식품 및 그 제조방법의 특허법적 보호에 관한 연구
A Study on Patents for Food Products and the Methods of Making Food Products
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
As the importance of patents for food has been raised, this paper would like to discuss the patent protection of general foods and the manufacturing method including traditional foods. First, it is reviewed whether foods of which the essential purpose is to offer nutrients for human life sustaining can be patent subject matter and the types of patents in foods industry are classified dividing a substance invention and a method invention. Furthermore, the legal issue are checked out in the patent application cases in order that large corporations deprive home or small companies of their original recipes and mass manufacture. Particularly, concerning inventive step and non-obviousness, the patentability of inventions for food by sensory attributes such as its taste and flavor is reviewed. And this paper studies the legal issues caused by the difference of the subject matter between patents and utility models. This paper further summarizes the methods of providing a written description of the food invention focusing on the method of description for sensory attributes, means plus function claims and product by process claims. Finally, when patentabilities and infringements for food patent, the food's attributes characterized by their function, use, manufacturing and processing should be considered.
Abstract
As the importance of patents for food has been raised, this paper would like to discuss the patent protection of general foods and the manufacturing method including traditional foods. First, it is reviewed whether foods of which the essential purpose is to offer nutrients for human life sustaining can be patent subject matter and the types of patents in foods industry are classified dividing a substance invention and a method invention. Furthermore, the legal issue are checked out in the patent application cases in order that large corporations deprive home or small companies of their original recipes and mass manufacture. Particularly, concerning inventive step and non-obviousness, the patentability of inventions for food by sensory attributes such as its taste and flavor is reviewed. And this paper studies the legal issues caused by the difference of the subject matter between patents and utility models. This paper further summarizes the methods of providing a written description of the food invention focusing on the method of description for sensory attributes, means plus function claims and product by process claims. Finally, when patentabilities and infringements for food patent, the food's attributes characterized by their function, use, manufacturing and processing should be considered.
참고문헌 (34)
- "한국전통지식포탈"[URL]
- 조영선, "특허법(제3판)", pp.8~ (2011), 도서출판 박영사
- "Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303", ~ (1980)
- Giles S. Rich, "The Exclusive Right Since Aristotle", Cir. B.J, 217(217), pp.217~ (2004)
- Donald S. Chisum, "Principles of Patent Law, 3rd ed", pp.7~ (2004), Foundation Press
- "대법원 1996. 02. 09. 선고 95후1333 판결", ~ (1996)
- "등록번호 10-0941160 “식혜의 제조방법”, 등록번호 10-0690506 “현미상황버섯추출물을 이용한 식혜음료제조방법”", ~
- "등록번호 10-1014636 “식혜 제조방법 및 그 제조방법에 의하여 제조된 식 혜”", ~
- "등록번호 10-0607671 “상황버섯을 이용한 식혜 및 그 제조방법”", ~
- Robert J. Lewis, "Protecting a Sensory Attribute of Food by Patent", Intell. Prop .&Tech. L.J, 11(17), pp.3~ (2006)
- 특허청, "식품분야 심사기준", 3~ (2008)
- 고명숙, "용도발명에 대한 고찰 : 기능성 식품 용도발명을 중심으로", 석사, 법학, pp.2008
- 특 허청, "식품분야 심사기준", 14~ (2008)
- 권오희, "식품특허 길라잡이", pp.27~ (2001), (주) 식품저널
- "특허법원 2002. 04. 04. 선고 2001허1501 판결", ~ (2002)
- "대법원 2007. 01. 25. 선고 2005후2045 판결", ~ (2007)
- "서울중앙지법 2006. 11. 17. 선고 2005가합63349 판결", ~ (2006)
- "생물다양성협약 홈 페이지" (2012)[URL]
- "대법원 1997. 11. 28. 선고 97후341 판결", ~ (1997)
- "Lewis, supra note 12, at 3", ~
- 구대환, "실용신안제도에 의한 소발명의 효과적인 보호방안", 서울대학교 법학, 46(4), pp.285~311 (2005), 법학연구소
- 권인희, "실용신안제도의 실효성에 관한 검토", 창작과 권리, (56), pp.53~81 (2009), 세창출판사
- "대법원 1998. 10. 13. 선고 97후1344 판결; 특허법원 2006. 11. 23. 선고 2005허7354 판결", ~ (2006)
- "대법원 2007. 9. 6. 선고 2005후1486 판결", ~ (2007)
- "대법원 2004. 4. 28. 선고 2001후2207 판결", ~ (2004)
- 특허청, "특허ㆍ실용신안 심사지침서", ~ (2011)
- 日本特許庁, "特許・実用新案審査基準", 第II部 第2章 新規性ㆍ進步性 1.5.2 (3), ~ (2006)
- 정차호, "제법한정물건 청구항(product-by-process claim)의 해석에 관한 새로운 제안", 성균관법학, 22(1), pp.167~208 (2010), 법학연구소
- "Scripps Clinic & Research Foundation v. Genentech, Inc., 927 F.2d. 1565", ~ (1991)
- "Atlantic Thermoplastics Co. v. Faytex Co., 970 F. 2d 834", ~ (1992)
- "Abbott Laboratories v. Sandoz, Inc., 566 F.3d 1282", ~ (2009)
- "Abbott 566 F.3d at 1294", ~
- 조현래, "Product by Process Claim에 대한 특허침해 판단 -Atlantic Thermoplastics Co. v. Faytex Corp. 판결을 대상으로-", 법학연구, 50(1), pp.137~160 (2009), 법학연구소
- 윤태식, "프로덕트 바이 프로세스 청구항, In 특허법주해 I", pp.1194~1195 (2010), 박영사