본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

특허권의 침해금지명령(Injunction)과 관련된 한-EU FTA의 내용 및 그 이행방안

Contents and Acceptance Method of Korea-EU FTA regarding Injunction

0

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Korea and EU temporally signed Free Trade Agreement(FTA) at Brussels on the 15th of October, 2009. This Korea-EU FTA includes national treatment and market access for goods, trade remedies,technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures,customs and trade facilitation, trade in services, establishment and electronic commerce, etc. In the field of intellectual property of Korea-EU FTA there are regulations embodying copyright, the rights related to patents, trademarks, service marks, designs, etc. Especially among such regulations there are those related to injunction, which are Injunction(10.48) and Alternative Measure(10.49). These regulations go hand in glove with Patent Troll that makes much money only through infringement lawsuits or transfers and licenses of patent rights without manufacturing goods. That is,Patent Troll is only patent owner but has no intention to manufacture goods. In this case, we come to grips with big problem whether Patent Troll should be protected by the Patent Act or infringer should be protected by the public interest. Of course, according to Korea-EU FTA, it is Korea's decision whether Korea would provide that at the request of the person liable to be subject to the measures of injunction, the competent judicial authorities may order pecuniary compensation to be paid to the injured party instead of applying the measures of injunction. However, in the case of ordering pecuniary compensation as alternative measures, Korea-EU FTA requests that infringer acted unintentionally and without negligence, execution of the measures in question would cause him or her disproportionate harm and pecuniary compensation to the injured party appears reasonably satisfactory. So this study aims for examining carefully contents of Korea-EU FTA regarding regulation of injunction and alternative measures,deciding whether we would accept such regulations in Korea-EU FTA and suggesting proposal to amend the Patent Act in case of accepting such regulations.

Abstract

Korea and EU temporally signed Free Trade Agreement(FTA) at Brussels on the 15th of October, 2009. This Korea-EU FTA includes national treatment and market access for goods, trade remedies,technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures,customs and trade facilitation, trade in services, establishment and electronic commerce, etc. In the field of intellectual property of Korea-EU FTA there are regulations embodying copyright, the rights related to patents, trademarks, service marks, designs, etc. Especially among such regulations there are those related to injunction, which are Injunction(10.48) and Alternative Measure(10.49). These regulations go hand in glove with Patent Troll that makes much money only through infringement lawsuits or transfers and licenses of patent rights without manufacturing goods. That is,Patent Troll is only patent owner but has no intention to manufacture goods. In this case, we come to grips with big problem whether Patent Troll should be protected by the Patent Act or infringer should be protected by the public interest. Of course, according to Korea-EU FTA, it is Korea's decision whether Korea would provide that at the request of the person liable to be subject to the measures of injunction, the competent judicial authorities may order pecuniary compensation to be paid to the injured party instead of applying the measures of injunction. However, in the case of ordering pecuniary compensation as alternative measures, Korea-EU FTA requests that infringer acted unintentionally and without negligence, execution of the measures in question would cause him or her disproportionate harm and pecuniary compensation to the injured party appears reasonably satisfactory. So this study aims for examining carefully contents of Korea-EU FTA regarding regulation of injunction and alternative measures,deciding whether we would accept such regulations in Korea-EU FTA and suggesting proposal to amend the Patent Act in case of accepting such regulations.

참고문헌 (21)

  1. 김용진, "지적재산권 집행제도로서의 증거보전", 2009년도 법학연구소 학술세미나(지적재산권 침해품에 대한 새로운 집행 체재의 모색) (2009), 충남대학교 법학연구소
  2. 김준호, "민법강의, 신정6판" (2006), 법문사
  3. 김형배, "민법학강의, 제7판" (2008), 신조사
  4. 안현실, "“특허괴물에 당하는 제조업”(2009. 7. 5. 방문), 2009년 6월 3일자 한국경제 기사", ~ (2009)
  5. 안현실, "특허괴물에 당하는 제조업”, 2009년 6월 3일자 한국경제 기사", ~
  6. 이강봉, "“‘특허 괴물’ 기승… 목표는 한국 기업(현재 325개사 성업 중, 국가적 대책 서둘러야)”(2010. 5. 15. 방문), 2010년 5월 14일 사이언스 타임즈 기사", ~ (2010)
  7. 이시윤, "신민사소송법" (2002), 박영사
  8. 임병웅, "이지특허법, 제6판" (2007), 한빛지적소유권센터
  9. 정차호, "특허의 침해금지청구권에 관한 eBay판결 : 특허권의 몰락?", 지식재산21, 통권 : 96 (2006), 특허청
  10. 정차호, "2005년 중 미국 주요 특허판례 해설", 지식재산21, 통권 : 93 (2005), 특허청
  11. 특허청 해외지식재산권보호센터, "해외지식재산권 보호가이드북(영국편)" (2008), 특허청
  12. 황종환, "특허법, 개정9판" (2004), 한빛지적소유권센터
  13. 中山信弘, "특허법(공업소유권법(상))" (2001), 법문사
  14. 吉藤幸朔, "특허법개설, 제13판" (2005), 대광서림
  15. "한-EU FTA 설명자료"[URL]
  16. "한-EU FTA 국문본"[URL]
  17. "한-EU FTA 가서명본"[URL]

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)