近年來，荷商飛利浦公司對臺灣廠商光碟及碟機廠商收取之權利是否合理的問題持續受到各界關注，由於我國廠在CD-R的原始專利技術發展上較為落後，因此即便努力投入研發，並協助專利權人擴大市場占有率，仍無可避免的必須自行吸收單價下滑，從而權利金支出在成本結構中不斷攀高的苦果；這不但對我國廠商的競爭力造成極大影響，更代表了我新興工業國家難以提昇自己國際競爭地位的窘境。 在2004年3月11日美國國際貿易委員會（International Trade Commission）行政法院針對我國廠商與荷商飛利浦之間專利侵害案所作判決中，使指出雖然飛利浦對我國廠商所提的侵權指控皆告成立，然在其改正專利濫用情事及除去因濫用行為所造成之後果前，依法不得行使其專利權。本文以為，本案所開啟的或許會是繼WTO公共衛生議題之後另一個挑戰TRIPs除外空間的議題；換言之，在TRIPs所容許的強制授權（compulsory licensing）之外，專利濫用而足以影響競爭秩序以及消費者福祉之情形應如何處理？又執法都應如何判斷其是否屬於應受競爭法節制之擴權行為？這些者是我們必須面對者。此外，在我國並無專利權之非衡平使用(inequitable use)概念前提下，如何回歸公司交易之本質來思考公平法之適用，亦有其必要。 原則上，本文之重點不在於評論案件，而在於自經濟分析的角度來檢視當前專利濫用判斷之合理適用空間。首先本文嘗試指出，工業先進國家的法制有將抽象「濫用」問題與競爭之經濟思維相結合之傾向，這使得屬於司法判斷的空間大幅縮小，也印證了經濟分析所顯示國家傾向於藉由專利制度來鼓勵創新的趨勢。然則在另一方面，本文也指出了專利制度之所以存在，其實也反映出權利人與社會大眾間的妥協；也因此，消費者與社會整體足以獲得一個最適的福祉效果。故此，本文同意在思考專利濫用問題時，應以尊重專利權人自主性的原則出發；然相對的，專利制度之目標並無法亙久存在，尤其自動態效率的評估角度來看，權利人之行為是否符合市場機制？又是否符合原有專利制度追求的目標？這些問題都在本中受到了關注。

In recent years, the rationality of royalty rate charged by Philips Corporation to Taiwanese CD-R manufacturers is big issue. Taiwanese CD-R manufacturers lacked for patent strength, so even if they make great effort to help patentees to expand the CD-R market share, thy inevitably confront the situation that the unit price is down while the royalty rate goes up. This situation not only causes negative influence on the competitiveness of Taiwanese CD-R manufacturers, but implies that the competitive positions of emerging industrial countries are difficult to be promoted. On March 11, 2004, U.S. International Trade Commission determined that none of the asserted Philips' claims are invalid, that the accused Taiwanese products infringes the asserted claims, but all of the asserted patents are unenforceable by reason of patent misuse. Perhaps the Philips case will be another debate on TRIPs exemption topic succeeding WTO public health topic. So we could think about the issues that how to deal properly with the patent misuse behavior which interferes with competition order and consumer welfare; that how should law executor judge what behavior violated completion law; that how to enforced competition law without equitable defense rule in Taiwan. The point of this article does not lie in commenting on the case, but to lie in reviewing the reasonable judgment of patent misuse from the viewpoint of economic analysis. This article tries to figure out that advanced industrial countries' judiciary tends to determine 'misuse' issues by referring to economic thinking. On the other hand, this article points out patent system reflects the compromise of patentees and the public, so that welfare of consumers and society could be optimized. This article agrees that we must take account of respecting patentee's autonomy while concerning balancing test for patent misuse issues, but this article also adopt "dynamic efficiency" viewpoint to assess that does patentee's behavior violate market mechanism or comply with the purpose of the patent system.