Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.author林珀如en_US
dc.contributor.authorLin, Po-Juen_US
dc.contributor.author王立達en_US
dc.contributor.authorWang, Li-Daren_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-12-12T01:24:26Z-
dc.date.available2014-12-12T01:24:26Z-
dc.date.issued2009en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://140.113.39.130/cdrfb3/record/nctu/#GT079468519en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11536/40997-
dc.description.abstract美國專利權耗盡原則為一經案例法長久發展而建立之法律原則,於專利物品之首次有權販賣後,耗盡原則限制專利權人繼續控制該物品的權利。美國聯邦最高法院於2008年之Quanta v. LGE案再次表達其對專利權耗盡原則的意見,由於這是聯邦最高法院睽違六十六年後再度審理專利耗盡案件,因此引發許多討論與期待。本文藉分析聯邦最高法院以及聯邦巡迴上訴法院相關判決,以探討專利權耗盡原則之內涵與發展,尤其是關於聯邦最高法院與聯邦巡迴上訴法院對於專利權人試圖透過施加售後限制,以控制買受人於專利物品之使用及再販賣等問題的見解。於Quanta案判決中,聯邦最高法院明白推翻聯邦巡迴上訴法院關於其耗盡原則不適用於方法專利的作法,並重申觸發耗盡原則之判斷標準僅在於是否發生有權販賣。雖然Quanta案判決並未直接對耗盡原則得否排除適用之問題表示意見,然經解析聯邦最高法院之Quanta案判決意見,本文認為聯邦最高法院已隱然表達不支持聯邦巡迴上訴法院關於耗盡原則得排除適用的作法。而就聯邦最高法院似乎允許,專利權人透過授權限制間接對買受人施加售後限制部分,本文則認為允許間接對買受人施加售後限制,將減損耗盡原則調和公共利益與專利權人私權之功能。即使允許間接對買受人施加售後限制,可施加之售後限制應該不能侵蝕耗盡原則背後之專利政策。分析Quanta案後下級法院之適用Quanta案判決方式,可看出下級法院試圖擴張解釋Quanta案判決意見以擴大耗盡原則之適用範圍。然而Quanta案判決意見對耗盡原則內涵之發展及影響仍有待更多法院判決的闡釋。zh_TW
dc.description.abstractThe doctrine of patent exhaustion is a well-established legal principle and has been created through a lengthy and complex body of case law. The patent exhaustion doctrine provides that an initial authorized sale of a patented article terminates all patent rights to that item. As a result, the purchaser of the patented article may use or resell the article free of control or restrictions imposed by the patent owner. The Supreme Court granted review in Quanta Computer v. LG Electronics and it arose many discussions and debates. It has been sixty-six years for the Supreme Court to address the patent exhaustion again since the High Court reviewed it last time. By looking into decisions made by the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit, the article explores the nature and evolvement of the patent exhaustion and especially focuses on the patentee’s exploiting its rights to control the use of patented articles the purchaser bought by imposing a post-sale restriction. The Supreme Court in Quanta expressly overruled the Federal Circuit’s method claim as a category could not apply to the exhaustion doctrine and reiterated that exhaustion is triggered only by a sale authorized by the patent holder. Although the Quanta court did not squarely address the underlying question whether the patent exhaustion doctrine is a default rule and can be discarded whenever patentees choose to impose explicit restrictions on authorized purchasers’ use or resale. After analyzing the Quanta’s opinion, the article argues that the Supreme Court impliedly declines to stand by the Federal Circuit on its opinion that exhaustion may be precluded. While examining the lower courts’ decisions in the wake of Quanta, it has been observed that the district courts’ intent to broaden its interpretation about Quanta decision for challenging the controversial decision made by the Federal Circuit, for example, the authorized foreign sale. However, it needs more courts’ decisions to observe how far the Quanta will reach.en_US
dc.language.isozh_TWen_US
dc.subject專利權耗盡zh_TW
dc.subject第一次銷售原則zh_TW
dc.subjectpatent exhaustionen_US
dc.subjectfirst sale doctrineen_US
dc.subjectQuantaen_US
dc.subjectlicensingen_US
dc.title美國專利權耗盡原則之研究:以聯邦最高法院Quanta v. LGE判決造成之衝擊與反思為中心zh_TW
dc.titleThe Doctrine of Patent Exhaustion: The Impact and Reflection of the Supreme Court’s Decision in Quanta v. LGEen_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.contributor.department管理學院科技法律學程zh_TW
Appears in Collections:Thesis


Files in This Item:

  1. 851901.pdf