从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展

留言板

尊敬的读者、作者、审稿人, 关于本刊的投稿、审稿、编辑和出版的任何问题, 您可以本页添加留言。我们将尽快给您答复。谢谢您的支持!

姓名
邮箱
手机号码
标题
留言内容
验证码

陈兵

文章导航> bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）> 2019> (3): 158-165

陈兵. 从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展[J]. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2019, (3): 158-165. doi: 10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

引用本文:

陈兵. 从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展[J]. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2019, (3): 158-165.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

CHEN Bing. New Development of Regulation on the Abuse of Intellectual Property in Qualcomm in Republic of Korea[J]. Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2019, (3): 158-165. doi: 10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

Citation:

CHEN Bing. New Development of Regulation on the Abuse of Intellectual Property in Qualcomm in Republic of Korea[J].Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2019, (3): 158-165.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展

doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

陈兵¹

1.
南开大学法学院, 天津 300350

基金项目:

天津市哲学社会科学规划课题重点项目资助“人工智能时代竞争规制法治的改进”（TJFX18-002）;天津市科技计划项目资助“人工智能对社会治理模式变革影响的研究”（18ZLZNGX00030）;中国博士后科学基金国际交流计划派出项目资助“中韩竞争法实施比较研究”（20150029）;南开大学百名青年学科带头人培养计划项目资助“中国反垄断法实施问题研究”（2017-2021）

New Development of Regulation on the Abuse of Intellectual Property in Qualcomm in Republic of Korea

CHEN Bing¹

1.
School of Law, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350, China

摘要:以韩国公平交易委员会（Korea Fair Trade Commission，KFTC）在2016年底对高通公司的处罚决定为标志，直接针对高通公司的闭合型反竞争商业模式课以矫正措施，从根本上遏制和消解了其反竞争能力和效果。KFTC首次明确提出了建立规制滥用知识产权垄断的开放性生态竞争系统对促进创新与竞争的关键性与必要性，并做了规制实验。对比KFTC于2009年和2016年对高通公司的两次反垄断处罚，发现：（1）提高多维度合规调查的力度与强度；（2）提升反垄断调查程序的透明度与参与度；（3）运行系统性和持续性的矫正措施；（4）从单向度的规制滥用行为到多向度的促进商业模式的健康运行，已成为韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断的行动向度。中国大力推进知识产权创新，亟需构建科学合理适宜操作的规范知识产权市场自由公平竞争的法治系统与方法。在全面推进知识产权创新的同时，促进相关市场上自由公平竞争秩序的健康运行，实现知识产权创新保护与公平自由竞争之间的整体性与时代性的结合。
- 韩国高通案/
- 滥用知识产权/
- 知识产权创新/
- 闭合型反竞争商业模式/
- 开放型生态竞争系统
Abstract:The Korea Fair Trade Commission marked the punishment decision of Qualcomm at the end of 2016, which directly pointed to the closed anti-competitive business model of Qualcomm with corrective measures, which fundamentally restrained and eliminated its anti-competitive ability and effect. The Korea Fair Trade Commission put forward the significance and necessity of promoting innovation and competition by establishing an open ecosystem that regulated the abuse of intellectual property monopoly, and made a regulatory experiment. Comparing the contents of two antitrust investigations and penalties imposed on Qualcomm by the Korea Fair Trade Commission in 2009 and 2016, we conclude that increasing the intensity of multi-dimensional compliance investigations, transparency and participation in the investigation process, adopting systematic and continuous corrective measures to curb the anti-competitiveness of operators, and going from one-dimensional regulation abuse to multi-dimensional healthy ecology of business model have become the action direction of Korea's regulation on the abuse of intellectual property. At present, China is vigorously promoting intellectual property innovation, and it is urgent to build a scientific, reasonable and appropriate legal system and method to standardize the free and fair competition of intellectual property market. In the process of fully promoting intellectual property innovation, meanwhile, the healthy operation of a free and fair competition order in the relevant markets should be promoted to achieve the goal of combining integrity and times between the intellectual property innovation protection and fair and free competition.
- Korean qualcomm case/
- abuse of intellectual property/
- innovation of IP/
- closed anti-competitive business model/
- opening eco-system of competition

[1]	FTC. Company's sales and licensing practices hamper qualcomm's competitors and threaten innovation in mobile communications[EB/OL].(2017-01-07)[2017-11-19]. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2017/01/ftc-charges-qualcomm-monopolizing-key-semiconductor-device-used.
[2]	KFTC. Qualcomm's abuse of market dominance[C]. Seoul:KFTC,2009-07-23.
[3]	谭燃. 韩国法院驳回高通上诉要求调整专利授权行为[EB/OL]. (2017-09-04)[2018-11-22]. https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1577620383641684492&wfr=spider&for=pc.
[4]	KFTC. KFTC imposes sanctions against qualcomm's abuse of SEPs of mobile communication[R]. Seoul:KFTC,2016-12-28.
[5]	王先林. 我国反垄断法适用于知识产权领域的再思考[J]. 南京大学学报(哲学·人文科学·社会科学),2013(1):34-43.

[1]	李丹, 武杰.知识产权保护、外资进入与内资企业出口 ----基于微观企业增加值贸易视角分析. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2022, (): -.
[2]	米捷, 郭彬, 陈怀超, 范建红.创新生态系统内的知识势差与知识流动机制. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2020, 22(6): 78-87.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2020.4055
[3]	杨宇静.中国清洁能源涉外知识产权诉讼的特点与趋势——兼论美国超导诉中国华锐风电案. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2019, (3): 143-148.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.9765
[4]	曹博.知识产权制度功能的重读与澄清——对“鼓励创造说”的检讨与批判. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2017, (1): 138-143.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2017.0118
[5]	蔡高强, 刘功奇.外空探索国际合作知识产权保护探析. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2016, (6): 119-124.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2016.0616
[6]	李朝明, 罗群燕, 曲燕.基于协同创新的企业知识产权合作绩效评价. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2016, (3): 52-60.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2016.0307
[7]	刘强, 陈舜翊.开放源代码硬件许可协议知识产权问题研究——以3D打印为视角. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2016, (1): 134-141.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2016.0118
[8]	李杜.外层空间3D打印对知识产权制度的挑战. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2015, (3): 137-142.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2015.0319
[9]	蔡高强, 刘功奇.中国商业卫星产业知识产权保护探析. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2015, (2): 100-104.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2015.0215
[10]	刘宇.TPP知识产权最大化国际保护新发展析论——以著作权若干规则为切入点. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2014, (4): 123-130.
[11]	郭堃.再论外空知识产权保护法律问题. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2013, (5): 107-113.
[12]	林小爱, 计华.奥林匹克运动会特许商品知识产权的特殊性. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2012, (5): 103-108.
[13]	彭霞.日本在国际组织中推动知识产权保护措施研究. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2010, (2): 91-94.
[14]	郭德忠.完整的知识产权归属制度的确立——论科学技术进步法与知识产权法的结合. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2009, (1): 8-11.
[15]	赵秀梅.知识产权私法保护制度的完善. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2006, (5): 26-29.
[16]	任培民, 夏恩君, 邵文武.国防科技企业知识产权战略研究. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2005, (5): 9-12.
[17]	陈瑜.企业技术创新的知识产权保护. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2002, (2): 79-82.
[18]	曹文泽.试论国际互联网对知识产权传统特性的影响. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2001, (4): 63-66.
[19]	徐向平, 唐水源.“入世”与我国知识产权保护对策. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2000, (4): 42-44.
[20]	程宗璋.论知识经济与知识产权. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2000, (2): 3-8.

点击查看大图

计量

文章访问数:479
HTML全文浏览量:2
PDF下载量:308
被引次数:0

从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展

doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

陈兵¹

1. 南开大学法学院, 天津 300350

基金项目:

收稿日期:2018-06-01
刊出日期:2019-05-10

关键词:

摘要:以韩国公平交易委员会（Korea Fair Trade Commission，KFTC）在2016年底对高通公司的处罚决定为标志，直接针对高通公司的闭合型反竞争商业模式课以矫正措施，从根本上遏制和消解了其反竞争能力和效果。KFTC首次明确提出了建立规制滥用知识产权垄断的开放性生态竞争系统对促进创新与竞争的关键性与必要性，并做了规制实验。对比KFTC于2009年和2016年对高通公司的两次反垄断处罚，发现：（1）提高多维度合规调查的力度与强度；（2）提升反垄断调查程序的透明度与参与度；（3）运行系统性和持续性的矫正措施；（4）从单向度的规制滥用行为到多向度的促进商业模式的健康运行，已成为韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断的行动向度。中国大力推进知识产权创新，亟需构建科学合理适宜操作的规范知识产权市场自由公平竞争的法治系统与方法。在全面推进知识产权创新的同时，促进相关市场上自由公平竞争秩序的健康运行，实现知识产权创新保护与公平自由竞争之间的整体性与时代性的结合。

English Abstract

New Development of Regulation on the Abuse of Intellectual Property in Qualcomm in Republic of Korea

CHEN Bing¹

1. School of Law, Nankai University, Tianjin 300350, China

Received Date:2018-06-01
Publish Date:2019-05-10

Keywords:

Abstract:The Korea Fair Trade Commission marked the punishment decision of Qualcomm at the end of 2016, which directly pointed to the closed anti-competitive business model of Qualcomm with corrective measures, which fundamentally restrained and eliminated its anti-competitive ability and effect. The Korea Fair Trade Commission put forward the significance and necessity of promoting innovation and competition by establishing an open ecosystem that regulated the abuse of intellectual property monopoly, and made a regulatory experiment. Comparing the contents of two antitrust investigations and penalties imposed on Qualcomm by the Korea Fair Trade Commission in 2009 and 2016, we conclude that increasing the intensity of multi-dimensional compliance investigations, transparency and participation in the investigation process, adopting systematic and continuous corrective measures to curb the anti-competitiveness of operators, and going from one-dimensional regulation abuse to multi-dimensional healthy ecology of business model have become the action direction of Korea's regulation on the abuse of intellectual property. At present, China is vigorously promoting intellectual property innovation, and it is urgent to build a scientific, reasonable and appropriate legal system and method to standardize the free and fair competition of intellectual property market. In the process of fully promoting intellectual property innovation, meanwhile, the healthy operation of a free and fair competition order in the relevant markets should be promoted to achieve the goal of combining integrity and times between the intellectual property innovation protection and fair and free competition.

陈兵. 从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展[J]. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2019, (3): 158-165. doi: 10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

引用本文:

陈兵. 从高通案看韩国规制滥用知识产权垄断新发展[J]. bob手机在线登陆学报（社会科学版）, 2019, (3): 158-165.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

Citation:

CHEN Bing. New Development of Regulation on the Abuse of Intellectual Property in Qualcomm in Republic of Korea[J].Journal of Beijing Institute of Technology (Social Sciences Edition), 2019, (3): 158-165.doi:10.15918/j.jbitss1009-3370.2019.1061

参考文献 (5)