八卷二十一期 891116

本 期 提 要HEADLINES

1.我國與法國加強保護智財權合作

Taiwan and France Strengthen IPR Protection
2.商標法部分條文修正草案要點

Trademark Law Amendment Submitted to 
Legislative Yuan
3.著作權法部分條文修正草案要點

Copyright Law Amendment Submitted to 
Legislative Yuan
4.智慧局修正商標規費收費準則

Increased Trademark Fees Approved

法 規 報 導

Laws and Regulations   

1.我國與法國加強保護智財權合作

經濟部智慧財產局局長陳明邦於本(八十九)年十月間與法國工業智慧財產局長漢嘉赫進行雙邊定期諮商,今年會談以酒類商標的認證為重點,另外也就生物及航太科技專利保護,交換意見。
陳局長於諮商會議後指出,雙方決定透過諮商,建立一套完整的酒類商標認證制度,並同意相互提供各種商標品牌的原始資料,以正確資訊保護廠商的形象,同時保護台灣消費者的權益。
此外,雙方也同意在生物科技方面,如遺傳科技、基因改造工程、酵母菌等各種微生物、疫苗、生物複製科技等的發明,都列入雙邊專利保護範圍。
陳局長強調,加強對先進國家各種科技商標專利的保護,可以增加外國廠商對台灣市場及業者的信賴,增進彼此的了解,有助於科技合作與移轉,促進台灣產業的昇級。他相信,與法國加強智慧財產保護的互動,保護合法,杜絕非法,雙方工業合作將更趨於具體而紮實。
(本篇轉載並節錄自中央社記者鄒明智巴黎八十九年十月二十六日新聞稿)

1.Taiwan and France Strengthen IPR Protection

Intellectual Property Office Director General Chen Ming-bang and Frances National Institute of Intellectual Property Director Daniel Hangard held an annual bilateral consultation in October 2000. This years meeting focused on alcohol beverage trademarks and the protection of microorganism and aerospace patents.
The meeting resulted in a decision to establish a comprehensive system for the recognition of alcohol beverage trademarks. The two countries also agreed to provide each other with source materials for trademarked products in order that accurate information can be used to protect the image of producers as well as protect the rights of Taiwan consumers.
In addition, the two sides agreed that biotechnology inventions would receive patent protection. Examples of such inventions included developments in the fields of genetics, gene modification, vaccines, cloning, and yeast fungi and other types of microorganisms. 
Chen emphasized that strengthening the protection of trademarks and patents owned by technology-related companies from developed countries can increase the confidence those companies have in working with Taiwan companies and in Taiwan overall. He also noted that increased mutual understanding facilitates economic cooperation and technology transfer, and can therefore help upgrading Taiwan industry. Chen predicted that taking steps to improve the protection of French-owned intellectual property would enhance business ties between the two countries.

2.商標法部分條文修正草案要點

商標法於十九年五月六日制定公布,自二十年一月一日施行以來,歷經九次修正,茲配合行政程序法定於九十年一月一日施行,行政院並訂定「行政程序法推動計畫」,飭令各行政機關全面檢視現行法規之行政程序為必要之調整。是凡涉及人民權利義務之事項者,依中央法規標準法第五條第二款規定,應以法律定之;而法律授權以法規命令限制人民權利或課以人民義務或規定其他重要事項者,其授權之目的、內容及範圍應具體明確;法律用語宜予正確區分等,均為檢視現行法規是否符合行政程序法之重要原則,為因應行政程序法之施行,並為加入世界貿易組織(WTO),增訂關於邊境管制措施之規定。經濟部智慧財產局爰擬具「商標法」部分條文修正草案,修正計十六條。行政院除於本(八十九)年十一月八日審議通過該草案,並已於同年月十日函請立法院審議。
茲將前揭「商標法」部分條文修正草案要點,敘述如次:
(1)為縮短延展註冊申請之審查程序所需時間,提高行政效能,廢除延展申請之實體審查。(修正條文第二十五條)
(2)就合法之行政處分之失效,如註冊後不當使用註冊商標或標章,或審定後不當使用審定商標,使其效力失效之行政處分改以「廢止」處分稱之。
(修正條文第三十一條、第四十二條、第四十四條及第七十六條)
(3)就違法之行政處分之失效,如以侵害他人之著作權、新式樣專利權或其他權利而獲准註冊者,以及註冊有違反本法之規定者,均修正以「撤銷」處分稱之。(修正條文第三十一條之一及第五十二條)
(4)行政程序法就行政處分失效之時點已有規定,故商標專用權消滅之時點已無特別規定之必要,爰刪除現行條文第三十三條。
(5)明定侵害商標專用權物品之邊境管制措施:商標專用權人對侵害其商標專用權之物品,得申請海關先予查扣之規定與程序、海關應廢止查扣與依申請返還保證金之法定事由及授權訂定實施辦法。(修正條文第六十一條之一至第六十一條之四)
(6)關於適用新舊法律之基準點,涉及人民權益甚鉅,應以法律定之,爰由本法施行細則移列本法規定之。(修正條文第七十七條之一)
(7)為期本次修正與八十六年五月七日部分修正條文之施行日期得以明確,爰明定各次修正之施行日期。(修正條文第七十九條)

2.Trademark Law Amendment Submitted to Legislative Yuan

On 10 November 2000, an amendment affecting 16 articles of the Trademark Law was submitted by the Executive Yuan to the Legislative Yuan. The amendment is intended to ensure that the provisions of the Trademark Law are in conformance with the Law of Administrative Procedure, which is scheduled to be enforced on 1 January 2001. The Executive Yuan has ordered that all administrative agencies review the laws they enforce to make sure that the administrative procedures of these laws are in conformance with the requirements of the Law of Administrative Procedure. Moreover, according to the Central Laws and Regulations Standards Law, procedures which result in decisions infringing on the rights and duties of individuals must be set forth in law. In addition, if a law provides delegation through a regulation restricting individual rights, imposing duties on individuals, or regulating other significant matters, the purpose, contents, and scope of the delegation must be clearly stated.
The proposed amendment to the Trademark Law is also intended to ensure that Taiwans border control measures are in accordance with international norms in order to facilitate Taiwans accession to the World Trade Organization.
The principle contents of the amendment are as follows:
a.eliminating the requirement that trademark holders undergo a substantive examination process to renew trademarks (Article 25); 
b.Adopting the term cancellation* to describe the invalidation of a trademark registration where such cancellation is made in an administration proceeding following a legal registration of a trademark. Examples of such cancellation would be when a trademark or an approved trademark design has not been put into use. (Articles 31, 42, 44 and 76);
c.Adopting the term revocation* to describe the invalidation of a trademark registration where an administration proceeding determines the registration of the trademark violated the law. Examples of such revocation would be when a trademark was registered which infringed upon a copyright, a new design patent, or another right of a person. (Articles 31bis and 52);
d.Deleting Article 33 because the Law of Administrative Procedure provides at what date a right shall be considered invalid when a cancellation decision is made. Thus, there is no need for a specific provision in the Trademark Law governing the same situation. 
e.Setting forth the procedures under which trademark owners may demand that Customs suspend the release of infringing goods. The Customs must issue regulations governing the suspension of seizure and return of bonds (Article 61bis-61quarto);
f.Transferring provisions regarding the standards for the applicability of the amended or the prior law from the Enforcement Rules to the Trademark Law based on the consideration that substantial effects on individual rights must be governed in laws and not supporting regulations (Article 77bis);
g.Clarifying the dates of enforcement of this amendment and the amendment of 7 May 1997 (Article 79).

3.著作權法部分條文修正草案要點

著作權法於十七年五月十四日制定公布,歷經九次修正,茲行政程序法於八十八年二月三日經 總統明令公布,並定於九十年一月一日施行,凡涉及人民權利義務之事項者,依中央法規標準法第五條第二款規定,應以法律定之;而法律授權以法規命令限制人民權利或課以人民義務或規定其他重要事項者,其授權之目的、內容及範圍應具體明確;法律用語宜予正確區分等,經濟部智慧財產局爰擬具「著作權法」第二條、第七十一條、第九十條之一修正草案,計修正三條。行政院除於本(八十九)年十一月八日審議通過該草案,並已於同年月十日函請立法院審議。
茲將前揭「著作權法」部分條文修正草案要點,敘述如次:
其修正要點如次:
一、原內政部主管之著作權相關業務已移撥經濟部主政,爰配合修正主管機關之歸屬。(修正條文第二條)
二、配合行政程序法用語,就合法行政處分之失效,如依著作權法第六十九條取得音樂著作強制授權之許可後,未依主管機關許可之方式利用著作者,欲使其效力失效之行政處分應以﹁廢止﹂稱之;就違法行政處分之失效,如強制授權許可後,發現其申請有虛偽情事者,欲使其效力失效之行政處分則應以﹁撤銷﹂稱之,爰予修正。(修正條文第七十一條)
三、現行條文第九十條之一所稱﹁撤銷查扣﹂,依其規範內容之性質而論,係指海關基於著作權人或製版權人之申請,對輸入或輸出侵害其著作權或製版權之物予以查扣後,另基於法定事由之發生,而以另一行政處分使原先合法查扣之效力終止,應屬﹁廢止﹂之概念,爰配合修正;另參照TRIPs第五十二條及第五十四條之規定,新增第九十條之一第三項明定海關受理著作權人或製版權人查扣之申請及實施查扣之通知義務。(修正條文第九十條之一)

3.Copyright Law Amendment Submitted to Legislative Yuan


On 10 November 2000, an amendment affecting three articles of the Copyright Law was submitted by the Executive Yuan to the Legislative Yuan. The amendment is intended to ensure that the provisions of the Trademark Law are in conformance with the Law of Administrative Procedure, which is scheduled to be enforced on 1 January 2001. The Executive Yuan has ordered that all administrative agencies review the laws they enforce to make sure that the administrative procedures of these laws are in conformance with the requirements of the Law of Administrative Procedure. Moreover, according to the Central Laws and Regulations Standards Law, procedures which result in decisions infringing on the rights and duties of individuals must be set forth in law. In addition, if a law provides delegation through a regulation restricting individual rights, imposing duties on individuals, or regulating other significant matters, the purpose, contents, and scope of the delegation must be clearly stated.
The principle contents of the amendment are as follows:
a.Revising Article 2 to reflect that the agency in charge of the Law is the Ministry of Economic Affairs. The law had provided that the agency in charge was the Ministry of the Interior;
b.Revising Article 71 in order to conform to terminology used in the Law of Administrative Procedure. The term cancellation* is used to describe the invalidation of a right when such cancellation is made in an administration proceeding following a legal grant of a right, such as the cancellation of a compulsory license of a musical right according to Article 69 when the work is not exploited in the manner approved by the competent authority. The term revocation* is used to describe the invalidation of a right when an administration proceeding determines the application for the right violated the law. An example is when it was discovered that an applicant had committed forgery in an application for a compulsory license. 
c.Revising Article 90bis to use the term cancellation* in place of the term revocation* to describe the procedure under which a suspension of release order can be lifted. This procedure refers to the ability of copyright owners and plate rights owners to file applications with Customs to suspend the release of goods that the copyright and plate rights owners believe infringe their rights. In addition, paragraph 3 of Article 90bis is revised to require notification of the importer or exporter when applications for suspensions of release orders are filed and when orders are enforced. This revision is intended to conform to Articles 52 and 54 of TRIPs.



行 政 報 導
Administrative Measures and Enforcement

4.智慧局修正商標規費收費準則

商標規費收費準則(以下簡稱本準則)自八十三年七月一日發布施行以來,均未隨我國物價指數上升而作合理之調整,目前商標各項收費普遍較世界主要國家為低廉,且不足支應行政成本,仍由政府編列預算補貼。基於商標專用權係特定權利之取得,且依財政部八十六年一月七日台財庫字第八五一八八八二六八號之函示,各機關收取之規費應落實「使用者、受益者付費」之公平原則,為合理反映公務審查成本及平衡政府財政收支,經核算商標審查直、間接成本,並參酌近年來我國物價指數變動情形及世界主要國家之收費標準後,經濟部智慧財產局爰修正本準則,調整各項商標規費,調升幅度自百分之二十至百分之六十之間。修正後商標規費收費準則於本(89)年11月1日公告,並於第3條第2項明定修正條文自90年1月1日施行。

4.Increased Trademark Fees Approved

The Intellectual Property Office recently increased trademark fees to become effective on January 1, 2001. The increase in fees ranges from 12% to 60%. The new fee system is distinguished by a new three-tiered system for calculating application fees based on the number of items listed in a trademark registration application.
Trademark fees have not been increased since 1 July 1994 and have not kept pace with inflation. The current trademark fees are lower than those in the major countries and are insufficient to pay administrative costs, thus forcing the IPO to rely on government subsidies to handle trademark matters. The decision to increase fees is also based on considerations that trademarks are special rights awarded by the government and that the government has adopted a general policy of requiring users to pay for services.