[{"subject":"雙邊／多邊市場之競爭與創新──論競爭法的因應","dataClassName":null,"pubUnitName":"科技法律研究所","posterDate":null,"updateDate":null,"detailContent":"<span style=\"font-size:115%;\"><strong>雙邊／多邊市場之競爭與創新──論競爭法的因應&nbsp;Innovation and Competition of Two/Multi-Sided Market: Response from Competition Law</strong></span><br />\r\n作者：顏雅倫<br />\r\n出版年月：201603<br />\r\n關鍵詞：雙邊市場、多邊市場、競爭政策、公平交易法、創新、Two-Sided Market、Multi-Sided Market、Competition Policy<br />\r\n&nbsp;<br />\r\n中文摘要:<br />\r\n隨著科技、網路的進步，以及資訊的高速生產與散布，各類降低交易成本的平臺及新應用不斷推陳出新，其多具有雙邊／多邊市場的特性，各國競爭法主管機關遂日趨重視既有的分析工具能否與如何因應雙邊／多邊市場所帶來的競爭法議題。我國公平交易委員會亦開始在結合案與處分案中嘗試使用雙邊／多邊市場理論。本文先分析雙邊／多邊市場的市場特性與雙邊／多邊平臺的相應競爭策略，次則探討雙邊／多邊市場對競爭主管機關帶來的挑戰與相關競爭政策爭議。最後經評析公平交易委員會歷年來涉及雙邊／多邊市場的相關決定與處分案例後，本文建議未來公平交易委員會在執法上，宜繼續關注特定雙邊／多邊平臺因所處雙邊／多邊市場特性，而採取的排他性行為對市場創新的可能不利影響，以及大型企業集團多角化結合設立之雙邊／多邊平臺的市場力量，與以整體營業額分析本身即跨領域經營諸多不同事業之雙邊／多邊平臺業者的市場占有率，可能衍生之盲點等特殊問題，同時應審慎評估套用10%市場占有率門檻評估雙邊／多邊平臺，所為之獨家交易、搭售或其他交易限制，是否會過度干預雙邊／多邊市場的創新行為與市場競爭機制。<br />\r\n<br />\r\n英文摘要:<br />\r\nBurgeoning two-sided/multi-sided platforms have brought about new antitrust issues concerning whether the traditional analytical tools for antitrust review shall be directly applied to two-sided/multi-sided markets. This article explores the characteristics of two-sided/multi-sided markets, the competitive strategies of twosided/ multi-sided platforms, and the challenge to and issues of antitrust enforcement and competition policy arising from two-sided/multi-sided markets. Then in light of decisions of Taiwan Fair Trade Commission (&ldquo;Taiwan FTC&rdquo;) concerning two-sided/multi-sided markets, the author suggests Taiwan FTC pay more attention to foreclosure activities adopted by two-sided/multi-sided platforms and their possible adverse effect to innovation. In addition, Taiwan FTC should also be wary of the market power possibly enjoyed by the two-sided/multi-sided platforms jointly established by several large-sized and leading enterprises by means of conglomerate mergers and its ripple effect. Moreover, the market share of one twosided/ multi-sided platforms owned by a conglomerate operating diverse business should not be calculated based upon the total revenue of that conglomerate. Finally, to avoid over intervention in innovation and competition of two-sided/multi-sided markets, Taiwan FTC should rethink if it is appropriate to use 10% market share as a threshold to evaluate exclusive contracts, tying, or other restrictive activities conducted by two-sided/multi-sided platforms.<br />\r\n&nbsp;","summary":"","liaisonper":null,"liaisontel":null,"liaisonfax":null,"liaisonemail":null,"docs":[{"fileurl":"https://lawreview.law.nycu.edu.tw/lawreviewlaw/ch/app/data/doc?module=nycu0001&detailNo=1401062861152718848&type=s","pdffileurl":"","odffileurl":"","expFile":"雙邊／多邊市場之競爭與創新──論競爭法的因應"}],"images":[],"videos":[],"audios":[],"resources":[]},{"subject":"論美國著作權法定形式制度於我國著作權登記制度立法之啟示","dataClassName":null,"pubUnitName":"科技法律研究所","posterDate":null,"updateDate":null,"detailContent":"<span style=\"font-size:115%;\"><strong>論美國著作權法定形式制度於我國著作權登記制度立法之啟示&nbsp;Rethinking the Legislation of Copyright Registration in Taiwan &mdash;Learning from the U.S. Experience with Copyright Formalities</strong></span><br />\r\n作者：姚信安<br />\r\n出版年月：201603<br />\r\n關鍵詞：著作權登記、著作財產權登記、質權登記、著作權法定形式、Copyright Registration、Copyright Formalities<br />\r\n&nbsp;<br />\r\n中文摘要:<br />\r\n我國著作權法於1998 年全面廢止著作權登記制度之多年後，鑑於網際網路等新興科技為著作權所帶來之嚴峻挑戰，各界再度反思著作權登記制度相對較強之公示與存證能力對保障交易安全及維持交易秩序之貢獻與重要性。此思潮雖日漸活躍，2010 年文化創意產業發展法亦率先於第23 條恢復部分著作財產權質權登記之制度，惟時至今日，著作權法對全面恢復著作權登記制度之立法尚持保留態度。對比美國過去雖面臨伯恩公約禁止以任何形式影響著作權之要求，仍於其著作權法典中保留著作權登記等法定形式之規定，箇中難以割捨之法律價值何在？值得進一步觀察。時值我國對著作權法進行全面檢討之關鍵時刻，本文欲以美國著作權法之態度與經驗為借鏡，藉由探究美國著作權登記、存證與標示等法定形式規範內容及誘因之介紹，分析美國著作權法定形式制度之優缺點，進而尋求該制度對我國著作權登記制度立法之啟示。<br />\r\n<br />\r\n英文摘要:<br />\r\nA few years after the provisions of copyright registration in the Taiwanese Copyright Law had been abolished in 1998, people in Taiwan have started to think about putting the system of copyright registration back in the Copyright Law again due to its contribution and importance to the transaction security and market order. In 2010, the Taiwanese Law for the Development of the Cultural and Creative Industries took the lead in providing the provisions for registrations of pledges on copyright originated from the cultural and creative industries. The Taiwanese Copyright Law itself, even so, is not willing to completely readopt the system of copyright registration. The U.S. Copyright Law, comparing to Taiwan, steadfastly preserves copyright formalities even though it has to confront the severe pressure from the Berne Convention. Is there any inalienable value that the Law must retain? This article will look into the provisions of copyright formalities in the U.S. Copyright Law, analyze the merit and the demerit which copyright formalities have, and further bring forth suggestions for the future legislation on copyright registration in the Taiwanese Copyright Law.<br />\r\n&nbsp;","summary":"","liaisonper":null,"liaisontel":null,"liaisonfax":null,"liaisonemail":null,"docs":[{"fileurl":"https://lawreview.law.nycu.edu.tw/lawreviewlaw/ch/app/data/doc?module=nycu0001&detailNo=1401062490497880064&type=s","pdffileurl":"","odffileurl":"","expFile":"論美國著作權法定形式制度於我國著作權登記制度立法之啟示"}],"images":[],"videos":[],"audios":[],"resources":[]},{"subject":"論美國關鍵字商標初始興趣混淆的民事責任與我國的議題現況評析──以網路搜尋引擎業者與資訊儲存服務提供者為中心","dataClassName":null,"pubUnitName":"科技法律研究所","posterDate":null,"updateDate":null,"detailContent":"<span style=\"font-size:115%;\"><strong>論美國關鍵字商標初始興趣混淆的民事責任與我國的議題現況評析──以網路搜尋引擎業者與資訊儲存服務提供者為中心&nbsp;Civil Liability for Trademark Initial Interest Confusion to Keywords in US and Current Evaluation in Taiwan &mdash;Centering on Search Engine and Information Storage Service Provider</strong></span><br />\r\n作者：程法彰&nbsp;(Fa-Chang Cheng)<br />\r\n出版年月：201603<br />\r\n關鍵詞：搜尋引擎、初始興趣混淆、關鍵字、間接侵權責任、商標法、Search Engine、Initial Interest Confusion、Keyword、Indirect<br />\r\n&nbsp;<br />\r\n中文摘要:&nbsp;<br />\r\n網路搜尋引擎業者強大的資訊蒐集能力與網路資訊儲存業者強大的資訊儲存能力，引起商標權人對初始興趣混淆議題的高度重視。本文認為美國在實務案件中出現對網路搜尋引擎業者或資訊儲存服務提供者關鍵字搜尋的商標運用行為，過度解讀為直接侵權行為。這樣的作法不但破壞了侵權行為的理論基礎，亦不當的平衡商標權人的保護與網路發展的重要性。若我國將來採取與美國相同的基調，經由美國的相關經驗，對網路搜尋引擎業者或資訊儲存服務業關於關鍵字商標初始興趣混淆責任，亦應以間接侵權行為責任相繩。在責任的具體規範上，第一步或許可以藉由通過目前電子通訊傳播法草案，對於業者宣示最低的行為準則。最終本文建議經由草案中避風港條款機制，對於商標間接侵權行為的免責實踐經驗，並參考美國對於智慧財產間接侵權行為的規範，在我國商標法中增列間接侵權行為責任條文。<br />\r\n<br />\r\n英文摘要:<br />\r\nThe enormous data collection power in search engine providers and the tremendous data storage power in information storage service providers arouse strong concerns about initial interest confusion to trademark use among the trademark owners. This article indicates that US judicial practice overreads the trademark use to keyword search mechanism in search engine providers and storage service providers as direct trademark infringement. This phenomenon not only tears down the fundamental torts theory but also strikes the inappropriate balance between the protection of trademark owners and the importance of Internet development. This article concludes that the indirect torts liability would be the most appropriate solution to resolve the trademark dispute for keywords initial confusion regarding search engine and information storage service if Taiwan follows the US experience. To get through the transitional stage until reaching the ultimate indirect tort liability for search engine providers and information storage providers, this article would suggest that to set minimum behavior requirements through the enactment of the Electronic Communications Act be the first step. With respect to implementing indirect tort liability into Taiwan&rsquo;s legal system, the author also conceives a tentative contributory liability (induced infringement liability) provision to the Taiwan Trademark Law, which is based upon the counterpart in the US legal system.","summary":"","liaisonper":null,"liaisontel":null,"liaisonfax":null,"liaisonemail":null,"docs":[{"fileurl":"https://lawreview.law.nycu.edu.tw/lawreviewlaw/ch/app/data/doc?module=nycu0001&detailNo=1401062099215454208&type=s","pdffileurl":"","odffileurl":"","expFile":"論美國關鍵字商標初始興趣混淆的民事責任與我國的議題現況評析──以網路搜尋引擎業者與資訊儲存服務提供者為中心"}],"images":[],"videos":[],"audios":[],"resources":[]},{"subject":"我國均等論實務之發展──由最高法院102年度臺上字第1986號判決觀察","dataClassName":null,"pubUnitName":"科技法律研究所","posterDate":null,"updateDate":null,"detailContent":"<strong><span style=\"font-size:115%;\">我國均等論實務之發展──由最高法院102年度臺上字第1986號判決觀察&nbsp;The Practical Development of Doctrine of Equivalents in the Supreme Court of Taiwan &mdash;A Survey of 2013 Tai Shang No. 1986 Decision</span></strong><br />\r\n作者：陳國成<br />\r\n出版年月：201603<br />\r\n關鍵詞：均等論、全要件原則、禁反言、先前技術阻卻、置換可能性、Doctrine of Equivalents、All-elements Rule<br />\r\n&nbsp;<br />\r\n中文摘要:<br />\r\n均等論為實務與學者於專利侵害判斷所確立之原則，惟最高法院過去判決被論者指未試圖建立均等論之理由與體系。最高法院102 年度臺上字第1986 號判決首次將專利均等侵害之內容作實質論述，上開論述相較於美、日二國均等論見解，有其差異以及未來仍有待再加補充闡釋之處。但該判決意旨相較於過往學者所指最高法院未能建立均等論之理由與體系之問題，已做出正面之回應，對於探討我國未來均等論實務理論之發展與建構，具有重要意義。本文由美、日二國均等侵害判斷之原則及其限制之介紹說明，對照最高法院上述均等侵害之判決見解，解析上開判決所闡釋均等侵害原則在比較法上與美、日二國之差異性，包括全要件原則、申請歷史禁反言、先前技術阻卻、置換可能性、置換容易性。並就實務運用該判決原則進行均等侵害判斷時，所可能產生相關爭議問題，提出初步建議及思考方向。期能在上開判決見解基礎上，提供作為進一步於我國實務發展均等侵害原則及爭議處理之參考。<br />\r\n<br />\r\n英文摘要:<br />\r\nThe doctrine of equivalents is an established legal rule adopted by patent infringement litigation practitioners and professors. However, the Supreme Court of Taiwan has drawn criticisms for not elaborating the theory of this doctrine and providing little guidance on how to apply this doctrine in the decisions. In response to these criticisms, the Supreme Court of Taiwan provided its first clear delineation on the doctrine of equivalents in 2013 Tai Shang No. 1986 decision, which made a meaningful stride in developing the doctrine theory in the jurisprudence of Taiwan. Taking a comparative perspective to the Taiwanese Supreme Court decision, this article discusses the doctrine of equivalents and its limits as applied in the United States and Japan to explore their differences, specifically with respect to the allelements rule, prosecution history estoppels, prior art preclusion, interchangeability and readiness of replacement among these jurisdictions. Based upon a legal analysis of the Supreme Court decision, the article concludes by presenting preliminary suggestions and possible approaches taken as references to deal with disputes yielded during application of the doctrine, along with the aim of achieving further development of the doctrine theory in the Supreme Court in Taiwan.<br />\r\n&nbsp;","summary":"","liaisonper":null,"liaisontel":null,"liaisonfax":null,"liaisonemail":null,"docs":[{"fileurl":"https://lawreview.law.nycu.edu.tw/lawreviewlaw/ch/app/data/doc?module=nycu0001&detailNo=1401061677109088256&type=s","pdffileurl":"","odffileurl":"","expFile":"我國均等論實務之發展──由最高法院102年度臺上字第1986號判決觀察"}],"images":[],"videos":[],"audios":[],"resources":[]},{"subject":"美國聯邦經濟間諜法之回顧與展望──兼論我國營業秘密法之刑罰化","dataClassName":null,"pubUnitName":"科技法律研究所","posterDate":null,"updateDate":null,"detailContent":"<span style=\"font-size:115%;\"><strong>美國聯邦經濟間諜法之回顧與展望──兼論我國營業秘密法之刑罰化&nbsp;Reviewing the U.S. Economic Espionage Act &mdash;With the Extending Comments on the 2013 Amendment of Taiwan&rsquo;s Trade Secret Act</strong></span><br />\r\n作者：林志潔<br />\r\n出版年月：201603<br />\r\n關鍵詞：經濟間諜、營業秘密、營業秘密刑罰化、Economic Espionage、Trade Secret、Criminalization<br />\r\n&nbsp;<br />\r\n中文摘要:<br />\r\n科技、經濟、國家安全，看似不相關的三個名詞，因營業秘密的存在而牢牢相扣。美國自1996 年起以聯邦層級的經濟間諜法來保護營業秘密，對於侵害營業秘密者課予刑事責任，並明確區分竊取營業秘密行為及經濟間諜行為，以嚇阻企業競爭對手竊取營業秘密，防止國家經濟、安全受到危害。然而，美國聯邦經濟間諜法施行至今已十九年，關於經濟間諜罪的案件，經法院判決確定有罪者卻為數不多，本文擬分析經濟間諜法實務上施行之困境，並提出改革建議。又，我國營業秘密法於2013 年增訂刑事規範第13 條之1至第13 條之4，主要參考自經濟間諜法，為分析比較，本文亦將一併檢討我國營業秘密法刑罰化後之問題。<br />\r\n<br />\r\n英文摘要:<br />\r\n&ldquo;Technology, economic and national security,&rdquo; these three words seem to be irrelevant on the surface; however, they are tightly bounded by the existence of the word&mdash;trade secret. The federal government of the U.S. passed the Economic Espionage Act in 1996 in an attempt to create a &ldquo;comprehensive and systematic&rdquo; approach to address trade secrecy misappropriation, drawing a clear line between economic espionage and theft of trade secrets through federal criminal justice system. It is established to prevent trade rivals from stealing other business&rsquo;s most precious property&mdash;trade secret, and to protect the national economy, security from any harm. While the Economic Espionage Act has been implemented for 19 years, there are only few cases brought in a verdict of guilty, which seemingly contradicts to the legislative purposes. Therefore, this article aims to analyze the predicament of the Act, and to give constructive propositions. Furthermore, the Trade Secret Act in Taiwan was revised in 2013. It mainly referred to the Economic Espionage, adding article 13-1 to 13-4. In order to compare and assay, this article will also probe into the amendment in 2013.<br />\r\n&nbsp;","summary":"","liaisonper":null,"liaisontel":null,"liaisonfax":null,"liaisonemail":null,"docs":[{"fileurl":"https://lawreview.law.nycu.edu.tw/lawreviewlaw/ch/app/data/doc?module=nycu0001&detailNo=1401060798654058496&type=s","pdffileurl":"","odffileurl":"","expFile":"美國聯邦經濟間諜法之回顧與展望──兼論我國營業秘密法之刑罰化"}],"images":[],"videos":[],"audios":[],"resources":[]}]