由美國實務經驗探討基礎科學專利對生物科技的影響__臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

來源文獻資料
摘要
外文摘要
引文資料

題名：	由美國實務經驗探討基礎科學專利對生物科技的影響
書刊名：	臺北大學法學論叢
作者：	陳文吟
作者(外文)：	Chen, Wen-yin
出版日期：	2008
卷期：	67
頁次：	頁115-173
主題關鍵詞：	基礎科學；研究工具；廣泛專利權；反共享；實驗免責；延展性授權契約；延展性權利金；延展性申請專利範圍；拜杜法；充分揭露要件；Basic science；Fundamental science；Research tools；Broad patent；Anti-commons；Experimental exemption；Reach-through licensing agreement；Reach-through royalty；Reach-through claims；Bayh-Dole act；Sufficient disclosure
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:1 共同引用:2 點閱:73

　　基礎科學的重要性，或可藉牛頓的名言說明：如果說我看得比別人遠，那是因為我站在巨人的肩膀上。專利制度固然促使產業科技的發展，惟，若非基礎科學的研究，產業科技只得於有限的知識下緩慢進行。是以鼓勵基礎科學之研究，確有其必要性，此尤以生物科技為然。　　專利制度是否必然有助於基礎科學的研究？居禮夫婦曾言：「科學是屬於全人類共有的財產。」對生物科技有重大影響的單株抗體，以及重組DNA技術之先驅－重組DNA分子，其技術均於研究完成時公諸於世，而未申請專利。然而，西元1980年以降，美國因立法、司法實務見解的變革，開啟基礎科學受專利保護之風。此雖有助於鼓勵基礎科學之研究，卻又箝制了相關技術的發展。　　如何確保基礎科學專利對生物科技發展的正面意義，又可消弭耳其弊端，自為當務之急。（1）實驗免責，（2）延展性授權契約的採行，（3）延展性申請專利範聞之禁止，以及（4）強制授權等均不失為可行的措施。然而，宜審慎因應，方得以相輔相成；兼顧鼓勵基礎科學之研究，避免箝制下游技術發展，並促進創新研發。實驗免責之適用不宜過度擴張，否則將損於基礎科學專利權人之權益，進而損及基礎科學研究的意願。實驗免責應僅得適用於（1）無營利目的之研究行為、（2）取得學名藥上市許可之試驗行為，及（3）還原工程之研究。適度允許當事人之採行延展性授權金，兼顧專利權人收取權利金之權益及被授權人之經濟情況，有利於基礎科學之廣泛利用以及科技之發展。廣泛專利權的賦予，雖時而有之，專利主管機關應藉由嚴謹的審查基準、審慎地審查專利申請案（包括實用性與充分揭露要件），使專利申請人無從據延展性申請專利範圍取得專利權。強制授權令利用人在無從主張實驗免責，亦無從接受延展性授權契約的情況下，可藉此取得授權並支付合理權利金。凡此，或可在賦予基礎科學專利的同時，兼顧鼓勵基礎科學的研究及生物科技的發展。

以文找文

　　Newton said: If I have seen farther, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. This sentence may indicate the importance of basic science. In the past centuries, scientists seldom patented their discovery/invention, as Nobel Prize winner Mrs. Curie said: “It is against scientific spirit.” However, since 1980s, scientists bringing their discovery/invention to Patent Office has no longer been rare. The main reason for such change is because of the enforcement of Bayh-Dole Act and the Supreme Court decision in Diamond v. Chakrabarty, which also caused the speedy development in biotechnology industry. Patent system may encourage basic scientific research, and further innovation. But, in the meantime, to patent basic science may cause delayed publication and broad patent, which may inhibit further innovation. The patent authority should take some measures to avoid the problems caused by basic science patent, such as: (1) to clarify the application of experimental use exemption; (2) to establish the standards of patent licensing; (3) to prohibit reach-through claims; and (4) to adopt compulsory licensing as provided under WTO/TRIPs agreement. To patent basic science, the patent authority should, considering their own nation's situation, take the proper measures to avoid problems, so that basic science patent would help the promotion of biotechnology industry and would not deter innovation.

以文找文

期刊論文
1.	Feldman, Robin C.(2003)。The Insufficiency of Antitrust Analysis for patent Misure。Hastings L. J.，55，399-448。
2.	Stafford, Kimberlee(2005)。Comment: Reach-through Royalties in Biomedical Research Tool Patent Licensing: Implications of NIH Guidelines on Small Biotechnology Firms。Lewis & Clark Law Review，9，699。
3.	Campbell, Eric G.(2002)。Data Withholding in Academic Genetics: Evidence from a National Survey。Journal of American Medical Association，287(4)，473-480。
4.	Mazzoleni, R.、Nelson, R. R.(1998)。The benefits and costs of strong patent protection: A contribution to the current debate。Research Policy，27(3)，273-284。
5.	Scotchmer, S.(1991)。Standing on the shoulders of giants: Cumulative research and the patent law。The Journal of Economics Perspectives，5(1)，29-41。
6.	Eisenberg, Rebecca S.(1989)。Patents and the Progress of Science: Exclusive Rights and Experimental Use。The University of Chicago Law Review，56(3)，1017-1086。
7.	Rai, Arti K.(1999)。Regulating Scientific Research: Intellectual Property Rights and the Norms of Science。Nw. U. L. Rev.，94，77。
8.	Heller, M. A.、Eisenberg, R. S.(1998)。Can patents deter Innovation?。Science，280，671-698。
9.	Shaughnessy, Brian(1996)。The False Inventive Genus: Developing a New Approach for Analyzing the Sufficiency of Patent Disclosure within the Unpredictable Arts。Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal，7，147。
10.	Mueller, Janice M.(2001)。No "Dilettante Affair": Rethinking The Experimental Use Exception To Patent Infringement For Biomedical Research Tools。Washington Law Review，76(1)，1-65。
11.	Merges, R. P.。Contracting into Liability Rules: Intellectual Property Rights and Collective Rights Organizations。California Law Review，84，1293-1358。
12.	Lemley, Mark A.(1990)。The Economic Irrationality of the Patent Misuse Doctrine。California Law Review，78，1599。
13.	余華(20041100)。研究工具的可專利性及其權利執行範圍。智慧財產權月刊，71，82-106。延伸查詢
14.	Mowery, David C.、Nelson, Richard R.、Sampat, Bhaven N.、Ziedonis, Arvids A.(2001)。The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980。Research Policy，30(1)，99-119。
15.	Merges, Robert P.、Nelson, Richard R.(1990)。On the complex economics of patent scope。Columbia Law Review，90(4)，839-916。
16.	Kitch, Edmund W.(1977)。The Nature and Function of the Patent System。The Journal of Law & Economics，20(2)，265-290。
17.	Mueller, Janice(2004)。The Evanescent Experimental Use Exemption from United States patent Infringement Liability: Implications for University and Nonprofit Research and Development。Baylor Law Review，56，917-917。
18.	O'Rourke, Maureen A.、O'Rourke, Maurren(2000)。Toward a Doctrine of Fair Use in Patent Law。Columbia Law Review，100，1177-1177。
19.	(2001)。The Fate of Gene Patents under the New Utility Guidelines。Duke Law & Technology Review，Feb.。
20.	Murashige, Kate(1988)。Section 102/103 Issues in Biotechnology Patent Prosecution。AIPLA Quarterly Journal，16。
21.	李森堙(2002)。淺談生技領域的研究工具專利爭議。科技法律透析，4。延伸查詢
22.	Villamil, Diana(2006)。Comment: Redefining Utility in Determining the Patentability of DNA Sequences。The John Marshall Review of Intellectual Property Law，5。
23.	Pitcher, Amanda S.(2003)。Comment: Contrary to First Impression, Genes are Patentable: Should there be Limitations?。Journal of Health Care Law & Policy，6。
24.	Blevins, David、Ewer, Sid(1988)。University Research and Development Activities: Intrusion into Areas Untended? A Review of Recent Developments and Ethical Issues Raised。Journal of Business Ethics，7。
25.	Garde, Tanuja V.(2005)。Supporting Innovation in Targeted Treatments: Licenses of Right to NIH-funded Research Tools。Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review，11。
26.	Hill, Laurie(2003)。The Race to Patent the Genome Free Riders, Hold Ups, and the Future of Medical Breakthroughs。Texas Intellectual Property Law Journal，11。
27.	Rai, Arti(2001)。Fostering Cumultive Innovation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry: The Role of Patents and Antitrust。Berkeley Technology Law Journal，16。
28.	陳奕雄(2002)。後基因體時代個人化－醫療新趨勢。生物醫學報導，16。延伸查詢
29.	Pavitt, Keith(1991)。What Makes Basic Research Economically Useful?。Research Policy，20(2)，109-119。
30.	Lunkkonen, Mattias(2001)。Gene Patents: How Useful Are the New Utility Requirements?。T. JEFFERSON L. REV.，23，337。
31.	Looney, Barbra(1994)。Should Genes be Patented? The Gene Patenting Controversy: Legal, Ethical, and Policy Foundations of an International Agreement。Law and Policy in International Business，26。
32.	Mireles, Michael(2006)。States as Innovation System Laboratories: California, Patents, and Stem Cell Technology。Cardozo Law Review，28。
33.	Mireles, Michael(2004)。An Examination of Patent, Licensing, Research Tools, and Tragedy of the Anticommons in Biotechnoloty Innovation。University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform，38。
34.	O'Connor, Sean(2005)。Intellectual Property Rights and Stem Cell Research: Who Owns the Medical Breakthroughs?。New England Law Review，39。
35.	Nyffeler, Paul(2007)。Allen Chair Symposium: The Role of the Death Penalty in America: Reflections, Perceptions, and Reform: The Safe Harbor of 35 U.S.C. §271(e)(1): The End of Enforceable Biotechnology Patents in Drug Discovery?。University of Richmond Law Review，41。
36.	Kunin, Stephen、Nagumo, Mark(2002)。Brian Stanton, Linda Therkorn & Stephen Walsh, Reach-through Claims in the Age of Biotechnology。American University Law Review，51。
37.	Freeburg, Ruth(2005)。No Safe Harbor and No Experimental Use: Is It Time for Compulsory Licensing of Biotech Tools?。Buffalo Law Review，53。
38.	Ramirez, Heather(2004)。Defending the Privatization of Research Tools: An Examination of the "Tragedy of the Anticommons", in Biotechnology Research and Development。Emory Law Journal，53。
39.	Mireles, Michael(2007)。Symposium: Closing in on Open Science: Trends in Intellectual Property & Scientific Research: Adoption of the Bayh-Dole Act in Developed Countries: Added Pressure for a Broad Research Exemption in the United States?。Maine Law Review，59，259。
40.	Barton, John(1997)。Patents and Antitrust: A Rethinking in Light of Patent Breadth and Sequential Innovation。Antitrust Law Journal，65。
41.	Hultquist, Steven(2004)。Reach-through Royalties: The Scope of Research Tool Patents。Journal of the Patent and Trademark Office Society，86。
42.	Summers, Teresa(2003)。The Scope of Utility in the Twenty-first Century: New Guidelines for Gene-related Patents。Georgetown Law Journal，91。
43.	Ko, Yusing(1992)。Note: An Economic Analysis of Biotechnology Patent Protection。Yale Law Journal，102，777-777。
44.	Note(2005)。The Disclosure Function of the Patent System。Harvard Law Review，118。
45.	Levin, Richard(1987)。Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development。Brookings Papers on Economic Activity，1987。
46.	Barton, John、Maskus, Keith(2004)。Economic Perspectives on a Multilateral Agreement on Open Access to Basic Science and Technology。SCRIPT-ed，1(3)，369-387。
47.	Hunt, Robert(1999)。Patent Reform: A Mixed Blessing for the U.S. Economy?。Business Review。
48.	See, Harold、Caprio, Frank(1990)。The Trouble with Brulotte: The Payment Royalty Term and Patent Monopoly Extension。Utah Law Review。

研究報告
1.	Lim, Amanda、Christie, Andrew(2005)。Reach-through Patent Claims in Biotechnology: An Analysis of the Examination Practices of the United States, European and Japanese Patent Offices。0。

學位論文
1.	周慧菁(2005)。生技製藥產業涉及專利法及競爭法之爭議問題研究，0。延伸查詢

圖書
1.	Schechter, Roger E.、Thomas, John R.(2004)。Principles of Patent Law。St. Paul, MN：West, a Thomson Business。
2.	施顏祥(1988)。科技發展與管理。臺北：高立圖書有限公司。延伸查詢
3.	Adelman, Martin、Rader, Randall、Thomas, John、Wegner, Harold(1998)。Patent Law。Patent Law。0。
4.	National Academy of Sciences, Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy(2001)。Workshop on Academic IP: Effects of University Patenting and Licensing on Commercialization and Research。Workshop on Academic IP: Effects of University Patenting and Licensing on Commercialization and Research。0。
5.	Newton, Isaac(2005)。自然哲學之數學原理。自然哲學之數學原理。0。延伸查詢
6.	Curie, Eve(1987)。居禮夫人。居禮夫人。0。延伸查詢
7.	第四次全國科學技術會議(1991)。第二中心議題，提昇基礎研究水準。第二中心議題，提昇基礎研究水準。0。延伸查詢
8.	Kevles, Bettyann(2000)。露骨。露骨。臺北市。延伸查詢
9.	第四次全國科學技術會議(1991)。第三中心議題，落實研究發展提昇產業科技水準。第三中心議題，落實研究發展提昇產業科技水準。0。延伸查詢
10.	陳嘉芬(1999)。現代遺傳學 (2) : 分子遺傳學。臺北：藝軒。延伸查詢
11.	王沙玲(1997)。遺傳學精要。遺傳學精要。0。延伸查詢
12.	Schacht, Wendy(2006)。CRS Report for Congress RL 32076, The Bayh-Dole Act: Selected Issues in Patent Policy and the Commercialization of Technology。CRS Report for Congress RL 32076, The Bayh-Dole Act: Selected Issues in Patent Policy and the Commercialization of Technology。0。
13.	Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2004)。Patents and Innovation: Trends and Policy Challenges。Patents and Innovation: Trends and Policy Challenges。0。
14.	Eisenberg, Rebecca(2003)。Reaching through the Genome。Perspectives on Properties of the Human Genome Project。0。
15.	Vagtborg, Harold(1976)。Research and American Industrial Development。Research and American Industrial Development。0。
16.	Brian, Denis(2005)。The Curies。The Curies。0。

其他
1.	Fröman, Nanny(1995)。Marie and Pierre Curie and the Discovery of Polonium and Radium，0。
2.	Biotechnology Industry Organization。Technology Transfer，0。
3.	Androsov, Nicky。How Far Should Biotech Patents Extend?，0。
4.	Berg, Paul。Creates First Recombinant DNA Molecules，0。
5.	Boyer, Herbert，Cohen, N. Stanley，Genome News Network。Develop Recombinant DNA Technology，0。
6.	Grassler, Frank。U.S. Treatment of Reach-through Claims and Reach-through Royalties，0。
7.	Evolution of the Role of Basic Research(1997)。Research & Development，0。
8.	Granni, Brock，Jackson。Why Support Basic Science，0。
9.	Biotechnology Industry Organization。The Technologies and Their Applications，0。
10.	Association of University Technology Transfer Managers。AUTM U.S. Licensing Survey: FY 2004，0。
11.	Report of the National Institute of Health Working Group on Research Tools，0。
12.	國立科學工藝博物館(2007)。諾貝爾的啟發與省思－科學的發現該擁有專利嗎？，0。延伸查詢
13.	Young, Margaret(1998)。The Legacy of Cohen-boyer，0。

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	垂直關係之最適專利授權方式
2.	由Myriad案探討因應基因專利之合理措施
3.	由美國法探討胚胎幹細胞之研究--以NIH之HSC準則及專利法制為中心
4.	基因有關研究工具授予專利之探討：以基因專利之審查為中心
5.	由美國專利實務探討專利侵害之實驗免責
6.	研究工具的可專利性及其權利執行範圍

1.	從公共衛生之觀點論醫藥專利權之保護與限制

無相關書籍

無相關著作

無相關點閱

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫