1. 經建會推動網際網路法制修法工作

因應網際網路蓬勃發展，行政院經建會「網際網路法制發展計畫」推動小組於91年5月20日第三次工作會議，決議將以修正商標法、著作權法、電信法、電腦處理個人資料保護法及刑法中與網路相關事項之法律規定，為今年度主要推動事項。會議中同時就與電子商務活動有關之電子契約、認證機構的設立及網路消費者保護等課題進行討論。 

經建會為使網際網路發展更為快速建全，擬定今年網際網路法制推動架構將分為電子化政府、網路智財權之保障、消費者權益保障、網路金流規範、電子契約法制、新形態網路犯罪之規範及及網路市場發展等七大要項。 

經建會表示，「網際網路法制發展計畫」今年度的主要推動重點，將朝向推動健全網路交易環境的五大法案修法。其中商標法及電信法修正草案已列為立法院本屆會期優先法案，尚在主管機關研擬中的則包括著作權法修正草案、電腦處理個人資料保護法修正草案及刑法修正草案。 

對於網路交易消費者保護課題，經建會副主委何美玥表示，經建會已將消保法修正建議草案、交易定型化契約應記載或不得記載事項等相關研究建議，送請消保會參酌，作為研修消費者保護法等相關法規參考。消保會也指出，已將相關條文修正建議併入修法時程予以研議，同時於日前召開之「電子商務與消費者保護法制專案小組」會議，就定型化契約記載事項，內容妥適性及後續應如何推動加以研商。 

至於現在網路犯罪者透過網路服務進行不法行為，身處於房東角色的網路服務業者（ISP）的法律責任，應如何擔負。法務部表示，已於去年成立「電腦（網路）犯罪相關法規研究小組」，對現行刑法中關於電腦（網路）犯罪進行通盤檢討，現已初步研擬具體條文。而網路服務業者（ISP）的法律責任規範，屬於共犯情節者，可依據現行刑法處罰。 

另隱私權的保護，法務部指出，現行研擬中之「電腦處理個人資料保護法」修正案，將擴大適用範圍，不限於八大行業，ISP業者亦將列入適用範圍。 

行政院於八十九年八月通過「知識經濟發展方案」，其六大具體措施之一為「建構網際網路應用之基礎環境」，經建會依據此具體措施，提出「網際網路法制發展計畫」，透過全面檢討相關法制，促進網際網路市場之健全發展。經建會指出，「網際網路法制發展計畫」於去（九十）年推動完成電子簽章法及其三子法立法，並於今年四月開始實施，成為我國發展法制化電子商務環境的一項里程碑。

CEPD Carries Out Cyber Law Amendments

In view of the rapid developments in Internet-related areas, the “Cyber Law Development Project” Team of Council for Economic Planning & Development (CEPD) of the Executive Yuan resolved during its 3rd meeting on May 20, 2002 to place on its priority for this year amendments to the Trademark Law, Copyright Law, Telecommunications Law, Computer-Processed Personal Information Law, and legal provisions within the Criminal Code in relation to the Internet.  The meeting had also discussed issues related to electronic contracts and establishment of certification authorities in E-Commerce, as well as protection for E-Commerce consumers. 

In order to ensure developments of the Internet proceeds rapidly but soundly, the CEPD has set up a framework for amendment of cyber laws.  The framework will contain 7 principal aspects, being: electronic government, protection of cyber IP rights, consumer rights protection, regulation of online monetary transfers, electronic contract laws, regulation of new cyber crimes, and development of E-Commerce. 

The CEPD has indicated that the main focus of the “Cyber Law Development Project” for this year will be to amend the 5 major laws that will help to create a more sound cyber transaction environment.  Amongst them, the Trademark Law and the Telecommunications Law have been listed as priority amendments for the present session of the Legislative Yuan.  The competent authorities are currently still drafting amendments to the Copyright Law, Computer-Processed Personal Information Law, and the Criminal Code. 

On the issue of consumer protection for cyber transactions, Deputy Chair HO Mei-Yue of the CEPD indicated that the CEPD has already submitted recommendations such as draft amendments to the Consumer Protection Law, and matters that should or should not be stipulated in set-form contracts for consideration by the Consumer Protection Commission.  The Consumer Protection Commission has also indicated that it has tabled such recommendations for discussion during the Commission’s meetings on legislative amendments.  It has also recently held a “E-Commerce and Consumer Protection Law Taskforce” meeting, during which issues such as matters stipulated in set-form contracts, suitability of contents, and further steps to be taken are discussed. 

There is also the question of legal liability of ISPs, where cyber criminals utilize their Internet services for illegal activities.  The Ministry of Justice indicated that it had formed the “Computer (Internet) Crimes Legislation Taskforce” last year, which would conduct a comprehensive review of provisions in the currently applicable Criminal Code concerning cyber crimes.  A preliminary draft of provisions is currently being prepared, and where an ISP may be considered an accessory to cyber crime, sanctions can be imposed under the currently applicable Criminal Code. 

In respect of protection of privacy rights, the Ministry of Justice is currently drafting amendments to the Computer-Processed Personal Information Law.  This Law’s scope of application will be extended to include ISPs, instead of merely the 8 principal industries. 

In August 2000 the Executive Yuan had passed the “Knowledge Economy Development Plan”.  One of its 6 main substantive measures was “creating a fundamental environment for Internet applications”.  Accordingly the CEPD had produced the “Cyber Law Development Project”, which would help to ensure sound development of the Internet market through a comprehensive review of relevant laws.  According to CEPD, the “Cyber Law Development Project” had in 2001 completed enactment of the Electronic Signatures Law and its 3 subsidiary legislations, which would enter into force in April this year.  It was a significant landmark in Taiwan’s development of a regulated E-Commerce environment.

2. 專利法修正草案(行政院版本)

專利法係三十三年五月二十九日由國民政府制定公布，三十八年一月一日施行，歷經七次修正，現行本法係立法院於九十年十月四日完成修正審議，經　總統於九十年十月二十四日公布；另為配合我國加入世界貿易組織之「專利法」部分條文修正案，業於八十六年五月七日公布，行政院訂於本（九十一）年一月一日施行。 

緣經濟發展諮詢委員會總結報告，於所獲三百二十二項之共同意見中，將「健全智財權審查機制」一項列入，要求加強智慧財產權保障，加速建立創新環境及健全智慧財產權之審查機制，行政院爰於九十年十一月二十八日將「專利法」修正草案函送立法院審議，惟未能於立法院第四屆立法委員任期內完成審查，依立法院職權行使法第十三條規定，下屆不予繼續審議。復因我國於本(九十一)年一月一日成為世界貿易組織會員，本法又具有國際性，自應密切關注各國規定，並與國際規範相調和。是有感於國內企業發展、國際立法趨勢及提升專利審查品質之需要，現行專利制度有再修正之必要，行政院爰提出「專利法」修正草案，並於本(九十一)年五月十七日報請立法院審議。 

「專利法」修正草案(行政院版本)修正要點及其理由如次：

一、明確界定本法有關期間之計算，將現行條文中的「之日起」或「之次日起」用語，一致修正為「之日起」，並明定原則上始日不計算在內，僅於有特別規定時，如專利權存續等期間，即日起算。

二、修正專利新穎性、進步性及創作性之規定

三、刪除繳納規費作為取得申請日之要件，至於申請人未繳納規費或未繳足規費，且經通知補正仍未繳納者，申請案將不予受理。

四、有關說明書記載、補充、修正及更正等規定，酌作文字修正。

五、明確列舉不予專利之法定事由

六、整合提起異議與舉發事由而廢除異議程序，專利權一經核准即可繳費領證，自公告之日起取得專利權，爰刪除現行條文第四十五條核准審定後尚未領證前，專利專責機關對於不應給予專利得依職權撤銷之規定。

七、增訂「為販賣之要約」（offering for sale）亦為專利權效力所及，以符合WTO TRIPS第二十八條規定。

八、刪除核准後之專利權得分割之規定。緣專利核准後之分割，必須重新審查有無超出原核准之範圍，不但增加審查程序之複雜化，並且造成權利範圍之變動，影響第三人瞭解核准專利範圍之內容。

九、增訂舉發審查程序規定。緣舉發審查程序依現行規定，原係準用異議有關之規定，本次修正已廢除異議程序，舉發之審查無法準用異議程序之條文，爰另為規定。

十、刪除專利物品之標示及刑罰規定。緣專利物品應如何標示，其標示是否確實，有無欺騙行為或致損害於他人，刑法、公平交易法及民法等規範已足資適用，爰刪除現行條文第八十三條及第一百三十條規定。

十一、參考國外立法例之獎勵規定，修正專利權人專利年費之減免規定，以有效激勵自然人、學校及中小企業利用其發明專利權，提升我國科技產業之創新發展。

十二、增訂涉侵權訴訟之舉發案，專利專責機關得優先審查之規定。

十三、新型專利改採形式審查制。緣世界主要國家專利審查制度，均將技術層次較低之新型專利，捨棄實體要件審查制，改採形式審查，以達到早期賦予權利之需求。

十四、增訂新型專利技術報告。由於新型專利改採形式審查，未對其新穎性及進步性進行實質審查，導致新型專利權之權利內容有相當之不安定性及不確定性，爰參考外國立法例，引進新型專利技術報告制度，任何人於新型專利公告後均可向專利專責機關申請新型專利技術報告。另為防止新型專利權人利用此制而濫用行使權利，對第三人技術利用及研發帶來相當大之危害，爰參考外國立法例，明訂新型專利權人於行使權利前，應提示由專利專責機關所作成之新型專利技術報告。

十五、廢除新型專利及新式樣專利之刑罰規定。緣現行專利法業將侵害發明專利權除罪化，卻仍維持侵害新型及新式樣專利之刑事責任，屢遭批評，咸認侵害技術層次較高之發明專利無刑事責任，侵害技術層次較低之新型或新式樣專利，反科以刑事責任，顯有輕重失衡之不合理情況。再以本次修正，新型專利已改採形式審查，對於僅經形式審查之新型專利權，是否合於取得專利權之實質條件，並不確定，如仍採取刑事罰，以國人習慣以刑逼民之作法，易對被告造成無法彌補之傷害，爰將侵害新型及新式樣專利權，均予廢除刑罰，完全回歸民事解決，以解決現行專利法輕重失衡體例不一之狀況，並避免將來專利權人動輒發動刑事程序影響企業之發展。

十六、增訂過渡條款。本次修正重點包括廢除異議程序、新型專利改採形式審查及導入新型專利技術報告等，皆屬專利制度重大變革，爰增訂適用新舊法律過渡期間規定。

十七、明定本專利法修正案之施行日期由行政院定之。

Draft Amendments to Patent Law (Executive Yuan Version)

The Patent Law was promulgated by the National Government on May 29, 1944, and entered into force on January 1, 1949.  Following 7 amendments, the currently applicable Patent Law was reviewed by October 4, 2001 and promulgated by order of the President on October 24, 2001.  Further, partial amendments for the purposes of Taiwan’s accession to the WTO was promulgated on May 7, 1997, and had entered into force on January 1, 2002. 

Amongst the 322 joint resolutions achieved by the Economic Development Advisory Board (EDAC), “a sound intellectual property right examination mechanism” had been one of them.  This resolution demanded that protection for intellectual property rights be strengthened, and establishment of an innovations-friendly environment and creation of a sound IPR examination system be accelerated.  The Executive Yuan had submitted draft amendments to the Patent Law for review by the Legislative Yuan on November 28, 2001, but the Legislative Yuan was unable to complete its review during the prevalent term of its members.  Pursuant to Article 13 of the Legislative Yuan Exercise of Powers Law, the amendments could not continue to be reviewed in the subsequent session.  As Taiwan had become a member of the WTO on January 1, 2002 and the Patent Law is international in character, it is necessary to follow regulations adopted by other countries closely and to be consistent with them.  Therefore there is a need to revise the present Patent Law system, in light of development of domestic businesses, international legislative trends, and enhancement of patent examination quality.  Accordingly the Executive Yuan had prepared draft amendments to the Patent Law, and submitted the same to the Legislative Yuan for review on May 17, 2002. 

The main points in and reasons for draft amendments to the Patent Law (Executive Yuan version) are as follows:

1.Clearly stipulate how relevant periods under this Law are to be calculated, and amending all “as of the date of” and “as of the following date” in the Law to “as of the date of”.  It is also stipulated that in principle the first day will not be included, except where specific provisions apply; for example, the period of subsistence of patent right will commence from the first day.

2.Revise provisions in relation to patent originality, progressive step, and inventiveness.

3.Abolish requirement that payment of patent fees is prerequisite to obtaining the patent filing date.  Where the applicant has not paid the fees or has not done so in full, and has failed to make payment upon reminder, the application will not be accepted.

4.Changes are made to the text of provisions in respect of description, supplementation, revision and amendment of claims.

5.Clearly stipulate statutory reasons for not granting a patent.

6.Bases for filing an objection or petition are integrated, so that the objections procedure is abolished. Once a patent application is approved, the applicant will be able to pay the fees and receive the certificate, and will enjoy the patent right as of the gazetted date.  Therefore Article 45 of the present Law is deleted, which presently provides that after the approval but prior to receiving the certificate, the patent authorities have the discretion by law to revoke patents that should not have been granted.

7.Insert provision that an “offering for sale” is also within the scope of a patent, so as to comply with Article 28 of the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement.

8.Delete provision that a patent right may be divided after approval.  As division of patents after approval require re-examination of whether it exceeds the scope of the original patent, it complicates the examination procedures and result in changes to the patent scope, which affects third parties’ understanding of the scope of the approved patent.

9.Insert provisions concerning petition for examination.  Under the existing Law, provisions in relation to objections apply mutatis mutandis to petition examinations.  As the present amendments will abolish the objection procedure, it is no longer appropriate to adopt those provisions in relation to petition examinations.  Therefore it is necessary to insert separate provisions.

10.  Delete provisions in relation to labeling of patented goods and relevant penalties.  Since the Criminal Code, Fair Trade Law and the Civil Code already contain sufficient provisions in relation to how patented goods should be labeled, whether such labels are accurate, and whether there are deceptive acts or acts likely to cause detriment to others, it is appropriate to delete Articles 83 and 130 of the present Patent Law.

11.  Based on foreign provisions for statutory incentives, the amendments revise provisions in relation to reduction of patent annual fees, so as to effectively encourage natural persons, schools and small to medium businesses to utilize their invention patents and boost innovative developments in Taiwan’s technology industries.

12.  Insert provisions that the patent authorities may first examine petitions in infringement litigation.

13.  New utility model patents will adopt an examination as to form system.  Patent systems in major countries around the world usually adopt an examination as to form system, rather than substantive examination system, in respect of new utility model patents that are technologically less sophisticated.  This enables patents to be granted earlier.

14.  Insert provisions for new utility model patent technical report.  As new utility models will adopt an examination as to form system, rather than conducting substantive examinations as to their originality and inventive step, there will be substantial instability and uncertainty in relation to contents of new utility model patents.  Therefore, based on foreign statutory examples, these amendments will introduce a utility model patent technical report system, where anyone may apply to the patent authorities for such a technical report once the new utility model patent is gazetted.  Further, in order to prevent new utility model patent owners from abusing their rights under this system and inhibiting third parties’ use of the technology and their research and development, it will be provided that prior to exercising their rights, the new utility model patent owner must produce a copy of the patent technical report issued by the patent authorities.

15.  Abolish criminal sanctions for new utility model and new design patents.  The present Patent Law has frequently been criticized for decriminalizing infringements of invention patents, but retaining criminalization of new utility model and new design patents.  It is generally thought to be unbalanced and irrational to impose criminal liability for infringements of new utility model or new design patents, which are lower in terms of technical expertise, while removing criminal liability for infringements of invention patents.  Further, as these amendments will adopt an examination as to form system in respect of new utility model patents, it will be uncertain whether the patent actually possesses all substantive criteria for being granted the patent.  If criminal sanctions were imposed, given Taiwanese businesses’ tendency to use criminal sanctions to exert pressure on opponents, they might result in irreparable damage to defendants.  Therefore criminal liability for infringements of new utility model and new design patents has now been abolished, so as to eliminate the existing imbalance of penalties and avoid the misuse of criminal proceedings in inhibiting commercial development.

16.  Insert transitional provisions.  Changes in these amendments, such as abolishment of the objection procedures, adoption of examination as to form for new utility model patents, and introduction of new utility model technical reports, are all major changes to the patent system, and therefore it is appropriate to insert transitional provisions

17.  Stipulate that commencement date of the Patent Law amendments should be determined by the Executive Yuan.

3. 專利師法草案(行政院版本)

行政院於本(九十一)年五月十七日報請立法院審議專利師法草案，該草案計分五章，四十二條。緣依九十年八月經濟發展諮詢委員會議有關加強智財權保障，加速建立創新環境，儘速通過專利師法草案之共同意見，復依專利法第十二條第四項「專利師之資格及管理，另以法律定之；法律未制定前，依專利代理人規則辦理。」之規定，經濟部智慧財產局爰參照其他專門職業及技術人員管理法律，擬具「專利師法」草案。 

專利師法草案(行政院版本)其要點如次：

一、專利師之積極、消極資格條件及請領專利師證書之程序。

二、專利師之職前訓練、執業登錄、執業方式、受委託業務範圍及執業應遵行事項。

三、專利師非加入專利師公會，不得執行業務。

四、專利師公會之組織及人民團體主管機關對公會之指導及監督事項。

五、明定專利師應付懲戒事由、懲戒程序、懲戒處分方式、懲戒委員會組織及未具專利師資格者擅自執業之處罰。

六、為建立國家專門職業及技術人員考選制度，及顧及本法施行前依「專利代理人規則」領有專利代理人證書者之工作權，明定專利代理人得繼續辦理專利代理業務及其相關管理事項。

Draft Patent Agent Law (Executive Yuan Version)

On May 17, 2002 the Executive Yuan had submitted the draft Patent Agent Law for review by the Legislative Yuan.  The said draft consists of 5 chapters and 42 articles, and arose from resolution by the August 2001 EDAC to strengthen IPR protection, accelerate creation of innovative environment, and accelerate enactment of the Patent Agent Law.  Therefore, pursuant to Paragraph 4, Article 12 of the Patent Law, which provides that “qualifications and regulation of patent agents should be separately determined by law; prior to such enactment, the Patent Agent Regulations shall apply.”  Based on regulations applicable to other professional and technical personnel, the IPO has prepared the draft Patent Agent Law. 

Main elements of the draft Patent Agent Law (Executive Yuan Version) are as follows:

1.Active and passive qualifications for patent agents, and procedures for application for patent agent certificate.

2.Professional training, registration, practice, scope of business and business regulations applicable to patent agents.

3.Patent agents may not engage in business activity without entering a patent agent association.

4.Organization of patent agent associations, and matters in which competent authorities for public associations shall instruct and supervise such associations.

5.Stipulate reasons for sanctioning of patent agents, sanction procedures, sanction means, organization of sanctions committee, and sanctioning of persons who practice without holding a patent agent certificate.

6.In order to establish an examination system for national professional and technical personnel, and in order to protect the work rights of persons who had previously been granted a patent agent certificate pursuant to the Patent Agent Regulations, it is stipulated that such patent agents may continue to handle patent agency business.  Other relevant matters are also stipulated.