台灣廠商涉及美國337調查之實證研究—兼論國內產業要件

Abstract

本文以實證方法研究歷年台灣廠商於美國國際貿易委員會337調查之涉案趨勢，並分析原告之國內產業要件之法規解釋及適用。近十年來台灣廠商涉案數量明顯攀升，尤其是2010及2011年台灣案件比例占年度總數三分之一。最近五年台灣案件有98%涉及專利侵害，被調查產品以半導體、電腦及週邊、光電材料及元件、及通訊傳播設備為主。近五年來，通訊傳播設備案件激增，光電材料及元件案件也增加，而電腦及週邊案件則是下降。綜觀涉案產品及產業之趨勢與台灣產業發展趨勢類似。歷年台灣廠商多是被調查對象，直到2001年才開始有台灣廠商發動337調查。此外，台灣案件有高和解率，反映出337調查對台灣廠商之商業競爭意義。先前研究認為歷年外國廠商發動337調查案件數量增加的理由，是因為國內產業要件是一低門檻，本文認為該低門檻已經改變。針對原告主張實質投資於利用系爭專利之授權以滿足國內產業要件，委員會適用三關連性測試以及實質性測試，因而使經濟要件之測試更為嚴謹。建議台灣廠商累積足夠而有用的美國專利並且瞭解337調查，才能在被調查之極短時間內因應，甚而提出337調查以反制競爭者。由於推翻原告立場是被告的共同目標，當台灣廠商同被調查時，建議可考慮在國內產業要件上合作因應。

The International Trade Commission has become a popular venue for U.S. patent holders to resolve patent disputes. The number of investigations involving Taiwanese companies has risen in the last ten years, with a sharp increase from 2009 to 2011. One third of the investigations involved Taiwanese companies in the last three years, and nearly 98% investigations related to patent infringement. The trends of products and industries related to investigations with Taiwanese companies correspond to the industrial development in Taiwan, especially communication devices related investigations are increasing while computer-related cases has declined. Taiwanese companies may launch section 337 investigations against both their foreign and domestic competitors. Investigations with Taiwanese complainants resulted in a higher settlement rate, considering that as a complainants win situation. The initiation of the investigations by foreign complainants and NPEs have greatly increased and scholars stated that one of the causes was because the threshold to satisfy the domestic industry requirement is minimal due to the addition of section 337(a)(3)(C) in 1988. However, the minimal threshold is changing, according the analysis of this study. A comprehensive framework including the three nexus test to assess investments in patent licensing in the Unites States and the guideline in assessing whether the investment is substantial has tightened the test for the economic prong in last two years. A thorough understanding of section 337 investigations and continuously build-up U.S. patents by Taiwanese companies are suggested, so they can respond swiftly if involved in the investigations or in order to develop counter-investigations. This article also suggests that Taiwanese respondents in an investigation may consider collaborations in the countermeasures to the investigation, especially for the common interest of the respondents to overthrow the complainant’s standing by challenging the domestic industry requirement.