法学院知识库

在当前经济时代的大背景下，高科技产品越来越多，并正在逐步代替繁重的体力劳动，成为更关键的生产要素。知识产权是一种私权利,是自然人、法人、非法人组织依据法律的规定对其在科学技术、文学艺术和生产经营等领域创造的知识产品所享有的专有权利的总称。知识产权受法律保护，具有排他性，可以自主行使权利，不受《反垄断法》的调控，但是随着法律对知识产权的过度保护，权利人窥见了更大的利润空间，使其对知识产权的使用超越了权利本身的界限，形成了知识产权滥用。

知识产权滥用是指知识产权人超出权利界限范围，违反了法律和行政法规的规定，滥用其合法取得的权利，损害集体和第三人利益、社会利益以及限制排除竞争，影响市场公平竞争，对经济发展造成不良影响的行为。鉴于知识产权是一种私权利，受到民法的调控，但是民法对于其滥用的禁止受到民事关系相对人的限制，并无法保护到非直接当事人的权益，例如非特定的消费者，参与市场合理公平竞争的其他主体。因此单纯的民法规范(知识产权法)已不足以控制大型企业利用知识产权对公平自由的市场秩序的破坏，需要其他的法律规范加以调整。在维护市场公平有效的竞争环境时，应当考虑知识产权制度能否真正发挥作用，法律制度在其中发挥着关键作用，知识产权相关法律制度应与时俱进，及时做出改变，尤其是在对权利滥用的规制上。

在2015年4月7日，国家工商行政管理总局通过了《关于禁止滥用知识产权排除、限制竞争行为的规定》，该规定初步奠定了我国知识产权滥用的反垄断规制基础，后来通过专家学者的研究和经济市场现实案例地回馈，我们发现无论是从法律本身的价值和宗旨，还是反垄断法规制与知识产权滥用行为高度契合的角度出发，研究出针对知识产权滥用的反垄断法规制以求经济市场的良性发展都刻不容缓。

本文的重点将放在我国知识产权滥用的反垄断法规制现状和欧美日可借鉴的经验分析上，因为本研究旨在为我国的反垄断法对知识产权的规制提出相关意见，以期为我国反垄断法的完善提供实际性的依据。本文首先通过分析知识产权滥用的相关概念，引出知识产权法与反垄断法的关系，进而论证反垄断法规制知识产权滥用的必要性和合理性，再比较欧美日的法律如何规制知识产权滥用问题，通过借鉴欧美等发达国家完善的知识产权滥用竞争法规，为完善我国知识产权滥用的反垄断法提供修改意见。

Under the background of the current economic era, there are more and more knowledge products, and intellectual property has become an increasingly key production factor and is gradually replacing heavy physical labor. Intellectual property rights are a kind of private rights. They are the collective name of the exclusive rights of natural persons, legal persons, and unincorporated organizations according to the provisions of the law to their intellectual products created in the fields of science and technology, literature and art, and production and management. It is subject to the law. Protection, with certain exclusivity, can exercise its own rights independently, and is not regulated by the "Anti-Monopoly Law." However, it follows that people have gained a greater profit margin in the protection of intellectual products, making intellectual property The use of intellectual property abuses beyond its own boundaries.

Abuse of intellectual property rights means that intellectual property rights are beyond the scope of their rights, violate the laws and administrative regulations, abuse their legally acquired rights, damage the interests of collectives and third parties, social interests, or restrict the fairness of competing in serious markets. Causes adverse effects. However, given that intellectual property is a private right and subject to the regulation of civil law, the prohibition on abuse of civil law is limited by the relative person of civil relations and cannot protect the rights of non-direct parties. For example, non-specific consumers and reasonable participation in the market Other players of fair competition. Therefore, the simple civil law norms (intellectual property laws) are not enough to control the destruction of fair and free market order by large companies using intellectual property rights, and need to be adjusted by other legal norms. When safeguarding a fair and effective competitive environment in the market, we should consider whether the intellectual property system can really play its role. The legal system plays a key role in it. The relevant legal system of intellectual property should be changed with the times, especially in the abuse of rights. Regulatory. On April 7, 2015, the State Administration for Industry and Commerce passed the “Provisions on the Prohibition of Abuse of Intellectual Property and Exclusion from Competition and Competition Restrictions.” This provision initially established the basis for the anti-monopoly regulation of China’s abuse of intellectual property rights. In the research of experts and scholars and the feedback of real cases in the economic market, we have found out that anti-monopoly laws against the abuse of intellectual property are developed from the perspective of the value and purpose of the law itself, or the high degree of conformity between the anti-monopoly law system and the abuse of intellectual property rights. Regulatory system in order to seek a sound development of the economic market is an urgent task.

The focus of this paper will be on the status quo of China's anti-monopoly regulations on the abuse of intellectual property rights and the experience that can be used in Europe, the United States, and Japan. This study aims to provide relevant opinions on the regulation of intellectual property rights in China's anti-monopoly law, with a view to competing with China. The perfection of the law provides the basis for practicality. This article first analyzes the basic theory of the abuse of intellectual property rights, elicit the relationship between intellectual property law and anti-monopoly law, and then demonstrate the necessity and rationality of the existence of anti-monopoly law in the abuse of intellectual property, and then compare how the laws of Europe, the United States and Japan regulate the knowledge The issue of abuse of property rights, through reference to the developed countries’ laws and regulations on the abuse of intellectual property rights, provides amendments to the anti-monopoly law that will improve the abuse of intellectual property in China.