非专利实施主体不正当行为的规制
Regulation of Unfair Behavior by Non-Patent Implementing Entities
DOI: 10.12677/ds.2024.1011454, PDF,   
作者: 梁文倩:南京理工大学知识产权学院,江苏 南京
关键词: 非专利实施主体NPE诉讼模式恶意诉讼Non-Patent Implementing Entities NPE Litigation Model Bad Faith Litigation
摘要: 非专利实施主体被称为NPE。NPE主要通过组合模式和诉讼模式进行盈利,组合模式即通过将专利打包进行捆绑许可授权,其中不乏低质量专利,这种行为损害了被授权企业的权益,不利于科技创新发展。而诉讼模式,则是通过提起恶意专利诉讼的形式,干扰被许可企业的正常生产经营活动。由于NPE的性质及其获利方式,极易实施不正当行为,侵害被授权企业的利益。所以需要对NPE进行规制,在立法上,要规范专利许可使用费制度,完善专利池反垄断规则和遵循诚实信用原则;在司法上,要加强对无效专利申请的审查认定,主动提起确认之诉与反诉的措施;在行政上,加强对无效专利申请的审查认定,严格把控专利审查标准来规制非专利实施主体的滥用权力的不正当行为。
Abstract: Non-patent implementing entities are called NPE. NPE primarily make profits through combination and litigation modes, with the combination mode involving bundled licensing of patents, including low-quality patents, which harms the interests of the licensed enterprises and is not conducive to the development of technological innovation. The litigation mode involves initiating malicious patent lawsuits to disrupt the normal production and operation activities of the licensed enterprises. Due to the nature of NPE and their profit-making methods, they are prone to engage in unlawful conduct and infringe the interests of licensed enterprises. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate NPE, including legislative regulation to standardize patent license use fees, improve anti-monopoly rules for patent pools and adhere to the principle of good faith and credit; judicial regulation to strengthen the review and determination of invalid patent applications and take active measures to initiate affirmative actions and counterclaims; and administrative regulation to strengthen the review and determination of invalid patent applications and strictly control the patent examination standards to regulate the unlawful behavior of NPE abusing their power.
文章引用:梁文倩. 非专利实施主体不正当行为的规制[J]. 争议解决, 2024, 10(11): 197-202. https://doi.org/10.12677/ds.2024.1011454

参考文献

[1] 陆介平, 林蓉, 王宇航. 专利运营: 知识产权价值实现的商业形态[J]. 工业技术创新, 2015, 2(2): 248-254.
[2] 魏玮. 从实施到运营: 企业专利价值实现的发展趋势[J]. 学术交流, 2015(1): 110-115.
[3] 谢光旗. 专利侵权警告函: 正当维权与滥用权利的合理界分[J]. 重庆大学学报(社会科学版), 2022, 28(1): 270-282.
[4] 刘权. 权利滥用、权利边界与比例原则——从《民法典》第132条切入[J]. 法制与社会发展, 2021, 27(3): 39-54.
[5] 李敏. 我国民法上的禁止权利滥用规范——兼评《民法总则》第132条[J]. 法律科学(西北政法大学学报), 2018, 36(5): 129-142.
[6] 彭诚信. 论禁止权利滥用原则的法律适用[J]. 中国法学, 2018(3): 249-268.
[7] 程德理. 专利侵权警告函滥用规制研究[J]. 知识产权, 2021(5): 56-67.
[8] 吕磊. 美国对专利海盗的规范措施及我国的借鉴[J]. 法学杂志, 2014, 35(5): 132-140.
[9] 谢光旗. 美国应对“专利蟑螂”最新法律实践述评[J]. 电子知识产权, 2016(3): 69-78.
[10] 林欧. 技术标准中专利挟持的反垄断规制[J]. 科技管理研究, 2015, 35(18): 126-129.
[11] 李培林. 技术创新与企业知识产权战略的联动[J]. 科技管理研究, 2009, 29(7): 384-387.
[12] 郑伦幸. 论我国专利劫持的法律规制[J]. 学海, 2018(6): 204-209.