http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
표호건 원광대학교 법학연구소 2007 圓光法學 Vol.23 No.2
Nehmen alle Streitgenossen an der mündlichen Verhandlung des Rechtsstreits teil, so ist jeder in dem Vorbringen des Prozeβstoffes unabhängig von den anderen. Jeder kann Angriffs- oder Verteidigungsmittel vorbringen, die nur ihn angehen oder allen gemeinsam sind, und Beweismittel daür benennen, kann eine von den anderen abweichende Sachdarstellung geben, die Behauptungen des Gegners bestreiten oder zugestehen, auf den geltend gemachten Anspruch verzichten oder ihn anerkennen usf. Aber die Einheitlichkeit der Entscheidung verlangt Einheitlichkeit des Prozeβstoffs. Bei widerstreitenden Sachdarstellung entscheidet über die dem Urteil als wahr zugrunde zu legende die Beweisaufnahme und die Beweiswürdigung des Gerichts, die wie bei der gewöhnlichen Streitgenossenschaft nur einheitlichkeit sein kann. Wenn aber ein Streitgenosse ein Geständnis, einen Verzicht oder ein Anerkenntnis erklärt, eine Klageänderung vornimmt oder ihr zustimmt usf., so kann deren Wirkung nur eintreten, wenn der Streitgenosse auch materiellrechtlich zu Lasten der anderen Streitgenossen verfügen kann.
표호건 한국지식재산학회 2006 産業財産權 Vol.- No.19
In 1994, Congress enacted a statute to satisfy the United States’ pledge under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPs) agreement. The new statute added liability under the patent law for an ”offer to sell.“ Effective January 1, 1996, 35 U.S.C. §271(a) provided that ”whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States infringes the patent“. Congress offered no guidance as to the meaning of the phrase other than stating in §271(i) that an ”offer to sell“ includes only those offers ”in which the sale will occur before the expiration of the term of the patent.“ The primary purpose behind the addition of the ”offer to sell“ language was to comply and harmonize with international intellectual property regimes as part of the TRIPs agreement and was not to disturb the fundamental scope of patent protection in the United States. The interpretation of the ”offer to sell“ language should be consistent with this purpose. From a policy perspective, the broad interpretation of the ”offer to sell“ language would also have the undesirable effect of deterring international companies from conducting otherwise lawful business in the United States.
表昊建 한국지식재산학회 2006 産業財産權 Vol.- No.19
In 1994, Congress enacted a statute to satisfy the United States' pledge under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPs) agreement. The new statute added liability under the patent law for an "offer to sell." Effective January 1, 1996, 35 U.S.C. §271(a) provided that "whoever without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States infringes the patent." Congress offered no guidance as to the meaning of the phrase other than stating in §271(i) that an "offer to sell" includes only those offers "in which the sale will occur before the expiration of the term of the patent." The primary purpose behind the addition of the "offer to sell" language was to comply and harmonize with international intellectual property regimes as part of the TRIPs agreement and was not to disturb the fundamental scope of patent protection in the United States. The interpretation of the "offer to sell" language should be consistent with this purpose. From a policy perspective, the broad interpretation of the "offer to sell" language would also have the undesirable effect of deterring international companies from conducting otherwise lawful business in the United States.