DSpace Community: 智慧財產評論
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/100963
智慧財產評論2024-03-29T12:14:17Z專利物與著作重製物之首次銷售原則的適用區域
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/132670
題名: 專利物與著作重製物之首次銷售原則的適用區域; TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF FIRST-SALE DOCTRINE IN PATENTED GOODS AND COPYRIGHTED WORKS
摘要: 美國聯邦最高法院在2013年3月,在Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley案就著作權首次銷售原則的地域適用範圍做出判決,卻於同月駁回Ninestar Technology Co. v. International Trade Commission案就專利權首次銷售原則的地域適用範圍的上訴請求。然而,專利權首次銷售原則是否受限於美國境內適用之爭議,再次見於Lexmark Int`l, Inc. v. Impression Prods., Inc.案,美國聯邦最高法院嗣於2017年5月做出終審判決,首揭美國專利物之販售地即使為美國境外,仍適用首次銷售原則,專利權人就該專利物所享有之專利權自得耗盡。是以,本文旨欲探討相隔四年,美國聯邦最高法院就首次銷售原則之適用地域範圍,於著作權與專利權兩法領域終於做出幾乎一致判決之影響,除了一明過去美國司法實務上就此問題之爭議,並透過美國司法實務遽然轉變之觀察,再重新檢視我國專利與著作權之相關現行法制,希冀未來若於專利權與著作權首次銷售原則之修法,能有所啟發。; In March 2013, the Supreme Court decided the territorial limits of the "first-sale doctrine" in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley, but denied Ninestar`s petition for writ of certiorari of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Ninestar Tech. Co. v. Int`l Trade Comm`n. Later, the same question about territory of patent exhaustion has arisen soon in Lexmark Int`l, Inc. v. Impression Prods., Inc., and expectedly the Supreme Court first ruled that an authorized sale outside the United States exhausted all rights under the Patent Act. Here, the Article aims to analyze how the effects might be after the Supreme Court made no geographical distinctions of the "first-sale doctrine" in both the Copyright Act and Patent Act, in four years after the ruling of Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley. By studying the U.S. statutes and the U.S. judicial exhaustion cases, this Article ends by suggesting some changes made to the current text of the exhaustion laws, respectively in Patent Act and Copyright Act in Taiwan.2020-11-17T08:45:23Z從我國法院判決的分析論電視節目版式著作權保護的國際趨勢
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/132669
題名: 從我國法院判決的分析論電視節目版式著作權保護的國際趨勢; A STUDY OF THE INTERNATIONAL TENDENCY OF COPYRIGHT PROTECTION FOR TV PROGRAM FORMATS BY ANALYZING COURT CASES HELD IN TAIWAN
摘要: 部分在全球受到熱烈歡迎的電視節目版式型態電視秀可以在授權市場上以極高價賣出,部分甚至高達數千萬美元之譜,但很難想像在如此的授權盛況下的電視節目版式,在目前的著作權法制度下並未必受到保護。本文擬從目前中國大陸綜藝界大量抄襲外國電視節目的現象出發,進而分析台灣綜藝節目「挑戰101」抄襲荷蘭原創節目「1 vs. 100」,在台灣經歷台北地方法院及智慧財產法院判決的過程及結果;最後參考近期英國法院、義大利法院、以色列法院的最新判決及韓國國會立法等國際趨勢,提出建議我國應學習韓國模式,積極鼓勵民間投入節目版式開發的事業,且我國法院應形成具體的電視節目版式著作權保護在概念與表達二分間的明確界線。; Some of globally popular TV shows presented with TV program formats are able to be licensed and sold at as high as several million US Dollars. Surprisingly, TV program formats are not usually recognized as protectable under current copyright system. This article starts with the plagiarism phenomenon of TV program format in China and then analyzes the legal cases held by Taipei District Court and Taiwan IP Court dealing with the TV program format in "1 vs. 100" created by Endemol Nederland and Endemol USA imitated by a similar Taiwanese TV show "Challenge 101". In conclusion, this article suggests that Taiwan should encourage creative industry to develop TV format business as South Korea has done and Taiwanese Courts should draw a clear limitation between idea and expression for protecting TV program format by studying the international tendency of copyright protection for TV program format with analyses of the most recent legal cases held by UK, Italy and Israel Courts and the legalization of protecting TV program format by South Korean Congress.2020-11-17T08:45:06Z新一代Alice/Mayo二階段軟體專利適格性判斷基準之形成與運用
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/132668
題名: 新一代Alice/Mayo二階段軟體專利適格性判斷基準之形成與運用; FORMATTING AND APPLICATION NEW 2 STEP ALICE/MAYO PATENT SUBJECT MATTER ELIGIBILITY FOR SOFTWARE PATENTS
摘要: 軟體專利是資訊科技保護其創新最主要的方法之一,而判斷抽象概念應用是否為專利適格之標的決定軟體專利品質。2010年最高法院在Bilski v. Kappo案推翻了機械或轉換測試法(Machine or Transformation Test)是唯一軟體專利標的適格性的唯一判斷標準後,緊接著2014年美國最高法院在Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International正式提出新的Alice/Mayo二階段軟體專利適格性判斷基準。Alice/Mayo測試標準可謂啟動新一波軟體專利革命,自2014年後,美國行政與司法機關為了落實Alice/Mayo測試,對於二階段專利適格性判斷基準細部程序之形成均投入相當之努力。首先美國專利商標局(USPTO)自2014年之後陸續發布Alice/Mayo測試標準之細節,以作為專利審查人員審查時之依據。與此同時,美國聯邦巡迴上訴法院(CAFC)也陸續在軟體專利適格性爭議案件中,指導下級法院如何進行二階段軟體專利適格性之審查,並將最高法院在Alice案遺留下之問題,陸續於個案中補充,以解決適用之問題。本文將針對2014-2017年間USPTO專利適格性審查基準之相關內容與CAFC審理有關軟體適格性案件,分析新一代Alice/Mayo二階段軟體專利適格性判斷基準之形成過程,以及檢討目前實務面臨問題與後續影響。藉此,並對新一代判斷基準形成過程與運用提供綜合意見,以作為強化我國軟體專利保護法理之參考與提供相關實務者處理美國軟體專利申請與訴訟之參考。; Software patent is one of the most important means to protect the innovation in the industry of information technology and the Internet of things. Because screening patent eligible abstract ideas has significant impacts on the quality of software patents, it is important to formulate an objective standard to evaluate the patentability of abstract idea for patent policy. Since 2014, Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, has established a two-step framework standard to evaluate the patentability of abstract ideas, more and more Federal Circuit Court of Appeals (CAFC) in the case of DDR follow and elaborate the two-step framework standard. In addition, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), has also revised and supplemented subject matter eligibility examination guideline and examples several times after the Alice. These show that an ongoing process that formulates object criteria for screening patentability of abstract idea has started. This article aims to formulate the objective criteria to evaluate the patentability of abstract idea for better protection and quality of software patent by exploring CAFC cases related to the patentability of abstract idea and further examining USPTO Amended patent examination guidelines and software patent examples. Also, based on the research results of CAFC cases and USPTO examples and guideline, this article will provide more jurisprudence for shaping the theory of Taiwan software patent law and strategy of software patent application and protection for inventors and litigators based on the research outcomes.2020-11-17T08:44:52ZTRADEMARKS AND BRANDS: WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES?
https://ah.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/132667
題名: TRADEMARKS AND BRANDS: WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES?; 商標與品牌-有差嗎?
摘要: Nowadays there is no universally accepted definition of brands and the differentiation from trade marks. This article is aimed to reveal the differences between brands and trademarks. In this regard, the concept of brand and the concept of trademark will be discussed. The definition of brand will be offered respectively. Finally the protection of brand will be discussed in the light of trade mark law and the cases from European Court of Justice (hereinafter ECJ).; 至今,「品牌」一詞並未有統一的定義,而其與「商標」間的差異亦屬多方說法。本文意在演繹「品牌」和「商標」的差異。與二者有關的概念會被分析與討論。據此,進一步提出「品牌」的定義。最後,商標保護的議題將會觸及,而歐洲法院的見解也會討論。2020-11-17T08:44:36Z