本文選題：知識產權許可 + 合并救濟措施　； 參考：《中外法學》2017年01期

【摘要】：在經營者集中反壟斷制度中,與知識產權相關的救濟措施主要為剝離和許可。科技發展日新月異,經營者因知識產權而擁有的競爭優勢在瞬息萬變的市場中具有更多的不確定性,相較于剝離,知識產權許可能夠更好地適應這種不確定性。從歐美經驗看,能否采用知識產權許可作為救濟措施,主要應考量和平衡兩方面因素,其一為競爭與效率,其二為反壟斷的事前控制和事后控制。知識產權許可的有效性取決于許可價格、類型、范圍等因素。我國目前采用知識產權許可作為救濟措施的案件主要是跨國并購案,涉及的并購方多為在相關領域掌握核心技術的大型跨國公司。借鑒歐美經驗,合理、有效地運用知識產權許可救濟措施,對保證未來我國相關市場的有效競爭具有重要意義。
[Abstract]:In the centralized anti-monopoly system, the main relief measures related to intellectual property rights are divestiture and licensing. With the rapid development of science and technology, the competitive advantage of the operator because of intellectual property has more uncertainty in the rapidly changing market. Compared with stripping, intellectual property license can better adapt to this uncertainty. From the experience of Europe and America, it is necessary to consider and balance two factors, one is competition and efficiency, the other is pre-control and post-control of anti-monopoly. The validity of intellectual property licensing depends on the licensing price, type, scope and other factors. At present, the cases of adopting intellectual property license as relief measures are mainly transnational merger and acquisition cases, and the M & A parties involved are mostly large multinational corporations that master the core technology in relevant fields. It is of great significance to apply the remedy measures of intellectual property license reasonably and effectively for reference to the experience of Europe and the United States in order to ensure the effective competition of relevant markets in our country in the future.
【作者單位】： 中國人民大學法學院;
【分類號】：D923.4

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前1條

1 梁琪;;淺議知識產權保護的司法救濟措施[J];法制與社會;2014年01期

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 葛洪莉;論網絡購物糾紛及其解決[D];吉林大學;2008年

，

本文編號：1848570