法来分析司法过程,对行为人使用方式、使用目的、使用效果上(使用效果又可细分为对权利人、其他竞争者和社会公众)等多重因素进行项目化的综合衡量；动态上,法官在决策过程中要考虑不同的判决导向对市场经济生活的不同影响,而不是局限于诉讼活动自身的分析,回应市场变化导致的知识产权边界的变化,对内部化收益大于内部化成本的知识财产作为产权来保护,对于内部化成本大于内部化收益的知识产权必须加以限制。更多还原

【Abstract】 Intellectual property is private right and important part of civil rights. In the rule of law process in training citizen society and strengthen right awareness, the research and protection of intellectual property becomes especially important. At the same time, innovation is an inexhaustible motive force for the progress of a nation; the intellectual property regulation of encouraging and protecting innovation plays a global and strategic role in the knowledge economy wave, takes the commanding height for technology innovation and science & technology development. However, while we emphasize strengthening the protection of intellectual property, it occurs more and more abuse of intellectual property in practice, the rights-holder exercises an improper intellectual property right has brought much negative impact on innovation and competition. The protection and restriction of intellectual property is two balanced methods in protecting the healthy and orderly development of intellectual property system, balancing of interests, coordinating of various conflicts. This problem has especially signification in present China.There is no a unified intellectual property law in China, the protection and restriction of intellectual property rights also needs to solve within the dynamic framework of the competition law at a greater degree. Actually, the protection and restriction of intellectual property defines, distributes and adjusts the benefits generated by knowledge between the individual and the society by law. The author attempts to do economics analysis on the protection and restriction of intellectual property rights under the anti-Unfair competition, from the externality theory especially the Coase theorem and property right theory. The framework of this article is introducing problems--- analyzing problems--- settling problems. To be specific, namely as raising issues- external analyzing-internalizing the externalities-searching the line of between the protection and the restriction-draw the line.After the introduction the topic combined with case, the protection and restriction of intellectual property in the Anti-Unfair Competition Law, this paper then explains and analyses the externalities and internalization of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law by utilizing the external theory. New Institutional Economics representative, Coase, has opened up a broad road to solve the problem of externalities. Besides the government intervention, he put forward the market way to solve the problem of externalities, by using the transaction cost as analysis tool. On the basis of the theory of property right of Coase, this paper put forward the externalities solution of the protection and restriction of intellectual property in the anti-unfair competition:by defining the property rights and allowing transactions, the private negotiations and transaction will naturally correct and solve the externality problems within the legal framework, while the government only plays as the oriented role. Analysis of externalities is to elicit the balance issue between the private property rights and the public interests, which is the key of drawing the line between the protection and the restriction of intellectual property. Anti-Unfair Competition Law embodies double value targets, protection the private rights and Maintenance the public interests (market order). The targets are achieved by means of the adjustment mechanism of interests balance, based on incentive mechanism.This article attempts to provide the law and economics tools for the judge to divide the boundary of property rights protection, instead of proposing legislation or amendment countermeasures. Combined with analysis of the case which is presented in the introduction, the author puts forward two aspects that the judge decisions on the use of externality theory can be divided into:Statically, the judge uses the economic analysis method to analyze the judicial process in the decision-making process, comprehensive measuring multiple factors, including the mode of occupation, the purpose of use, the effect of use, and so on. Dynamically? the judge consider the influences of different judgments on the market-oriented economic life in the decision-making process, instead of only analysis the litigation activity itself, to respond to the changes of intellectual property rights as results of market changes. Protect the intellectual products as property of which the internalization income more than the internalization cost, and restrict the intellectual property of which the internalization cost is more than the internalization income.更多还原