臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：美國專利法制之懲罰性損害賠償規範與確定原則--從美國專利改革談起
書刊名：世新法學
作者：李柏靜 引用關係
作者(外文)：Lee, Po-ching
出版日期：2010
卷期：3:2
頁次：頁87-139
主題關鍵詞：增加損害賠償；懲罰性損害賠償；三倍損害賠償；故意侵害；客觀上之輕率；美國專利改革；Increased damages；Punitive damages；Treble damages；Willful infringement；Objectively reckless；US Patent Reform
原始連結：連回原系統網址new window
相關次數：
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:94
  • 點閱點閱:75
本文探討美國專利法第284條中增加損害賠償之立法緣由及司法實務發展，並分析2009年美國專利改革法案之修法建議。專利法並沒有規範增加損害賠償的裁量依據，司法實務則是在認定敗訴的侵害人構成故意侵害後，才決定是否判命懲罰性損害賠償。專利改革法案建議明文規定故意侵害為懲罰性損害賠償的前提要件。本文歸納美國專利懲罰性損害賠償之三種認定故意的標準：一是傳統的故意侵害論，Underwater Devices案「充分注意之確切義務」之標準為故意侵害設立了一個較低的門檻，比較類似過失；二是Seagate案的故意侵害論，為客觀上之輕率；三是專利改革的故意侵害論，為行為有客觀上之輕率，並似有意限定為三種樣態的故意：被通知後從事客觀上仍構成侵害之行為、主觀之侵害、侵害確認後客觀上仍續行侵害。專利改革法案之建議可能限制法官的裁量權而影響救濟的彈性。
Legislation history and judicial dicisions on increased damages in US Patent Law § 284, and the proposed amendment in US Patent Reform Act of 2009 are studied. Lacking statutory guidance in determining increased damages, courts have held that an award of increased damages requires a showing of willful infringement. Patent Reform Act suggests to codify the doctrine of willful infringement for punitive damages. This study concludes three standards of willfulness in determining punitive damages. First, the traditional willfulness doctrine hold in Underwater Devices case requires the affirmative duty of due care which sets a lower threshold of willful infringement that is more akin to negligence. Second, willfulness in Seagate case requires at least an objective recklessness. Third, in Patent Reform Act, willfulness is defined as acting with objective recklessness in one of the three types of conduct: after receiving written notice thereafter perform the alleged act of infringement, intentionally copy the patented invention, and engage in conduct no colorably different from the conduct previously found to have infringed the patent. Such proposed amendment may restrict the discretion of court and flexibility of remedy.
期刊論文
1.Chao, Bernard H.(2008)。After eBay, Inc. v. MercExchange: The Changing Landscape for Patent Remedies。Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology，9(2)，543-572。  new window
2.馮震宇(19960100)。論侵害專利權之民事責任與民事救濟。法學叢刊，41(1)=161，28-39。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Bensen, Eric E.、White, Danielle M.(20080817)。Using Apportionment to Rein in the Georgia-Pacific Factors。COLUM. SCI. & TECH. L. REV.，9，1。  new window
4.Moore, Kimberly A.(2004)。Empirical Statistics on Willful Patent Infringement。The Federal Circuit Bar Journal，14，227-237。  new window
5.李柏靜(20081200)。評析美國專利改革法案--以提升專利品質為目的的思考。世新法學，2(1)，149-200。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.Bloebaum Scott(2007)。Past the Tipping Point: Reforming the Role of Willfulness in the Federal Circuit’s Doctrine of Enhancied Damages for Patent Infringement。N.C. J.L. & Tech.，9(1)，139。  new window
7.Das, Kaustuv M.(2007)。Willful Infringement, Waiver, and Advice of Counsel: A Sea Change at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit。Pat. & Trademark Off. Soc’y，89(3)，853。  new window
8.Brian, Ferguson(2007)。Seagate Equals Sea Change: The Federal Circuit Establishes a New Test for Proving Willful Infringement and Reserves the Sanctity of the Attorney-Client Privilege。Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal，24(1)，167-183。  new window
9.Landers, Amy L.(2006)。Let the Games Begin: Incentives to Innovatives to Innovation in the New Economy of intellectual Property Law。Santa Clara L. Rev.，46(2)，307-375。  new window
學位論文
1.張容綺(2005)。專利侵害損害賠償制度之檢討與重構--以美國法作為比較基準--(碩士論文)。世新大學。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Gamer, Bryan A.(2004)。Black’s Law Dictionary。St. Paul：West, a Thomson business。  new window
2.羅炳榮(2004)。工業財產權論叢--基礎篇。台北：翰蘆圖書出版有限公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Schwartz, Herbert F.(2006)。Patent Law and Practice。  new window
4.Cooter, Robert、Ulen, Thomas、溫麗琪(2003)。法律經濟學。臺北市：華泰文化。  延伸查詢new window
5.蔡明誠(2008)。專利侵權要件及損害賠償計算。台北：經濟部智慧財產局。  延伸查詢new window
6.蔡明誠(2000)。發明專利法研究。臺北：蔡明誠。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.曾陳明汝(20040000)。兩岸暨歐美專利法。臺北：蔡明誠。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.雷雅雯(200311)。侵害專利權之民事責任與救濟。  延伸查詢new window
9.Chisum, Donald S.、Mien, Nard Craig、Schwartz, Herbert F.、Pauline, Newman、Scott, Kieff F.(2001)。Principles of Patent Law。  new window
10.Lewis Ian、Ruth Taplin(2004)。Intellectual Property Litigation, Liability Insurance, Issues and Solutions, in Valuing Intellectual Property in Japan, Britain and the United States。  new window
11.Schwartz, Victor E.、Kelly, Kathryn、Partlett, David F.(2005)。Prosser, Wade and Schwartz’s Torts Cases and Materials。West Academic。  new window
其他
1.Dudas, Jon W.(20070606)。Patent Reform: The Future of American Innovation, Statement of Jon W. Dudas Under Secretary of Commerce of Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office before the Committee on the Judiciary United States Senate，http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/speeches/2007iun06.htm， 2008/11/11。  new window
2.司法院(2009)。大法官釋字第 654 號。  延伸查詢new window
3.Aro Mfg. Co. v.，Convertible Top Replacement Co.,(1964)。  new window
4.Beatrice Foods Co. v.，New England Printing & Lithographing Co.(1991)，Fed. Cir.。  new window
5.(1876)。Birdsall v. Coolidge。  new window
6.Cohesive Technologies, Inc.(2008)。v. Waters Corporation，Fed. Cir.。  new window
7.Western Litho Plate and Supply Co.(1988)。Fromson v.，Fed.Cir.。  new window
8.In re Seagate Tech., LLC(2007)。In re Seagate Tech.，Fed. Cir.。  new window
9.Johns Hopkins Univ.，v. Cellpro, Inc.(1998)，Fed. Cir.。  new window
10.(1996)。Jurgens v. CBK Ltd.，Fed. Cir.。  new window
11.Crucible, Inc.(1986)。Kloster Speedsteel AB v.，Fed. Cir.。  new window
12.(2004)。Knorr-Bremse Systeme Fuer Nutzfahrzeuge GmbH v. Dana Corp.，Fed. Cir.。  new window
13.(2008)。Mars, Inc. v. Coin Acceptors, Inc.，Fed. Cir.。  new window
14.(1998)。Nike inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores，Fed. Cit.。  new window
15.(1992)。Read Corp. v. Portec, Inc.，Fed. Cit.。  new window
16.(2002)。Riles v. Shell Exploration & Prod Co.，Fed. Cir.。  new window
17.(1987)。Rite-Hue corporation, v. Kelley Company, Inc.，Fed. Cit.。  new window
18.(1889)。Rude v. Westcott。  new window
19.(1983)。Underwater Devices v. Morrison-Knudsen Co.，Fed. Cit.。  new window
20.(1960)。Union Carbide Corp. v. Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co.。  new window
21.郭土木(200002)。期貨交易詐欺及內線交易行為之探討(上)，2http://web.fsc.gov.tw/Layout/main_ch/AllInOne_Show.aspx?path=2259&guid=0f807f4b-67c4-4e4c-ad7f bae3b9eb7832〈=zh-tw)， 2009/07/30。  new window
22.陳春山(200406)。不實財務報告之民事責任法律適用爭議，http://web.fsc.gov.tw/Layout/main_ch/AllInOne_Show.aspx?path=1139&guid=5c9cd53d-b24f-45dd-a559-6d7b5475a3fl〈=zh-tw)， 2009/07/30。  new window
23.(19520719)。813 Historical and Rvision Notes, Office of the Law Revision Counsel, U.S. House of Representatives，http://uscode.housc. gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t33t36+1577+0++%28%29%20%20 AND%20%28%2835%29%20ADJ%20USC%29%3ACITE%20AND%20%28US C%20w%2F10%20%28284%29%29%3ACITE%20%20%20%20%20%20%20% 20%20. last visit: 20 10/01/30.。  new window
24.(17900410)。An Act to promote the progress of useful arts, Ch. 7,1st Congress, in Statutes at Large, 1789-1875,，http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId= llsl&filename=001/lls1001.db&recNum=19, last visit: 2010/2/20.， 2010/02/20。  new window
25.(20070904)。House, House Report 110-314 - PATENT REFORM ACT OF 2007，http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/R? cp110: FLDO 10: @ 1 (hr314)， 2008/11/11。  new window
26.Ladas & Parry LLP。A Brief History of the Patent Law of the United States，http://www.ladas.com/Patents/USPatentHistory.httnl. last visit， 2010/02/19。  new window
27.Merrill, Stephen A.，LevinRichard C.，Myers, Mark B.(200409)。A Patent System for the 21st Century，http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10976， 2008/11/11。  new window
28.PricewaterhouseCoopers(2007)。2007 Parent and Trademark Damages Study，http://www.pwc.com/extweb/pwcpublicatios.nsf/docid/CB9DF7557A7E4088525729500564C55， 2009/01/08。  new window
29.PricewaterhouseCoopers(2009)。2009 Parent Litigation Study，http://www.pwc.cp/uslen/forensic-servicesipublicationsl2009-patent-litigation-study.jhtml， 2010/04/13。  new window
30.Sandburg, Brenda(2001)。You May Not Have Choice. Trolling for Dollars, The Recorder，http://www.phonetel.com/pdfs/LWTrol1s.pdf， 2010/02/19。  new window
31.Senate(20080124)。Senate Report 110-259 - THE PATENT REFORM ACT OF 2007，http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/2?cp 110:./temp/~cp110mSUfk&sid=cp11mSUfk&item=2&sel=TOCLIST&h_count=2&xform_type=3 &r_n=sr259.110&dbnamecp110&&rjrsr259&dbname=cpi10&refer=&&， 2010/02/19。  new window
32.Senate(20090512)。Senate Report 111-018 -THE PATENT REFORM ACT OF 2009，http://thomas.1oc.gov/cgibiIilcNUC1Y/R? cp111:FLDO 10: @1(sr018)， 2012/02/19。  new window
圖書論文
1.Lawrence, M. Sung、Peter, K. Yu(2007)。Patent Infringement Remedies。INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INFORMATION WEALTH。  new window
2.陳聰富(2004)。美國法上之懲罰性賠償金制度。侵權歸責原則與損害賠償。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Rappaport, Irving(2009)。Making Sense of Recent Trends, Court Decisions, and Attempts at Patent Reform。From Assets to Profits: Competing for II’ Value and Return。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1411（臺灣：1403，外國：8） ／ 本年度總使用人次：2488187 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：68301144
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上