ªk¡@³W¡@³ø¡@¾É
Laws and
Regulations
1¡B¤½¥·|¼f²z§Þ³N±ÂÅv¨óij®×¥ó³B²zì«h
ªñ¦~¨ÓÀHµÛ¬ì§Þµo®i»P¶i¨B¡A°ê»Ú©Ê§Þ³N¥æ©ö¤Î§Þ³N±ÂÅv¤§ªÈ¯É®×¥ó¥çÀH¤§¼W¥[¡A¦æ¬F°|¤½¥¥æ©ö©eû·|¬°³B²z¦³Ãö§Þ³N±ÂÅv¨óij®×¥ó¤§ª§Ä³¡A¬¸°Ñ¦Ò¸Ó·|¥H©¹¬ÛÃö®×¨Ò¤§¸gÅç¡A¤Î§Ú°ê¥Ø«e²£·~µo®i¤§²{ªp¡A¨Ã°Ñ°u¬ü°ê¡B¤é¥»¤Î¼Ú·ù¦³Ãö§Þ³N±ÂÅv¤§¬ÛÃö³W©w¡A©ó¤E¤Q¦~¤@¤ë¤Q¤K¤é²Ä¥|¤K¤@¦¸©eû·|ij¨Mij³q¹L¡u¦æ¬F°|¤½¥¥æ©ö©eû·|¼f²z§Þ³N±ÂÅv¨óij®×¥ó³B²zì«h¡v¡A°£´¦¥Ü¸Ó·|¼f²z§Þ³N±ÂÅv¨óij®×¥ó¤§¾A¥Î½d³ò¡B°ò¥»ì«h¡B¼f¬d¤ÀªR¨BÆJ¤Î¼f°u¨Æ¶µº[§Þ³N±ÂÅv¨óij¤º®e±`¨£¤§¦æ¬°Ãþ«¬¡C
1.Principles for Handling of Technology Licensing Cases
Along with the advancement of technology, international technology trading and disputes over licensing have also increased. As an aid to handling disputes, the Executive Yuan's Fair Trade Commission has reviewed relevant past cases with reference to the current state of the domestic economy, and has also reviewed regulations governing technology licensing in the US, Japan, and the EU. The "Principles for Handling Technology Licensing Cases" were passed at the 481st Commission meeting on 18 January 2001. Those principles explain the scope of FTC case handling, the criteria used, steps in the evaluation process, and aspects of cases relevant to the evaluation. The principles also list commonly occuring features of technology licensing agreements.¡@
¦æ¡@¬F¡@³ø¡@¾É
Administrative
Measures and Enforcement
2¡B´¼¼z§½³]¸m¾n¤¤¥¿¾÷³õ¤Î°ò¶©µÛ§@Åv¤å¥ó®ÖÅ礤¤ß
¸gÀÙ³¡´¼¼z°]²£§½¬°¿ì²z®ÖÅçµÛ§@Åv¤å¥ó·~°È¡A¯S³]¸m¸Ó§½¾n¤¤¥¿¾÷³õ¤Î°ò¶©®ÖÅ礤¤ß¡]¥H¤U²ºÙ®ÖÅ礤¤ß¡^¡A¨Ã©ó¤é«eq©w¸Ó§½¾n¤¤¥¿¾÷³õ¤Î°ò¶©®ÖÅ礤¤ß³]¸m¤ÎºÞ²znÂI¡C«e´¦®ÖÅ礤¤ßÁõÄݸӧ½µÛ§@Åv²Õ¡A¿ì²z¿é¥XµøÅ¥µÛ§@¡]VHS¡BVCD¡BDVD¡BCDROM¡BLD¡^¤Î¥N¤uÅJ®g°Û¤ù¡]CD¡^µÛ§@Åv¤å¥ó®ÖÅç¨Æ¶µ¡A¤ÎÃö©ó«e´Ú®ÖÅç·~°È¤§¿Ô¸ßªA°È¡B¥Ó½Ð®Ñªí´£¨Ñµ¥¨Æ¶µ¡C
2.IPO Establishes Keelung, CKS Airport Copyright Document Inspection Centers
The Intellectual Property Office recently established border inspection centers at Keelung and the CKS international airport in order to carry out procedures under the "Copyright Document Inspection Procedures for Export of Audiovisual Works and OEM Audio CDs". Regulations regarding the establishment and operation of these two in
spection centers were also implemented. The inspection centers are under the jurisdiction of the IPO's Copyright Department and handle service inquiries and applications for inspections of exports of audiovisual copyrighted works (VHS, VCD, DVD, CDROM, and LD) and OEM audio CDs. The inspection centers are also charged with carrying out the inspections of exports of these products.
¡u¤Gºû±ø½X±M§Qªí³æ¦Û°Ê¿é¤J¨t²Î¡v¦w¸Ëµ{¦¡Åwªï¯Á¨ú
¸gÀÙ³¡´¼¼z°]²£§½©ó¤é«eªí¥Ü¡A¦U¬É¦p±ý¯Á¨ú¡u¤Gºû±ø½X±M§Qªí³æ¦Û°Ê¿é¤J¨t²Î¡v¦w¸Ëµ{¦¡¡A°£¥i³w¬¢¸Ó§½¸ê°T«ÇªLùÚ¦p¤p©j¡]TEL¡G0227380007¤À¾÷¡G1103
¡^¡F¥ç¥iª½±µ¦Ü¸Ó§½ºô¯¸¤§¡§«K¥ÁªA°È/¥Ó½Ðªí®æ¡]http¡G//www.moeaipo.gov.tw/sub5/sub531.htm¡^¡¨³sµ²¤U¸ü¦w¸Ëµ{¦¡¡F¥t¥~¤¤¤å³y¦r¦w¸Ëµ{¦¡¥ç¤w¸m©ó¸Ó§½ºô¯¸¡A¦p¦³»ÝnªÌ¥ç¥i¦Û¦æ¤U¸ü¦w¸Ë¨Ï¥Î¡A¨Ã¥i¤@¨Ö¤U¸ü½s½Xªí¡AÚ«K¬d¸ß°Ñ¦Ò¡C
2D Bar Code Patent Form Available for Downloading
The Intellectual Property Office of the MOEA has announced that the software for their "2D code automatic application system" is available for downloading. Interested parties may contact Mi
ss Lin Herngru at the Information Office (02
27380007. ext. 1103), or visit the IPO website (http¡G/www.moeaipo.gov.tw/sub5/sub531.htm).
Chinese "createacharacter" software is also available for downloading from the site, and the code table is available for reference.
4¡B§Ú°êÀÀ¬ãµo±M§Q¹q¤l¥Ó½Ð¨t²Î
¸gÀÙ³¡´¼¼z°]²£§½©ó¤é«e«ü¥X¡A¬°´Á§Ú°ê±M§Q¼f¬d§Þ³Nº[¦æ¬F§@·~§ó¦³®Ä²v¡AÀ³¥i°Ñ¦Ò¬ü°ê±M§Q¹q¤l¥Ó½Ð¤Î¬d¸ß¨t²Î¡A¤ÎÁú°ê±M§Q¹q¤l¤Æ¥Ó½Ð¤Î¦æ¬F¨t²Î¡A¬ãµo§Ú°ê±M§Q¹q¤l¥Ó½Ð¨t²Î¤§¥i¯à©Ê¡C
½t¬ü°ê±M§Q°Ó¼Ð§½¡]USPTO¡^¥þ¤O±À°Ê±M§Q¹q¤l¥Ó½Ð¨t²Î¤Î¬d¸ß¨t²Î(PAIR¤ÎEFS)·~°È¡A±M§Q¥Ó½Ð¤H¥i¸g¥Ñºô»Úºô¸ô¨ì±M§Q¹q¤l·~°È¤¤¤ß¨t²Î¥Ó½Ðµù¥U¡A¡C¸Ó¨t²Î´£¨Ñ¥i§K¶O¤U¸ü¤§³nÅé¡A¨Ã¥ipºâ³W¶O¡A¤Î¥i½T»{¥Ó½Ð¤º®e¥B¤©¥[±K«á§Y¶Ç°e¥Ó½Ð®×¦ÜUSPTO¤§¹q¤l¶l¥ó«Ç¡C¶à«á¡A¥Ó½Ð¤H¨Ã¥i¬d¸ß¬ÛÃö¥Ó½Ð®×¿ì²z¬yµ{¤Î¶i«×¡C³z¹L¦¹¨t²Î½T¥i¹F§Ö³t¥B¦w¥þ©Ê°ª¤§¥Ø¼Ð¡C
¦ÓÁú°ê¦Û¤@¤E¤E¤E¦~¤@¤ë¤G¤é¶}©l±À¦æ¹q¤l¤Æ¥Ó½Ð¤Î¦æ¬F¨t²Î (KIPONET)¡A¬°µo®i¦¹¨t²Î¡AÁú°ê¦b¹L¥h¤T¦~¤º§ë¤J¥|¡B¤C¢¯¢¯¤H/¤ë¡A¤Î¤G¡B¤»¢¯¢¯¸U¬ü¤¸¡A¸Ó¨t²Î«Y«Ø¸m¦b¤º¥~ºô°ì°ò¦¤U¡A¹B¥Î·s¬ì§Þ¦p¼Æ¦ìñ³¹¤Î¸ê®ÆÁôÂç@¬°¦w¥þ±±ºÞ¡A¥H¥Ø¼Ð¾É¦V¤§¸ê®Æ®w³]p§@¬°²§°Êª©¥»ºÞ²z¡A¥H¸ê®ÆÜÀx§@¬°³B²zµ{§Ç¤ÀªR¡C¦b§ïµ½¼f¬d«~½è¤è±¡AKIPONET¶i¥Î³Õ¤h¯Å¼f¬d©x¼f²z¥Íª«¬ì§Þµ¥·s¶i§Þ³N¡B¥[±j¼f¬d©x°V½m¡Bµo®i¹q¸£»²§UÀ˯Á¨t²Î¡C¼f®×t²ü¶q¤]¦]¼W¥[¥~³¡«e®×À˯Á¦Ó½w©M¡A¼f¬d¤§§Þ³N¤À³¥±q¤@¤E¤E¤C¦~¤§¤G¢¯¤»Ãþ°¨ì¤@¤E¤E¤K¦~¤§¤@¤C¤@Ãþ¡A´Á¯à´£°ª¼f¬d«~½è¡C
Taiwan Considers Development of EFS for Patents
The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) of the MOEA recently pointed out that for greater efficiency in patent examination and administrative procedures, a study should be made of the US system for electronic patent application and information retrieval, as well as a similar system in Korea, to ascertain the feasibility of setting up such a system in Taiwan.
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has been promoting use of its electronic filing system (EFS) and patent information retrieval system (PAIR). Those wishing to file a patent can apply for registration over the Internet through the use of free downloadable software, which will assist them in calculating fees, checking the completeness of the application, and encrypting the application for submission to the USPTO. The applicant may then continue to retrieve information on the progress of the examination. The system allows for both speed and security in electronic filing of patents.
On 2 January 1999, Korea began using its own Patent electronic filing and administration system, or "KIPONET." A total of 4,700 man/months and US$26 million were invested in developing the intraand extranetbased system. Security feat
ures include use of electronic signatures and information hiding. Objectoriented databases and data warehousing are used for analysis and monitoring changes. The quality of review procedures has been enhanced through
employing examiners with advanced degrees relevant to new technology patents in areas such as biotechnology. Training of examiners has been improved and computerassisted archive search systems developed. Case burdens have been reduced through implementing external examination of prior art, and
technology examination categories have been re duced from 206 in 1997 to 171 as of 1998, which is expected to further enhance the quality of examination procedures.
5¡B¤@¤E¤E¤E¦~§Ú°ê¦V¬ü¡B¤é¡B¼Ú¥Ó½Ð±M§Qº[®Öã¥ó¼Æ±¡§Î
¯÷¾Ú¸gÀÙ³¡´¼¼z°]²£§½·J¾ã¤§¸ê®ÆÅã¥Ü¡A1999¦~°ê¤H¦V¬ü°ê¥Ó½Ð±M§Q®×¥óp11392¥ó¡A¸û1998¦~®×¥ó¼Æ7627¥ó¡A¼W¥[49.36%¡A±Æ¦W²Ä¥|¡C¦Ó¤½§i®Öã®×¥ó¦@4526¥ó¡A¸û1998¦~®×¥ó¼Æ3805¥ó¡A¼W¥[18.95%¡A±Æ¦W²Ä¥|¡C
¥t1999¦~°ê¤H¦V¼Ú¬w±M§Q§½¥Ó½Ð±M§Q®×¥óp212¥ó¡A¸û1998¦~®×¥ó¼Æ150¥ó¡A¼W¥[41.33%¡C¦Ó¤½§i®Öã®×¥ó¦@49¥ó¡A¸û1998¦~®×¥ó¼Æ41¥ó¡A¼W¥[19.51%¡C¦]°ê¤H¦Ü¼Ú¬w±M§Q§½¥Ó½Ð¤Î®Öã±M§Q®×¥ó¶q¸û¤Ö¡A¬GµL±Æ¦W¡C
¦Ó1999¦~°ê¤H¦V¤é¥»¯S³\ÆU¥Ó½Ð±M§Q®×¥óp1907¥ó¡A¸û1998¦~®×¥ó¼Æ1623¥ó¡A¼W¥[17.49¢M¡A±Æ¦W²Ä¤»¡C¥t¤½§i®Öã®×¥ó¦@1362¥ó¡A¸û1998¦~®×¥ó¼Æ1
177¥ó¡A¼W¥[15.71¢M¡A±Æ¦W²Ä¥|¡C
Taiwan Shows Dramatic Rise in Patent Approvals in U.S, Europe, Japan
According to information provided by the Intellectual Property Office, Taiwan pplicants in 1999 filed 11,392 patent applications in the United States, an increase of 49.36% from the 7,627 applications filed in 1998. Taiwan ranked fourth in the number of patent applications in 1999 as well as in the number of approved patents in 1999. The number of approved patents in 1999 was 4,526, an increase of 18.95% from the figure of 3,805 in 1998.
In 1999, Taiwan applicants filed 212 patent applications with the European Patent Office, an increase of 41.33% from the 150 applications filed in 1998. A total of 49 applications were approved in 1999, an increase of 19.51% from the 41 approvals in 1998. Taiwan was not ranked among the leading countries filing patent applicatio
ns and receiving approvals in the EPO.
In Japan, Taiwan applicants filed 1,907 patent applications in 1999, an increase of 17.49% from the figure of 1,623 applications in 1998. A total of 1,362 applications were approved in 1999, a 15.71% increase over the figure of 1,177 from 1998. In 1999, Taiwan ranked sixth in the number of applications and fourth in the number of pat
ent approvals in Japan.
6¡B¤@¤E¤E¤E¦~¬ü¡B¤é¡B¼w±M§Q¥Ó½Ðº[®Öã¥ó¼Æ±¡§Î
¨Ì¾Ú¸gÀÙ³¡´¼¼z°]²£§½¤é«eµo§G¤§·s»D½Z¸ê®Æ©ÜÅS¡A1999¦~¦U¥Dn¥ý¶i°ê®a±M§Q¤§¥Ó½Ð¥ó¼Æ¡A¥H¤é¥»¤§405655¥ó»â¥ý¦U°ê¡A¬ü°ê¤§270187¥ó¤Î¼w°ê¤§252440¥ó¡Ñ¡Ñ«h¤À©~²Ä¤G»P²Ä¥|¡A«nÁú¤Î¤¤°ê¤j³°¨Ã¾r¨äÅX¡A¼Ú·ù©~²Ä¤»¡A¦Ó§Ú°ê¦W¦C²Ä¤C¡C
¦Ü©ó±M§Q®Öã®×¥ó¤è±¡A¬ü°ê¥H153493¥ó©Þ±oÀYÄw¡A¤é¥»150059¥ó©~²Ä¤G¡A¼w°ê«h¥H119779¥ó¦W¦C²Ä¤T¡A«nÁú¡B¤¤°ê¤j³°¡B¼Ú·ùºò°l¨ä«á¡A¥»°ê¤´¦C²Ä¤C¦ì¡C
¦Ó±M§Q®Öã²v³¡¤À¡A«h¥H²üÄõ97.18%³Ì°ª¡B«nÁú80.13%©~¦¸¡B¤¤°ê¤j³°74.61%±Æ²Ä¤T¡B¬ü°ê56.81%²Ä¥|¡A§Ú°ê56.13%«h¦W¦C²Ä¤¡C
¤S¥H1999¦~¦U¥Dn¥ý¶i°ê®a¦V§Ú°ê¥Ó½Ð±M§Q¤§¥ó¼Æ¦Ó¨¥¡A¨ä¤¤¤´¥H¤é¥»¤§7468¥ó»â¥ý¦U°ê¡A¬ü°ê6201¥óª½°l¨ä«á¡A¼w°ê1456¥ó±Æ²Ä¤T¡A«nÁú¦W¦C²Ä¥|¡C¦Ü©ó±M§Q®Öã®×¥ó¤è±¡A¥ç¥Ñ¤é¥»©Þ±oÀYÄw¡A¬ü°ê©~²Ä¤G¡A¼w°ê¦W¦C²Ä¤T¡C¦Ó±M§Q®Öã²v³¡¤À¡A«h¥H¥[®³¤j65.43%¬°³Ì°ª¡A¨Ì¦¸¬°¤é¥»¡B¼w°ê¤Î«nÁú¡A¥ç§¡¦³¦Ê¤À¤§60¥H¤W¤§®Öã²v¡A¸û¥»°ê56.13%¥§¡®Öã²v¬°°ª¡AÅã¥Ü¦U¥Dn¥ý¶i°ê®a¤§µo©ú¡]³Ð§@¡^«~½è¸û¥»°ê¬°°ª¡C
6.Taiwan Ranks Seventh in Global Patent Applications and Approvals
According to information provided by the Intellectual Property Office, Taiwan ranked seventh in the world in the number of patent
applications and approvals in 1999. Japan led developed cou
ntries in the number of patent applications in 1999 with a total of 405,655. The United States was second with 270,187 while Germany was third with 252,440. South Korea and mainland China ranked fourth and fifth with the European Union sixth.
For patent approvals in 1999, the United States led with 153,493 while Japan was second with 150,059, and Germany third with 119,779. South Korea, mainland China, and the European Union followed in that order. Taiwan was also ranked seventh for patent approvals.
The Netherlands finished first with a patent application approval rate of 97.18% in 1999 followed by South Korea (80.13%), mainland China (74.61%), the United States (56.81%), and Taiwan (56.13%).
Regarding patent applications from developed countries filed in Taiwan, Japan was the leading country with 7,468 in 1999 followed by the United States (6,201) and Germany (1,456). South Korea was fourth. Ranked in order of the number of patent approvals were Japan, the United States, and Germany. For patent approval percentage, Can
ada (65.43%) was first followed by Japan, Germany, and South Korea. The approval rates of all three of these countries were above 60%. Taiwan's approval rate was 56.13%.
¥q¡@ªk¡@³ø¡@¾É
Judicial Report
7¡B¬ü°êCAFC¸T¤îNapsterºô¯¸¥æ´«ª©Åvµ¼Ö
¬ü°êÁp¨¹¨µ°j¤W¶Dªk°|¡]Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit¡ÐCAFC¡^©ó2001¦~2¤ë12¤é§P¨M¡Aµ¼Öºô¯¸Napster¥²¶·°±¤îµL±ø¥ó§K¶OÅýºô»Úºô¸ô¨Ï¥ÎªÌ¤U¸ü¡B¥æ´«¥¼¸g±ÂÅv¤§ª©Åvµ¼ÖªºªA°È¡A§_«hÀ³¬°¨Ï¥ÎªÌ¤§¹Hªk¦æ¬°t³d¡A¦ý¨Ã¥¼¿Ù¥O¦³6100¸U¥Î¤á¤§Napsterºô¯¸Ãö³¬¡C
§P¨M«ü¥X¡Aì§P¨M¹ïNapster¤U¹F¤§¸T¨î¥O
¡A½d³ò¹L©ó¼sªx¡A¦]¦¹µo¦^ì¼fªk°|×¥¿¡C¸Ó§P¨M¨Ã«ü¥XNapster´£¨Ñªº§K¶O¼Æ¦ì¤U¸üªA°È¡AªÖ©w·|¥Oª©Åv©Ò¦³¤H¸Õ¹Ï´£¨Ñ¥I¶OªA°Èªº§V¤O¨ü¨ì¶Ë®`¡C
¤W¶Dªk°|ºû«ù¦a¤èªk°|¹ïNapster«I¥Çª©Åvªºì«h¡A«ü¥X°Û¤ù·~Á|ÃÒ¤FNapster¥Î¤á¡uª½±µ«IÅvªºªì¨BÃÒ¾Ú¡v¡A±©ªí¥Üì§P¨M§â©Ò¦³¨¾¤î½Æ»s¡B¤U¸ü¡B¶Ç°eª©Åvµ¼Öªº³d¥ô³£Âk©óNapster¡A¥²¶·×¥¿¡C
¤W¶Dªk°|ªí¥Ü¡A³oÓºô¯¸¦bª¾±¡ªº±¡ªp¤U¡A¥ô¥Ñ¤Wºô¨Ï¥ÎªÌª½±µ«I¥Çª©Åv¡ANapster¥i¯àn¬°ºô¯¸¨Ï¥ÎªÌªº«IÅv¦æ¬°t³d¡A¦]¬°¥¦½T¹êª¾¹Dºô¯¸¤W¬Y¨Çµ¼ÖÀɮצ³ª©Åv¡A«o¥¼±Ä¨ú¦æ°Ê¡A¨¾¤î¥¦Ì¦bºô¸ô¤W¶Ç¥¬¡C¤W¶Dªk°|¨Ã«ü¥X¡A¦pnÁ×§Kªk«ß³d¥ô¡ANapster¥²¶·¡u¨µÅÞ¡v¦Û¤vªººô¯¸¡A¨¾¤î«IÅv¦æ¬°¡A¨Ã¨¾¤î¨Ï¥ÎªÌ±µÄ²·j´M¥Ø¿ý¤¤¦³ª©Åvªººq¦±¡C
¡]¥H¤W¸ê®Æ·J¾ã¦ÛÁp¦X³ø¡B¤¤°ê®É³ø¤Î©_¼¯·s»D¥Á°ê90¦~2¤ë14¤é¬ÛÃö³ø¾É¡^
US Appeals Court Prohibits Napster from Distributing
Copyrighted Music
On February 12, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a ruling that Na
pster must cease allowing free and unconditional downloading and swapping of unlicensed, copyr
ighted music files by Internet users, or bear li
ability for their infringing conduct. However, it did not order the Napster site, with 61 mill
ion users, to close down. The ruling pointed out that the original injunction against Napster was too broad, and the case was remanded back to the original court for revision. The ruling also po
inted out that the Napster service providing f
ree digital downloads would be injurious to cop
yright holders' attempts to provide service for pay.
The appeals court maintained the principle that Napster was infringing copyright, referring to the recording industry's evidence that Napster users were engaging in direct violation of cop
yright. However, it held that the original jud
gment holding.
|