1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Commerce
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 以國際專利訴訟為例探討台灣廠商之專利品質
Using International Patent Litigation as Examples to Evaluate Taiwan High Tech Industry Patent Quality
作者 陳怡婷
Chen, Yi Ting
貢獻者 陳桂恒
Chan, Keith
陳怡婷
Chen, Yi Ting
關鍵詞 專利品質
專利訴訟
日期 2013
上傳時間 1-Jul-2014 12:35:21 (UTC+8)
摘要 專利侵權訴訟成為近年最熱門的議題之一，各國公司皆主動或被動的參與其中。台灣廠商，尤其高科技產業，近年常被報導在專利訴訟中敗訴且損失大筆權利金；然而台灣廠商所擁有的專利數量龐大，和敗訴的情形呈現對比。
專利侵權訴訟失敗的原因諸多，包含智財策略、專利權管理、專利品質等因素。本研究針對專利品質這項因素，以國際專利訴訟勝方專利為標的，探討專利品質及特性，做為台灣廠商在申請專利時之參考。
本論文針對研究對象進行基本被引證數（forward citation）分析，以及使用品質檢驗表分別檢核美國廠商及台灣廠商美國專利之品質。所得結果顯示多數研究對象之專利被引證數確實高於該年度的平均被引證數。專利品質檢驗表檢核結果顯示研究對象確實可能獲得極高分，然台灣廠商之美國專利，也有可能得分不低。
整體研究結果顯示，專利品質被多種因素影響，被引證數只是其一，其餘包含專利技術本身、撰寫品質、前案檢索等，皆影響一篇專利的品質。台灣廠商若在專利撰寫初期即注意這些特徵，應可提升其專利品質，並在訴訟方面有較佳之表現。
參考文獻 1. Allison, John R. and Lemley, Mark A. (1998). Empirical Evidence on the Validity of Litigated Patents. American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) Quarterly Journal, Vol. 26, p. 185. http://ssrn.com/abstract=118149 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.118149
2. Allison, John R. and Lemley, Mark A. and Moore, Kimberly A. and Trunkey, R. Derek.. (2003). Valuable Patents.
3. Allison, John R. and Mann, Ronald J..(2007). The Disputed Quality of Software Patents. Law and Economics Research Paper.No. 97.
4. Amber。(2005)。專利引證(citing)與專利被引證(cited)。科技產業資訊室。http://cdnet.stpi.org.tw/techroom/pclass/pclass013.htm
5. Anthon C. (2005). A Classical Dictionary: Containing the Principle Proper Names Mentioned in Ancient Authors. Kessinger Publishing.
6. Abrams, David and Akcigit, Ufuk and Popadak, Jillian A.(2013). Understanding the Link between Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Defensive Disruption? PIER Working Paper No. 13-065; U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 13-23. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2351809 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2351809
7. Bronwyn H. H. & Dietmar H. (2004). Post-Grant Reviews in the U.S. Patent System—Design Choices and Expected Impact. Berkeley Tech L. J. 19(1).
8. Dar-Zen Chen and Wen-Yau Cathy Lin. (2005).Essential patent indicators for the evaluation of industrial technological innovation competitiveness. Proceeding of ISSI 2005. P. 490-498.
9. Ernst H. (1998). Patent portfolio for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. 15, 279-308.
10. Global Patent Quality Statistics & Investment Analysis. 2013 U.S. Patent Quality Statistics spreadsheet. http://www.bustpatents.com/statistics.html
11. Graf, S. W. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis &clarkl.rev. p. 495-519. http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/LCLARKUS/L070524G.pdf
12. Hall & Harhoff, supra note 23, at 991.
13. International Patent Classification (IPC) Official Publication. WIPO. http://web2.wipo.int/ipcpub/#refresh=page¬ion=scheme&version=20060101
14. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. 35 U.S.C. (2011). Appendix L Consolidated Patent Laws. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_laws.pdf
15. Maria V. H. (2002). The U.S. Patent System Celebrates 212 Years. [Press Release]. http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2002/02-26.jsp
16. Mariagrazia. S., Hélène D., Chiara C. (2013). Measuring Patent Quality. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/03. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5k4522wkw1r8.pdf?expires=1377082761&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=9EAAF3C435E342BC19AB83FC1D089B40
17. Narin F. (2000). Inventing our future: The link between Australian patenting and basic science. AusInfo, Canberra, ACT.
18. Narin F. and Olivastro D. (1998). Linkage between patents and papers: an interim EPO/US comparison. Scientometics. 41(1-2). P. 51-59.
19. Narin F., Hamilton K. S. and Olivastro D. (1997). The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science.ResearchPolicy. 26(3). P. 317-330.
20. Ocean Tomo Ratings™ System. http://www.oceantomo.com/ratings/system
21. Ocean Tomo. Ocean Tomo Ratings™ Brochure. http://www.oceantomo.com/system/files/OTRatings_Brochure_Final.pdf
22. OECD. (2011). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011, OECD Publishing.doi: 10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2011-en
23. PAIR: http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
24. Patent Scope. (2013). WIPO. http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents.html
25. Patentgesetz von Venedig. (2001). http://www.wolfgang-pfaller.de/venedig.htm
26. Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=426020
27. Stephen A. M., Richard C. L., and Mark B. M. (Eds). (2004). Patent System for the 21st Century. The national academies press. [Adobe Digital Editions version]. http://www.nap.edu/html/patentsystem/
28. Susan S. D. (2003). To promote innovation: the proper balance of competition and patent law and policy. Report by the Federal Trade Commission. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/10/innovationrpt.pdf
29. Susan W. G. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis &clarkl.rev. p. 495-519. http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/LCLARKUS/L070524G.pdf
30. U.S. P Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2006, at 19, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2006/ 2006annualreport.pdf
31. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2003, § 4.2.1, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2003/index.html
32. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2005, § 4.2.1, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2005/index.html
33. United Kingdom Patent Applications. (2004). http://w3.nexis.com/sources/scripts/info.pl?278252
34. University of Houston Law Ctr., Decisions for 2000–2004. http://www.patstats.org/Composite%20Table%20(2000−2004).html
35. University of Houston Law Ctr., Decisions for 2005. (2005). http://www.patstats.org/2005.html
36. USPTO Performance and Accountability Report fiscal year 2012. (2012). http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2012PAR.pdf
37. USPTO. (2013). Patent. http://www.uspto.gov/patents/
38. WIPO. (2013). Standard St.9. Recommendation Concerning Bibliographic Data on and Relating to Patents and Spcs. http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/standards/en/pdf/03-09-01.pdf
39. 周延鵬。（2006）。一堂課2000億。台北市：工商財經數位。
40. 周延鵬。(2009)。專利的品質、價值與價格初探。科技與法律。79(3)。P. 40-44。
41. 李淑蓮。(2013)。台積電法務長告訴你什麼是「高品質」的專利組合。北美智權報。http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Industry_Economy/publish-70.htm
42. 林國塘。（2012）。專利實務講義。附錄2。P. 1-5。
43. 潘治良。（2005）。專利之品質與價值評量方法—以TFT-LCD產業為例。未出版之碩士論文。政治大學智慧財產研究所。P.24-28。
44. 經濟部智慧財產局。(2013)。何謂專利？http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=502690&ctNode=7633&mp=1
45. 經濟部智慧財產局。(2013)。專利申請表格暨申請須知。http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=203009&CtNode=6672&mp=1
46. 許履塵。(2012)。專利的品質及價值。笑談專利演義：唐老鴨和乒乓球。p.181。
47. 談定宇，James Long。2008。專利品質是灰色的─美國專利個案研究。北美智權報。http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Patent_Skill/publish-4.htm
48. 談定宇。2009。不是黑或白「專利品質」是灰色的。北美智權報。http://naipo97.pixnet.net/blog/post/18085318-%E4%B8%8D%E6%98%AF%E9%BB%91%E6%88%96%E7%99%BD-%E3%80%8C%E5%B0%88%E5%88%A9%E5%93%81%E8%B3%AA%E3%80%8D%E6%98%AF%E7%81%B0%E8%89%B2%E7%9A%84
49. 賴晏翎。(2013)。我國智慧局與各大專利局最新專利申請相關數據摘要。 http://www.taie.com.tw/tc/p4-publications-detail.asp?article_code=03&article_classify_sn=64&sn=786
50. 阮明淑，梁俊齊。(2009)。專利指標發展研究。圖書館學與資訊科學。35(2)。
51. 陳世顯。(2012)。專利價值大勢觀。科技產業資訊室。專利情報。http://cdnet.stpi.narl.org.tw/techroom/pclass/2012/pclass_12_A001.htm
52. 陳乃華。(2000)。專利權評價模式之實證研究。臺灣銀行季刊。第六十一卷第二期。P. 270-272。
53. 陳達仁、李思宏。(2005)。由專利指標看TFT-LCD中段製程技術。http://www.tipo.gov.tw/PCM/pro_show.asp?sn=183
54. 陳達仁。(2007)。由專利看美國大學科技創新研發能量的表現。評鑑雙月刊。第8期。http://epaper.heeact.edu.tw/archive/2007/07/06/294.aspx
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
100361009
102
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100361009
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 陳桂恒zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Chan, Keithen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 陳怡婷zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Chen, Yi Tingen_US
dc.creator (作者) 陳怡婷zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Chen, Yi Tingen_US
dc.date (日期) 2013en_US
dc.date.accessioned 1-Jul-2014 12:35:21 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 1-Jul-2014 12:35:21 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 1-Jul-2014 12:35:21 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0100361009en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67203-
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) 100361009zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 102zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 專利侵權訴訟成為近年最熱門的議題之一，各國公司皆主動或被動的參與其中。台灣廠商，尤其高科技產業，近年常被報導在專利訴訟中敗訴且損失大筆權利金；然而台灣廠商所擁有的專利數量龐大，和敗訴的情形呈現對比。
專利侵權訴訟失敗的原因諸多，包含智財策略、專利權管理、專利品質等因素。本研究針對專利品質這項因素，以國際專利訴訟勝方專利為標的，探討專利品質及特性，做為台灣廠商在申請專利時之參考。
本論文針對研究對象進行基本被引證數（forward citation）分析，以及使用品質檢驗表分別檢核美國廠商及台灣廠商美國專利之品質。所得結果顯示多數研究對象之專利被引證數確實高於該年度的平均被引證數。專利品質檢驗表檢核結果顯示研究對象確實可能獲得極高分，然台灣廠商之美國專利，也有可能得分不低。
整體研究結果顯示，專利品質被多種因素影響，被引證數只是其一，其餘包含專利技術本身、撰寫品質、前案檢索等，皆影響一篇專利的品質。台灣廠商若在專利撰寫初期即注意這些特徵，應可提升其專利品質，並在訴訟方面有較佳之表現。		zh_TW
dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1
第一節 研究動機與目的 1
第二節 研究方法與架構 2
第三節 研究範圍與限制 4
第四節 研究流程 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
第一節 專利特性及要件 7
第二節 專利品質 18
第三節 專利評量指標 20
第四節 專利品質評分模型及標準 29
第五節 專利品質與價值 34
第六節 專利評價模型 37
第七節 小結 42
第三章 個案研究 43
第一節 被引證數分析 46
第二節 專利品質檢查表 49
第三節 小結 67
第四章 研究結果與結論 69
第五章 討論與建議 72
參考文獻 76
附件 81		zh_TW
dc.format.extent 2468525 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100361009en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專利品質zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專利訴訟zh_TW
dc.title (題名) 以國際專利訴訟為例探討台灣廠商之專利品質zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Using International Patent Litigation as Examples to Evaluate Taiwan High Tech Industry Patent Qualityen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 1. Allison, John R. and Lemley, Mark A. (1998). Empirical Evidence on the Validity of Litigated Patents. American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) Quarterly Journal, Vol. 26, p. 185. http://ssrn.com/abstract=118149 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.118149
2. Allison, John R. and Lemley, Mark A. and Moore, Kimberly A. and Trunkey, R. Derek.. (2003). Valuable Patents.
3. Allison, John R. and Mann, Ronald J..(2007). The Disputed Quality of Software Patents. Law and Economics Research Paper.No. 97.
4. Amber。(2005)。專利引證(citing)與專利被引證(cited)。科技產業資訊室。http://cdnet.stpi.org.tw/techroom/pclass/pclass013.htm
5. Anthon C. (2005). A Classical Dictionary: Containing the Principle Proper Names Mentioned in Ancient Authors. Kessinger Publishing.
6. Abrams, David and Akcigit, Ufuk and Popadak, Jillian A.(2013). Understanding the Link between Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Defensive Disruption? PIER Working Paper No. 13-065; U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 13-23. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2351809 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2351809
7. Bronwyn H. H. & Dietmar H. (2004). Post-Grant Reviews in the U.S. Patent System—Design Choices and Expected Impact. Berkeley Tech L. J. 19(1).
8. Dar-Zen Chen and Wen-Yau Cathy Lin. (2005).Essential patent indicators for the evaluation of industrial technological innovation competitiveness. Proceeding of ISSI 2005. P. 490-498.
9. Ernst H. (1998). Patent portfolio for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. 15, 279-308.
10. Global Patent Quality Statistics & Investment Analysis. 2013 U.S. Patent Quality Statistics spreadsheet. http://www.bustpatents.com/statistics.html
11. Graf, S. W. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis &clarkl.rev. p. 495-519. http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/LCLARKUS/L070524G.pdf
12. Hall & Harhoff, supra note 23, at 991.
13. International Patent Classification (IPC) Official Publication. WIPO. http://web2.wipo.int/ipcpub/#refresh=page¬ion=scheme&version=20060101
14. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. 35 U.S.C. (2011). Appendix L Consolidated Patent Laws. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_laws.pdf
15. Maria V. H. (2002). The U.S. Patent System Celebrates 212 Years. [Press Release]. http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2002/02-26.jsp
16. Mariagrazia. S., Hélène D., Chiara C. (2013). Measuring Patent Quality. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/03. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5k4522wkw1r8.pdf?expires=1377082761&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=9EAAF3C435E342BC19AB83FC1D089B40
17. Narin F. (2000). Inventing our future: The link between Australian patenting and basic science. AusInfo, Canberra, ACT.
18. Narin F. and Olivastro D. (1998). Linkage between patents and papers: an interim EPO/US comparison. Scientometics. 41(1-2). P. 51-59.
19. Narin F., Hamilton K. S. and Olivastro D. (1997). The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science.ResearchPolicy. 26(3). P. 317-330.
20. Ocean Tomo Ratings™ System. http://www.oceantomo.com/ratings/system
21. Ocean Tomo. Ocean Tomo Ratings™ Brochure. http://www.oceantomo.com/system/files/OTRatings_Brochure_Final.pdf
22. OECD. (2011). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011, OECD Publishing.doi: 10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2011-en
23. PAIR: http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
24. Patent Scope. (2013). WIPO. http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents.html
25. Patentgesetz von Venedig. (2001). http://www.wolfgang-pfaller.de/venedig.htm
26. Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=426020
27. Stephen A. M., Richard C. L., and Mark B. M. (Eds). (2004). Patent System for the 21st Century. The national academies press. [Adobe Digital Editions version]. http://www.nap.edu/html/patentsystem/
28. Susan S. D. (2003). To promote innovation: the proper balance of competition and patent law and policy. Report by the Federal Trade Commission. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/10/innovationrpt.pdf
29. Susan W. G. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis &clarkl.rev. p. 495-519. http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/LCLARKUS/L070524G.pdf
30. U.S. P Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2006, at 19, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2006/ 2006annualreport.pdf
31. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2003, § 4.2.1, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2003/index.html
32. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2005, § 4.2.1, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2005/index.html
33. United Kingdom Patent Applications. (2004). http://w3.nexis.com/sources/scripts/info.pl?278252
34. University of Houston Law Ctr., Decisions for 2000–2004. http://www.patstats.org/Composite%20Table%20(2000−2004).html
35. University of Houston Law Ctr., Decisions for 2005. (2005). http://www.patstats.org/2005.html
36. USPTO Performance and Accountability Report fiscal year 2012. (2012). http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2012PAR.pdf
37. USPTO. (2013). Patent. http://www.uspto.gov/patents/
38. WIPO. (2013). Standard St.9. Recommendation Concerning Bibliographic Data on and Relating to Patents and Spcs. http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/standards/en/pdf/03-09-01.pdf
39. 周延鵬。（2006）。一堂課2000億。台北市：工商財經數位。
40. 周延鵬。(2009)。專利的品質、價值與價格初探。科技與法律。79(3)。P. 40-44。
41. 李淑蓮。(2013)。台積電法務長告訴你什麼是「高品質」的專利組合。北美智權報。http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Industry_Economy/publish-70.htm
42. 林國塘。（2012）。專利實務講義。附錄2。P. 1-5。
43. 潘治良。（2005）。專利之品質與價值評量方法—以TFT-LCD產業為例。未出版之碩士論文。政治大學智慧財產研究所。P.24-28。
44. 經濟部智慧財產局。(2013)。何謂專利？http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=502690&ctNode=7633&mp=1
45. 經濟部智慧財產局。(2013)。專利申請表格暨申請須知。http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=203009&CtNode=6672&mp=1
46. 許履塵。(2012)。專利的品質及價值。笑談專利演義：唐老鴨和乒乓球。p.181。
47. 談定宇，James Long。2008。專利品質是灰色的─美國專利個案研究。北美智權報。http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Patent_Skill/publish-4.htm
48. 談定宇。2009。不是黑或白「專利品質」是灰色的。北美智權報。http://naipo97.pixnet.net/blog/post/18085318-%E4%B8%8D%E6%98%AF%E9%BB%91%E6%88%96%E7%99%BD-%E3%80%8C%E5%B0%88%E5%88%A9%E5%93%81%E8%B3%AA%E3%80%8D%E6%98%AF%E7%81%B0%E8%89%B2%E7%9A%84
49. 賴晏翎。(2013)。我國智慧局與各大專利局最新專利申請相關數據摘要。 http://www.taie.com.tw/tc/p4-publications-detail.asp?article_code=03&article_classify_sn=64&sn=786
50. 阮明淑，梁俊齊。(2009)。專利指標發展研究。圖書館學與資訊科學。35(2)。
51. 陳世顯。(2012)。專利價值大勢觀。科技產業資訊室。專利情報。http://cdnet.stpi.narl.org.tw/techroom/pclass/2012/pclass_12_A001.htm
52. 陳乃華。(2000)。專利權評價模式之實證研究。臺灣銀行季刊。第六十一卷第二期。P. 270-272。
53. 陳達仁、李思宏。(2005)。由專利指標看TFT-LCD中段製程技術。http://www.tipo.gov.tw/PCM/pro_show.asp?sn=183
54. 陳達仁。(2007)。由專利看美國大學科技創新研發能量的表現。評鑑雙月刊。第8期。http://epaper.heeact.edu.tw/archive/2007/07/06/294.aspx		zh_TW