RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    공정거래법에 의한 지적재산권 남용 규제 = Regulating Abuse of Intellectual Property Right by the Anti-Monopoly and Fair Trade Act: Criticism and alternative suggestion

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101824361

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The rigid regulatory enforcement of Antitrust Law alone would wither the intellectual property rights system itself and cause the contraction of innovation. Thus, the standard of undue exercise of intellectual property has to be used in the purpose of intellectual property law. In this regard, the author strongly believes that Antitrust Law should be applied to regulate ``IP Misuse``. However, in reality, the Fair Trade Commission`s lack of expertise and manpower is predictable enough in the patent area of sharp conflict of technological ideologies. Therefore, the IP Misuse is bound to be a remedial relief in the enforcement of Antitrust Law. Many empirical studies of the economy warn that without competition, intellectual property rights would be strengthened excessively and rather slow the rate of innovation. The best innovation of intellectual property can be realized only when the protection of intellectual property is maintained proportionally spaced from the competition policy. Therefore, it is the author`s view that Antitrust Law needs to regulate the misuse of intellectual property rights. Particularly industries related to intellectual property are changing so fast that urgent relief measures will be essential. It is because it usually takes months or years before the Fair Trade Commission investigates and takes corrective actions, and the court decides on the case. Thus, there are high concerns on effectiveness and time. In addition, market timing is an absolutely critical matter in intellectual property-related industries. Where a potential market entrant is discouraged to enter into the market due to a collective refusal to deal with a potential competitor to market, the market enterpriser would have no choice but to abandon the relevant business unless the refusal to deal is banned immediately. So, the resulting damage in the form of compensation for damages is hard to prove it in practice since there is lack of economic motives in the claim to increase the chance of monetary damages. In light of this problem, Antitrust Law should introduce ``private action for injunction under Antitrust Law`` to allow the claim of those who are likely to be inflicted with injury or damage to the court to injunct the unlawful act. More over, Intellectual property rights are usually associated with the highly specialized area of the industrial sector and it is not easy for the Fair Trade Commission to recognize the violation of law. In other words, it is hard to find the best solution to promote competition. Accordingly, it is necessary to introduce the consent order to investigate and deliberate process of self-corrective measures proposed by enterprisers. When the competition authority recognizes the validity of the corrective measures, the competition authorities will close the case quickly without investigating the violation of law.
    번역하기

    The rigid regulatory enforcement of Antitrust Law alone would wither the intellectual property rights system itself and cause the contraction of innovation. Thus, the standard of undue exercise of intellectual property has to be used in the purpose of...

    The rigid regulatory enforcement of Antitrust Law alone would wither the intellectual property rights system itself and cause the contraction of innovation. Thus, the standard of undue exercise of intellectual property has to be used in the purpose of intellectual property law. In this regard, the author strongly believes that Antitrust Law should be applied to regulate ``IP Misuse``. However, in reality, the Fair Trade Commission`s lack of expertise and manpower is predictable enough in the patent area of sharp conflict of technological ideologies. Therefore, the IP Misuse is bound to be a remedial relief in the enforcement of Antitrust Law. Many empirical studies of the economy warn that without competition, intellectual property rights would be strengthened excessively and rather slow the rate of innovation. The best innovation of intellectual property can be realized only when the protection of intellectual property is maintained proportionally spaced from the competition policy. Therefore, it is the author`s view that Antitrust Law needs to regulate the misuse of intellectual property rights. Particularly industries related to intellectual property are changing so fast that urgent relief measures will be essential. It is because it usually takes months or years before the Fair Trade Commission investigates and takes corrective actions, and the court decides on the case. Thus, there are high concerns on effectiveness and time. In addition, market timing is an absolutely critical matter in intellectual property-related industries. Where a potential market entrant is discouraged to enter into the market due to a collective refusal to deal with a potential competitor to market, the market enterpriser would have no choice but to abandon the relevant business unless the refusal to deal is banned immediately. So, the resulting damage in the form of compensation for damages is hard to prove it in practice since there is lack of economic motives in the claim to increase the chance of monetary damages. In light of this problem, Antitrust Law should introduce ``private action for injunction under Antitrust Law`` to allow the claim of those who are likely to be inflicted with injury or damage to the court to injunct the unlawful act. More over, Intellectual property rights are usually associated with the highly specialized area of the industrial sector and it is not easy for the Fair Trade Commission to recognize the violation of law. In other words, it is hard to find the best solution to promote competition. Accordingly, it is necessary to introduce the consent order to investigate and deliberate process of self-corrective measures proposed by enterprisers. When the competition authority recognizes the validity of the corrective measures, the competition authorities will close the case quickly without investigating the violation of law.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼