EU 경쟁법상 IP License에 대한 獨占規制 政策 小考

장은익 한국지식재산학회 2006 産業財産權 Vol.- No.19

EC Treaty is based on two principles of free trade and undistorted competition. Free trade is protected by the free trade regulations of commercial products or services. Undistorted competition is protected by the competition principle of agreements prescribed from the Article 81 to Article 89. Article 81 and Article 82 among the principles about competition of communities are the most core of competition laws. The Article 81 is a regulation about prohibition of competition limiting behavior and the Article 82 is a regulation which prohibits abuse of overriding position. Both Articles has a important meaning. Therefore, the Article 81 and the Article 82 of EC competition laws! and their relationships regarding the patent property rights are reviewed. Regarding the transfer of the patent property rights! the new block exemption regulation 772/2004' is applied to the technology transfer agreements involving patents! know- hews or software copyrights (EC Regulation). On the same date the Commission also released a guide that provides advice for applying the new block exemption and for evaluating the antitrust risks of licensing agreements that fall outside the scope of the new Regulation. The new EC Regulation and the accompanying EC guidelines develop an analytical framework that is similar to the framework described in the US. Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (US. Guidelines). Despite the many similarities in the US and EU policy documents for the antitrust review of technology licensing agreements, there are important differences that should be noted by anyone involved in technology licensing in the United States and in the European Union. The US Guidelines focus on possible harm to inter-technology competition from licensing arrangements. The EC Regulation and Guidelines express concerns about loss of intra-technology competition as well as inter-technology competition. Despite these differences, which stem from contrasting principles in EU and US. antitrust laws, the new EC Regulation and Guidelines are a quantum leap toward a globally consistent approach to antitrust policy for technology licensing.

國際硏究契約에서 知的財産權 歸屬에 關한 法的硏究

崔致浩(Chi Ho Choi),姜善俊(Sun-Joon Kang),柳熙俊(Hee-June Ryu) 한국기업법학회 2009 企業法硏究 Vol.23 No.4

In recent years, as a consequence of the globalization of Research and Development(R&D), researchers must increasingly be aware of world-wide trends and cooperate with international R&D institute. The Joint Research has a consistently high record of achievement in research, and it is the New government strong commitment towards research which attracts large amounts of research grant income. Survival in today s fast-paced business environment requires fast learning how to team up with foreign independent research organization to survive world and acquire Science and technology. It is best way to emulate the success of the university United States and Japan, whose system is one of the most remarkable IP Policy. Stanford University, Massachsetts institute of Technlogy(MIT), and The University of Electronic-Communiciations(UEC)'s IP policy give us lessons like these are helping us move forward- with careful steps. While it may not be so perfect, though, there are implications for the make the our Intellectual Property Policy(IP Policy). This Study considered the matter from various angles and designed to improve compare experiences and review policy and management issues in IP policy. In this paper proposes to enact the reasonable and applicable research institute's intellectual property policy proposal. A private enterprise have several options for Intellectual Property Rights such as ownership of inventions and license. The option a corporation select determines which commercialize Inventions. [IP Policy] 1. Inventions created by only the Researcher Institute shall be owned itself. 2. Inventions created by the Researcher Institute and collaborator shall be owned jointly Institute and collaborator. The share of Inventions will be determined according to the contribution. 3. [Option A : Research institute Sole inventions] 1) Assignment of Intellectual Property 2) Grant of limtied-term, exclusive license 3) Grant of limited-term non exclusive license 4) No grant of license 4. [Option B : Joint inventions] 1) Assignment of Intellectual Property 2) Grant of limited-term, exclusive license(including distribution license fee, if grant a non-exclusive license to a third party) 3) Grant of non-exclusive license 4) No grant of License International cooperation and Joint R&D are the main stream of the 'open innovation R&D' and can time to take the leap advanced country. It is necessary for us to get a new IP Policy to develop world wide famous research instittue and protect efficient of rewards from R&D.

고령운전자의 면허증 반납제도에 관한 교통딜레마 : 편리성과 이동성을 중심으로

김용태(Kim, Yong Tae),유근환(Yoo, Keun Hwan),최인규(Chol, In Kyu) 대구과학대학교 국방안보연구소 2021 사회융합연구 Vol.5 No.5

본 연구는 최근 고령화가 사회적 문제점으로 대두되면서 고령운전자의 교통사고 증가로 운전면허 반납제도에 관한 교통딜레마에 있어 편리성과 이동성을 중심으로 살펴보고자 하는 것이 연구의 목적이다. 운전면허증 반납과 관련된 지원제도는 편리성과 사회성 그리고 복지비 상승을 가져오는 반면, 운전면허증을 반납치 않으면 교통사고 위험성과 이동성을 증가하는 딜레마에 놓일 수 있다는 것이다. 따라서 고령운전자 면허반납에 따른 고령운전자의 사각지대 실태를 살펴보고 교통안전을 위한 정책적 개선방안으로 첫째. 고령운전자 면허반납은 연령에 따른 차별이 가지 않도록 생계형 고령운전자와 자발적 운전면허 반납자 대한 신중한 대처가 필요하다. 둘째, 자발적 운전면허 반납제도를 교통여건이 나은 대도시(광역단위)부터 고령운전자 면허증 반납제도 정책의 적정성에 따라, 농촌도시로 확대해야 하며, 셋째, 생계형 고령운전자에 대한 자격유지검사 의무화와 고령운전자의 교육과 관련하여 인지기능 저하 우려가 없다고 판정되거나 75세 미만이면 해당 교육시간을 단축하고, 넷째, 고령운전자에 대한 사회적 관심과 운전자의 행태가 바뀌어야 한다. The purpose of this study is to focus on convenience and mobility in the traffic dilemma regarding the driver s license return and return system due to the increase in traffic accidents among older drivers as the aging population has recently emerged as a social problem. The support system related to the return of a driver s license brings convenience, sociality, and welfare costs, while failing to return the driver s license can lead to a dilemma that increases the risk of traffic accidents and increases mobility. Therefore, as a policy improvement plan for traffic safety by examining the actual condition of the blind spots of elderly drivers following the return of their driver s licenses. The return of senior driver s license requires careful handling of subsistence-type elderly drivers and voluntary driver s license returners so that there is no discrimination based on age. Second, the voluntary driver s license return system should be expanded from large cities (wide-area units) with better traffic conditions to rural cities according to the appropriateness of the policy for returning elderly drivers licenses. In relation to education, if it is determined that there is no risk of cognitive decline or is under the age of 75, the relevant training time should be shortened. Fourth, social interest in elderly drivers and driver behavior should be changed.

시큐리티 자격제도의 현황과 발전방안

김태민(Tae Min Kim) 한국정부학회 2008 한국정부학회 학술발표논문집 Vol.2008 No.03

Although private security industry of Korea is continuously growing, there still are various problems and qualitative assignments. One of methods to specialize security work and improve customer`s reliability is to introduce and activate license policy. Currently, private security license of Korea is restricted to security instructor license. In private security industry, the system of professional security certificate of qualification is applied around the advanced nations just like U.S. and japan. Therefore, the study tries to consider domestic and foreign license policy and suggest its improvement direction. Specifically, it considers license policy of advanced country and searches for improvement direction of license policy on the basis of the Law of Security, which is a basic law of private security. The study suggests improvement direction through improvement of security instructor system, adoption of security planning company license and introduction of security license.

유출-개방형 기술혁신으로서의 기술사업화 정책 분석

안준모(Joon Mo Ahn) 한국기술혁신학회 2015 기술혁신학회지 Vol.18 No.4

그동안 과학기술정책은 연구개발 투자규모를 늘여서 논문이나 특허 같은 연구성과물을 창출해내는데 집중되어 왔다. 하지만, 과학기술의 경제적 역할이 강조되고 창조경제가 부각되면서, 기술사업화에 대한 정책적 관심이 높아지고 있다. 정부가 추진하는 기술사업화란 공공연구기관의 연구성과물이 민간기업에서 상용화될 수 있도록 지원하는 일련의 혁신과정을 일컫는데, 조직 외부로의 지식(공공기술)의 흐름과 확산을 수반한다는 점에서 유출-개방형 기술혁신과 그 맥을 같이한다고 볼 수 있다. 본고는 이러한 견지에서, 주요 경제부처(미래창조과학부, 산업통상자원부, 중소기업청)의 기술사업화 예산사업에 대한 분석을 하였다. 이를 통해 현재의 기술사업화 정책현황을 진단하고 향후 정책과제를 도출하였다. 본고는 기술사업화 예산사업이 (1) 부처별로 특화되고, (2) 기술이전에 대한 지원을 강화하며, (3) 통합적 연계를 통해 지원 스펙트럼을 확대하고, (4) 엑셀러레이터 같은 민간 전문가 그룹을 육성하는 방향으로 추진될 것을 정책제언으로 제시하였다. Up to present science and technology (S&T) policy in Korea has focused on producing academic papers and patents through the increase of investment on research and development (R&D). However, as the role of science and technology on boosting national economy has been emphasized and the current government has established ‘creative economy’ as a main policy agenda, ‘technology commercialization’ has been moving onto the center of S&T policy. Technology commercialization policy encourages R&D outcomes of public R&D institutions to be utilized in private firms for their new business development, and this concept is in line with out-bound open innovation, in the sense that it involves the flow of technological knowledge from public R&D institutions to private firms. Based on this understanding, this paper analyses government technology commercialization programs and attempts to suggest policy implications. The results suggest that future technology commercialization policy (1) be specialized in a way of reflecting the characteristics of each government ministry, (2) strongly support technology licensing-out, (3) strengthen the linkage between each programs, and (4) nurture expert groups, such as accelerators who can help and foster technology start-ups.

행정작용의 비교법적 고찰― 미국법과의 비교를 중심으로 ―

김민호 한국공법학회 2008 공법연구 Vol.37 No.1

In general, a researcher uses a his own method to classify the administrative function according to research purpose. For comparative study on two the Korea, with U.S.A. legal system about administrative function, we have to choose the method being able to compare Korea administrative function to U.S.A.'s. Therefore I adopt the classification system of American administrative function introduced by American administrative law professors in their materials. In most cases, American administrative professors classify administrative function to Policy Formation, Adjudication, Enforcement, Licensing, Rule Making, and Informal Agency Activity, etc.. The outline of these functions is as follows. Adjudication is the legal process of resolving a dispute. The formal giving or pronouncing of a judgment or decree in a court proceeding; also the judgment or decision given. The entry of a decree by a court in respect to the parties in a case. It implies a hearing by a court, after notice, of legal evidence on the factual issue(s) involved. The equivalent of a determination. It indicates that the claims of all the parties thereto have been considered and set at rest. In administrative law, rulemaking refers to the process that executive agencies use to create, or promulgate, regulations. In general, legislatures first set broad policy mandates by passing laws, then agencies create more detailed regulations through rulemaking. By bringing detailed scientific expertise to bear on policy, the rulemaking process has powered the success of some of the most notable government achievements of the 20th century. For example, science-based regulations are critical to modern programs for environmental protection, food safety, and workplace safety. However, explosive growth in regulations has fueled criticism that the rulemaking process reduces the transparency and accountability of democratic government. In this article, at first I research the special features of American administrative function, and then I seek a point of difference between U.S.A. administrative function and Korea's. Finally I suggest the way solving the problems of Korea administrative function. 행정작용의 분류체계는 연구자가 분석하고자 하는 목적에 따라 그 기준을 설정하고 분류하는 방식을 취할 수밖에 없다. 따라서 우리나라의 행정작용과 미국의 행정작용을 비교 고찰하기 위해 비교가 용이한 분류방식, 즉 현실적으로 비교 분석이 가능한 행정작용의 유형화를 시도하였다. 우리나라와 법체계가 매우 상이한 미국법을 비교분석하기 위해서 미국법상 존재하거나 적어도 미국의 법학자들이 중요하게 여기는 행정작용을 분석의 대상으로 삼았다. 미국 행정법학자들의 행정작용 분류 중 우리나라의 법제와 비교분석이 가능한 영역은 규범정립작용(명령 또는 행정입법), 허가작용(허가ㆍ특허 등), 행정강제작용(행정의 실효성 확보 수단), 비공식적 행정활동(비공식적 행정작용) 등이다. 이들 작용에 대한 미국에서의 논의를 살펴 본 후 이들 작용과 유사한 우리나라의 행정작용을 대비하여 분석하고, 만약 시사점이 있으면 이를 도출하는 것으로 연구를 진행하였다. 미국 행정작용의 특징적인 것들을 요약하면 다음과 같다. ⑴ 미국은 행정입법에 대하여 사법부가 추상적 규범통제를 하지는 않지만 우리나라처럼 행정입법의 처분성을 문제 삼아서 행정소송의 대상적격을 제한하고 있지는 않다. ⑵ 미국에서는 Licensing 제도의 도입 취지가 소비자의 보호 등에 있었고, licensing의 도입으로 인한 직업단체의 독점적 이익을 경계하여야 한다는 주장이 끊임없이 제기되고 있음에도 불구하고 licensing으로 인하여 사실상의 법적 이익이 침해당하였다면 행정소송의 원고적격을 인정하고 있다. ⑶ 미국은 행정강제작용을 강압적 수단으로 보기 보다는 상대방이 행정법상의 의무를 스스로 이행하도록 유도하는 수단으로 이해하고 있다. ⑷ 미국은 전체 행정작용 중 비공식적 행정작용이 차지하는 비중이 90%에 달하며, 비공식적 행정작용의 비중이 커질 경우 연방행정절차법의 입법취지가 몰각될 것이라는 우려를 하고 있다.

국가-사회간 이익매개양식의 변화: 건설업 면허정책을 중심으로, 1953-2007

나찬영,유재원 한국정책학회 2008 韓國政策學會報 Vol.17 No.2

The past few decades witnessed social actors' influence over the governmental policy-making process on the rapid rise. As citizens, individually or as a group, are getting more active and influential in the public policy process, the mode of interest mediation between the state and the society has been changing from corporatism to policy community or issue network. In corporatism as a mode of interest mediation, state actors reign over social actors in policy process, and the relationship between two sets of actors is depicted as hierarchial and asymmetrical. On the contrary, policy community and issue network are both a mode of interest mediation where state and societal actors are described as being interdependent and symmetrical. The difference between two is that issue network is more easily penetrable by social actors and less clear in boundary between the public and the private sectors than policy community. This paper traces the formation of construction license policy over the past five decades from 1953 to 2007 and examines the evolution of mode of interest mediation in this area. 1987년 민주화선언 이후 민주화와 자유화라는 시대환경변화 속에서 정치과정이 개방되고, 국가의 사회부문에 대한 통제력의 이완으로 사회부문 행위자들의 수적인 팽창과 영향력이 크게 증대하였다. 사회부문 행위자들의 양적 팽창과 영향력 확대의 결과로 다양한 개혁정책을 추진하는 과정에서 국가와 사회부문 행위자들간의 관계의 성격이 점차 협력적인 방향으로 변모하게 되었고, 이들 간의 이익매개양식 또한 변화하게 되었다. 이상의 환경변화에 힘입어 학자들 사이에서 국가와 사회를 연결하는 새로운 이익매개 양식으로의 변화가 일어나고 있음을 알리는 연구들이 다양한 정책영역에서 연구자들에 의해 지각되고 있는 데 이들의 결론적 주장은 기존에 빈번하게 적용되던 국가주도적인 조합주의가 쇠퇴하고 그 대신 1990년대에 접어들면서 제한된 행위자들간의 연대가 견고한 정책공동체의 이익매개 양상을 넘어 개방성과 수평성이 강한 이슈네트워크의 특성들이 대두되고 있다는 것이다. 이 연구의 주요 목적은 이익매개양식이 국가중심적인 조합주의에서 국가와 사회부문 행위자들간에 쌍방적인 교호작용을 통해 정책을 결정하고 집행하는 개방적인 이슈네트워크로 변화되고 있다는 다수 연구자들의 주장이 이 연구의 분석대상인 건설업 면허정책에서도 동일하게 적용될 수 있는지를 분석하는 데 있다.

행정작용의 비교법적 고찰 ― 미국법과의 비교를 중심으로 ―

김민호(Kim, Min Ho) 한국공법학회 2008 공법연구 Vol.37 No.1-1

행정작용의 분류체계는 연구자가 분석하고자 하는 목적에 따라 그 기준을 설정하고 분류하는 방식을 취할 수밖에 없다. 따라서 우리나라의 행정작용과 미국의 행정작용을 비교 고찰하기 위해 비교가 용이한 분류방식, 즉 현실적으로 비교 분석이 가능한 행정작용의 유형화를 시도하였다. 우리나라와 법체계가 매우 상이한 미국법을 비교분석하기 위해서 미국법상 존재하거나 적어도 미국의 법학자들이 중요하게 여기는 행정작용을 분석의 대상으로 삼았다.미국 행정법학자들의 행정작용 분류 중 우리나라의 법제와 비교분석이 가능한 영역은 규범정립 작용(명령 또는 행정입법), 허가작용(허가·특허 등), 행정강제작용(행정의 실효성 확보 수단), 비공식적 행정활동(비공식적 행정작용) 등이다. 이들 작용에 대한 미국에서의 논의를 살펴 본 후 이들 작용과 유사한 우리나라의 행정작용을 대비하여 분석하고, 만약 시사점이 있으면 이를 도출하는 것으로 연구를 진행하였다. 미국 행정작용의 특징적인 것들을 요약하면 다음과 같다.⑴ 미국은 행정입법에 대하여 사법부가 추상적 규범통제를 하지는 않지만 우리나라처럼 행정입법의 처분성을 문제 삼아서 행정소송의 대상적격을 제한하고 있지는 않다.⑵ 미국에서는 Licensing 제도의 도입 취지가 소비자의 보호 등에 있었고, licensing의 도입으로 인한 직업단체의 독점적 이익을 경계하여야 한다는 주장이 끊임없이 제기되고 있음에도 불구하고 licensing으로 인하여 사실상의 법적 이익이 침해당하였다면 행정소송의 원고적격을 인정하고 있다.⑶ 미국은 행정강제작용을 강압적 수단으로 보기 보다는 상대방이 행정법상의 의무를 스스로 이행하도록 유도하는 수단으로 이해하고 있다.⑷ 미국은 전체 행정작용 중 비공식적 행정작용이 차지하는 비중이 90%에 달하며, 비공식적 행정작용의 비중이 커질 경우 연방행정절차법의 입법취지가 몰각될 것이라는 우려를 하고 있다. In general, a researcher uses a his own method to classify the administrative function according to research purpose. For comparative study on two the Korea, with U.S.A. legal system about administrative function, we have to choose the method being able to compare Korea administrative function to U.S.A.'s. Therefore I adopt theclassification system of American administrative function introduced by American administrative law professors in their materials. In most cases, American administrative professors classify administrative function to Policy Formation, Adjudication, Enforcement, Licensing, Rule Making, and Informal Agency Activity, etc.. The outline of these functions is as follows.Adjudication is the legal process of resolving a dispute. The formal giving or pronouncing of a judgment or decree in a court proceeding; also the judgment or decision given. The entry of a decree by a court in respect to the parties in a case. It implies a hearing by a court, after notice, of legal evidence on the factual issue(s) involved. The equivalent of a determination. It indicates that the claims of all the parties thereto have been considered and set at rest.In administrative law, rulemaking refers to the process that executive agencies use to create, or promulgate, regulations. In general, legislatures first set broad policy mandates by passing laws, then agencies create more detailed regulations through rulemaking. By bringing detailed scientific expertise to bear on policy, the rulemaking process has powered the success of some of the most notable government achievements of the 20th century. For example, science-based regulations are critical to modern programs for environmental protection, food safety, and workplace safety.However, explosive growth in regulations has fueled criticism that the rulemaking process reduces the transparency and accountability of democratic government.In this article, at first I research the special features of American administrative function, and then I seek a point of difference between U.S.A. administrative function and Korea's. Finally I suggest the way solving the problems of Korea administrative function.

Copyright policies of science and engineering open access journals indexed in Science Citation Index Expanded or Scopus, published by Korean academic societies: a case study

이주연,홍대운 한국과학학술지편집인협의회 2024 Science Editing Vol.11 No.1

This article explores the challenges related to copyright policies in the context of science and engineering open access (OA) journals based in Korea. The English-language science and engineering OA journals published independently by Korean academic societies typically exhibit three common characteristics regarding their copyright and licensing policies. First, authors are generally required to transfer their copyrights. Second, the Creative Commons (CC) license terms are predominantly BY-NC (Attribution-NonCommercial), without providing authors the option to select alternative licensing terms. Third, the journals do not sufficiently protect the rights of the authors. From the analyses presented herein, it is evident that the current copyright and licensing policies of Korea’s English-language science and engineering OA journals lack a robust structure. These policies need to be revised to allow authors to retain copyright and require them to consent for the CC license terms it adopts, in order to align with the common practice among OA journals. Furthermore, to better protect authors’ rights, it would be beneficial to permit authors to choose the specific terms of the CC license for their articles.

미국 원격의료 주별 정책 현황과 한국에의 시사점

김진숙,오수현,최재욱,김석영 대한의사협회 2015 대한의사협회지 Vol.58 No.10

The main objective of this study to propose an implementation about telemedicine policy in Korea through analyzing current status of state telemedicine policy in the United States. To achieve the result, three types of data sets were used to draw conclusions; 1) status of insured service of telemedicine in each state, 2) physician practice standards related to telemedicine, and 3) licensure. Analyzed results indicated differentiation in insured status of telemedicine service among private insurance parity law, medicaid coverage parity law, and state employee health plan parity in each states. Only two states provide insured service of telemedicine without any limits or certain conditions. Other states have a strict regulation or coverage condition about providing insurance. Each states also apply rigorous standards to telemedicine providers about physician practice standards and licensure. Some states restrict telemedicine itself or provide strict regulation process of telemedicine in Physician-patient encounter. Also, the most strict type ‘full state license’ and ‘consulting exemptions (applied in certain condition)’ are applied in most of states. On the basis of study result, environmental and conditional requirement implementation in application of telemedicine policy in Korea is provided in conclusion.