| dc.contributor.advisor | 許牧彥 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Hsu, Mu-Yen | en_US |
| dc.contributor.author (Authors) | 黃泓淥 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author (Authors) | Huang, Hung-Lu | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 黃泓淥 | zh_TW |
| dc.creator (作者) | Huang, Hung-Lu | en_US |
| dc.date (日期) | 2019 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 5-Sep-2019 17:29:50 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 5-Sep-2019 17:29:50 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 5-Sep-2019 17:29:50 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) | G0106364120 | en_US |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125920 | - |
| dc.description (描述) | 碩士 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 國立政治大學 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 科技管理與智慧財產研究所 | zh_TW |
| dc.description (描述) | 106364120 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 從2013年到2017年以來，非專利實施事業體(Non-Practicing entities, NPEs)已經收購超過2880件與半導體有關的美國專利，並提出超過兩萬多件侵權專利訴訟，甚至在2014年NPEs讓從事半導體相關營運公司付出了法律費用包含律師費或授權費等法律成本估計約122億美元，逐漸威脅整個半導體供應鏈包括整合元件製造商、設計商到封裝測試供應商。台灣身為半導體產業大國，在產業鏈上IC設計商就高達兩百多家，產值為全球排名第二，僅次於美國。持續受到NPEs的恐嚇與攻擊之下，台灣廠商需額外投入更多資源與資金在專利侵權訴訟的成本上，造成廠商研發與創新之路受到阻礙。本研究首先以NPEs攻擊台灣半導體廠商的案例作為研究的範圍，並以台廠被控次數最多的聯發科技公司為代表，進一步分析發現該NPE與聯發科競爭對手博通(Broadcom)有合作關係，因此本研究針對該NPE與博通之間合作模式進行深入的個案研究。為了解讀訴訟事件始末的脈絡，本研究透過動態競爭理論加以解釋，並以察覺-動機-能力(AMC)架構探討兩者之間如何串連雙方資源與優勢攻擊聯發科。本研究發現，在產品市場上博通進行專利轉移行動時，假以他手發起訴訟活動，降低聯發科的察覺性，減少被反訴的風險。在專利授權市場中，NPEs訴訟時機會等待聯發科同時有多件訴訟案繁忙在身，且會控訴下游客戶來增加議價能力，而聯發科在產品市場上要付出相當成本才能改良迴避，但產品卻已是從成熟期進入衰退期之時。本研究之貢獻在於發現非專利實施實體的營運模式與訴訟時機會隨當時的情境來調整不同的訴訟策略。另一方面，本文也發現動態競爭理論可以透過三方不同的視角，為彼此之間的攻防策略刻畫出更深的輪廓，讓台灣半導體廠商能提早警覺NPEs的行動，加以防範。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | Through 2013 to 2017, Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) had been acquiring more than 2880 US patetents related to semiconductor industry and filing more than twenty thousand cases of infringement litigation as well. What’s more is NPEs had semiconductor companies pay approximately 12.2 billion dollars singly in 2014 for legal expense include lawyer fee, settlement fee and license fee, which gradually posed a huge degree of threats to semiconductor companies in the supply chain such as IDM, IC fabless design house, and assembly and testing house. As a leading country in the scope of semiconduction industry, Taiwan possesses as many as two hundred fabless design houses which gain a great amount of revenue and rank number 2 in the world, second only to US. As a result of being heavily attacted and threatened by NPEs, Taiwan operating companies are forced to input more resources to defend themselves and increase the cost of patent litigation in the end, by which the innovation of research and development in the industry is hindered.In the beginning of the study is the action by NPEs attacking Taiwanese semiconductor companies as a wide range of research scope. MediaTek, which is being attacked the most is chosen to be a focal firm in the study, and furthermore the article analyzes the cooperation model of the NPE and Broadcom Inc.(Broadcom) from the perspective of competitive dynamics. To understand the context of the patent litigation, Awareness-Motivation-Capability (AMC) framework interprets how the NPE and Broadcom utilize and combine their resources and advantages to take action against MediaTek. It is found in this article that the purpose of Broadcom to transfer their patents to Cherokee (NPE) so as to file a suit by assignee is to decrease the risk of counterclaims. On the other hand, Cherokee (NPE) took advantage of a perfect time when MediaTek was busy dealing with lots of patent litigations at the same time. Cherokee, in the meanwhile, filed the same patent litigation against MediaTek’s customers as a part of business strategy.The contribution of the study is the observation of both of the product company and NPEs collaboratively establishing an operating model in a different way when facing different lawsuit scenarios. Based on the AMC structure of competitive dynamics, the study provides a whole new different perspective of a three-sided view of focal firm, NPEs, and third-party operating company to aquire more of their strategies as defenders and attackers, which can alert Twainese semiconductor companies to take precautionary measures in case of any action of NPEs and competitors. | en_US |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 中文摘要 i英文摘要 ii目錄 iv表目錄 v圖目錄 vii第壹章 緒論 1第一節 研究背景與動機 1第二節 研究目的與問題 7第三節 研究定位及流程 10第貳章 文獻探討 12第一節 NPE的簡介與其商業模式發展趨勢 12第二節 動態競爭 27第三節 美國專利訴訟制度與行政程序概況 35第參章 研究方法 39第一節 研究範圍與架構 39第二節 研究方法 40第三節 個案篩選流程與標準 41第肆章 資料分析 43第一節 專利授權市場概念 43第二節 全球半導體與NPEs專利訴訟案件概況 47第三節 NPE與台灣專利訴訟案件概況 48第伍章 個案分析 52第一節 公司介紹 52第二節 動態競爭分析概況 61第三節 NPEs個案分析 Lake Cherokee LLC v. MediaTek 75第四節 Lake Cherokee動態競合策略 77第陸章 結論與分析 84第一節 研究發現與討論 84第二節 研究結論與建議 87第三節 研究限制與後續建議 89參考文獻 91 | zh_TW |
| dc.format.extent | 3848043 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | - |
| dc.source.uri (資料來源) | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106364120 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 專利訴訟 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 非專利實施體(NPEs) | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 動態競爭 | zh_TW |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Patent Litigation | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Non-Practicing Entities(NPEs) | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Competitive Dynamics | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | NPE與台灣廠商的動態競爭-以台灣半導體產業為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title (題名) | The analysis of NPE and Taiwan Operating Company from AMC perspective of Competitive Dynamics - The case of Taiwan Semiconductor Industry | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | thesis | en_US |
| dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) | 英文文獻2018-Forecast-Meeting. (2018). WSTS Semiconductor Market Forecast Autumn 2018.ACACIA-RESEARCH-CORPORATION. (2012). Acacia《2012 FORM 10-K》. Retrieved from http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AUCBuwWKqzYJ:acaciaresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/10-K.pdf+&cd=1&hl=zh-TW&ct=clnk&gl=twBarnett, W. P. (1997). The dynamics of competitive intensity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 128-160.Broadcom. (2012). Broadcom《2012 Annual Report on FORM 10-K》.Chen, M.-J. (1996). Competitor analysis and interfirm rivalry: Toward a theoretical integration. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 100-134.Chen, M.-J., & Miller, D. (2012). Competitive dynamics: Themes, trends, and a prospective research platform. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 135-210.EEtimes.(2010).AMD jumps into fabless chip company ranking. Retrieved from https://www.eetimes.com/document.asp?doc_id=1172794#FEDERAL-TRADE-COMMISSION. (2011). The Evolving IP Marketplace: Aligning Patent Notice and Remedies with Competition. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/reports/evolving-ip-marketplace-aligning-patent-notice-and-remedies-competition-report-federal-trade/110307patentreport.pdfHarrigan, K. R. (1985). An application of clustering for strategic group analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 6(1), 55-73.IFICLAIMS-Patent-Service. (2018). 2018 Patent Trends and Insights. Retrieved from https://www.ificlaims.com/rankings-trends-2018.htmIFICLAIMS. (2017). 2017 Patent Trends and Insights.iPEL-Inc. (2018). iPEL, Inc. Poised to Redefine Global Patent Market Having Raised $100 Million in Capital. Retrieved from https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ipel-inc-poised-to-redefine-global-patent-market-having-raised-100-million-in-capital-300672220.htmlKnowMade. (2017). Patent Licensing Companies in the Semiconductor Market: Patent Litigation Risk and Potential Targets. Retrieved from https://www.knowmade.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Patent_Licensing_Companies_in_Semiconductor_Market_FLYER.pdfLOTNETWORK. (2018). How LOT Network Addresses the PAE Problem.Retrieved from https://lotnet.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Introduction-to-LOT-2.0_4_18.pdfMerriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation: John Wiley & Sons.Miller, S. P., & Aravind, A. (2018). Who’s Suing Us? Decoding Patent Plaintiffs since 2000 with the Stanford NPE Litigation Dataset. Stanford Technology Law Review, 21(2).Porter, M. E. (1980). Industry structure and competitive strategy: Keys to profitability. Financial Analysts Journal, 36(4), 30-41.Robert A. Matthews, J. (2009). The Restricted Scope of Patent Infringement Remedies, Available to “Non-Practicing” Patent Owners. IP Litigator, 1-11.RPX-Rational-Patent. (2017). RPX Data Update: Patent Litigation Volatility Persists as Strategies Shif. Retrieved from https://www.rpxcorp.com/intelligence/blog/rpx-data-update-patent-litigation-volatility-persists-as-strategies-shift/RPX. (2019). Q1 in Review: New Uncertainties Spark Further Change as Reform Momentum Builds. Retrieved from http://www.rpxcorp.com/intelligence/blog/q1-in-review-new-uncertainties-spark-further-change-as-reform-momentum-builds/RPX, R., Patent. (2017). RPX Data Update: Patent Litigation Volatility Persists as Strategies Shift.Schindler, J. (2018). $100 million NPE sets its sights on China and promises a big litigation play within a fortnight. Retrieved from https://www.iam-media.com/finance/100-million-npe-sets-its-sights-china-and-promises-big-litigation-play-within-fortnightThissandier., F., Bastard., A., & Baron., N. (2017). Patent Licensing Companies in the Semiconductor Market: Patent Litigation Risk and Potential Targets.Unifiedpatents. (2017). 2017 Patent Dispute Report: Year in Review. Retrieved from https://www.unifiedpatents.com/insights/2017/12/26/2017-patent-dispute-report-year-in-reviewUnifiedpatents. (2019). portal-unifiedpatents. Retrieved from https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/caselist?sort=-filing_date中文文獻Brandenburger, A. M. (2004)。競合策略 (許恩德譯, Trans.)。臺北: 台灣培生教育出版。ClarivateAnalytics (2018)。美國專利訴訟發展趨勢。DIGITIMES-Research (2019)。2018年全球IC設計營收狀況。取自https://www.digitimes.com.tw/tech/dt/n/shwnws.asp?CnlID=1&id=556847&query=%A5%FE%B2yic。于台珊 (2014)。103年度經濟部科技專案跨領域科技管理與智財運用國際人才培訓計畫。經濟部工業局。中央銀行 (2017)。中央銀行業務報告暨 106年度業務計畫及營業預算報告。取自https://www.cbc.gov.tw/public/Data/88141637171.pdf王仁君 (2012)。專利侵權的不當得利問題。全國律師 (Vol. 16, pp. 40-50)。王柏翔 (2014)。技術標準必要專利與禁制令救濟之研究。(碩士)， 國立政治大學， 台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/e5w85v朱浩筠 (2016)。美國專利舉發制度及其相關爭議問題簡介 ――以多方複審（IPR）案件為中心。智慧財產權月刊 (Vol. 213, pp. 5-25)。江柏風 (2018)。半導體產業年鑑。財團法人工業技術研究院。取自https://www.itis.org.tw/book/download_sample.aspx?type=itispubfile&pubid=53221101。李淑蓮 (2018)。兩岸半導體產業比一比： IC設計篇。北美智權報， 220。李永健 (2009)。聯發科砸3.5億美元吃下ADI手機晶片。拓墣產業研究所。吳碧娥 (2018)。台灣企業與NPE合作可行嗎？。北美智權報， 72。周逸達 (2008)。產業分析:報告IC設計產業。國立虎尾科技大學。取自http://nfuba.nfu.edu.tw/ezfiles/31/1031/img/468/IC01.pdf。易先勇 (2014)。引發專利訴訟的影響因素－以動態競爭AMC觀點分析ITC案件為例。(碩士), 國立政治大學， 台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/mc22qz。林柏裕 (2013)。非專利實施實體之商業模式—以Acacia和Intellectual Ventures為例。(碩士)， 國立臺灣大學， 台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/ps2nq4。林柏全 (2008)。解獨聯發科的成長密碼。(碩士), 國立臺灣大學， 台北市。長庚大學技術合作處 (2012)。第一章美國專利訴訟教戰手冊緒論，取自http://www.fanxinyujia.com/p-1443798262.html。侯勝宗, & 連婉茜 (2017)。研發聯盟的動態競合管理:以中鋼為例。科技管理學刊 (Vol. 22, pp. 29-65)。洪瑞麟 (2005)。教你學策略。臺北: 台灣培生教育出版。唐與菁 (2016)。台灣資通訊品牌企業面臨PE及NPE專利訴訟風險之比較分析—從動態競爭AMC的觀點。(碩士)， 國立政治大學， 台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/y3qz3f。孫遠釗 (2011)。評台灣面對國外專利侵權訴訟的對應策略-兼論政府參與智慧財產基金的可行性。智慧財產評論 (Vol. 9)。許牧彥 (2016)。加己減異、加異減己-專利佈署的全方位競爭策略。中華民國科技管理研討會論文集。陳明哲 (2008)。動態競爭策略探微：理論實證與應用。臺北: 智勝文化。陳明哲 (2010)。動態競爭Competitive Dynamics。臺北: 智勝文化。陳明哲 (2012a)。動態競爭與傳統靜態競爭分析。取自https://www.hbrtaiwan.com/article_content_AR0002104.html。陳明哲 (2012b)。預測競爭對手的回應: AMC分析法初探。哈佛商業評論 (pp. 28-29)。陳明哲 (2012c)。察覺─動機─能力：細解AMC分析法(一) 。哈佛商業評論， 30-31。陳明哲 (2013)。策略分析與動態競爭。哈佛商業評論, 14-15。陳明哲 (2013)。競爭者分析：市場共同性－資源相似性架構。哈佛商業評論， 30-31。陳修賢 (2008)。後波特時代的企業優勢。哈佛商業評論中文版，25，66-69.馮震宇 (2011)。鳥瞰 21 世紀智慧財產:從創新研發到保護運用。臺北: 元照出版。馮震宇 (2015)。搞懂智財遊戲規則 殺出專利叢林重圍。取自http://www.dgnet.com.tw/articleview.php?article_id=17783&issue_id=3454。黃紫旻 (2008)。專利地痞與企業因應策略。(碩士)， 國立政治大學，台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/hq45aa。楊明炯 (2002)。半導體廠商的競爭策略與核心優勢研究。(碩士)，國立臺灣大學, 台北市。取自https://hdl.handle.net/11296/cf4a43。經濟部工業局智慧電子產業計畫推動辦公室 (2018)。半導體產業現況。經濟部智慧財產局 (2015)。翻轉從專利開始，利用專利檢索開啟技術知識寶盒。 取自https://pcm.tipo.gov.tw/PCM2010/PCM/commercial/01/twpat.aspx?aType=1&Articletype=1。經濟部智慧財產局 (2019)。IPC國際專利分類查詢。取自https://www.tipo.gov.tw/np.asp?ctNode=6658&mp=1。葉雪美 (2013)。論美國設計專利侵害之損害賠償 —以 Apple 獲得 10.5 億美元的損害賠償為例。 智慧財產權月刊 (Vol. 174, pp. 5-51)。管中徽 (2006)。專利代理人的利益衝突與保密義務。智慧財產權月刊(90)，39-56。蔣士棋 (2015)。USPTO提交多方專利複審程序（IPR）修正建議。北美智權報，148。蔣士棋 (2018)。專利授權新模式：Initial License Offering。北美智權報 (Vol. 215)。簡志勝 (2011)。動態能力個案分析：以M公司為例。(碩士)， 國立政治大學， 台北市。取自 http://140.119.115.26/handle/140.119/54926。賴建男 (1997)。台灣IC設計業中技術知識特質與組織動態能耐之研究。(碩士)， 國立政治大學， 台北市。取自 https://hdl.handle.net/11296/4fx75a。 | zh_TW |
| dc.identifier.doi (DOI) | 10.6814/NCCU201900951 | en_US |
