English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 11 |  Items with full text/Total items : 88866/118573 (75%)
Visitors : 23554712      Online Users : 245
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67203


    Title: 以國際專利訴訟為例探討台灣廠商之專利品質
    Using International Patent Litigation as Examples to Evaluate Taiwan High Tech Industry Patent Quality
    Authors: 陳怡婷
    Chen, Yi Ting
    Contributors: 陳桂恒
    Chan, Keith
    陳怡婷
    Chen, Yi Ting
    Keywords: 專利品質
    專利訴訟
    Date: 2013
    Issue Date: 2014-07-01 12:35:21 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 專利侵權訴訟成為近年最熱門的議題之一,各國公司皆主動或被動的參與其中。台灣廠商,尤其高科技產業,近年常被報導在專利訴訟中敗訴且損失大筆權利金;然而台灣廠商所擁有的專利數量龐大,和敗訴的情形呈現對比。
    專利侵權訴訟失敗的原因諸多,包含智財策略、專利權管理、專利品質等因素。本研究針對專利品質這項因素,以國際專利訴訟勝方專利為標的,探討專利品質及特性,做為台灣廠商在申請專利時之參考。
    本論文針對研究對象進行基本被引證數(forward citation)分析,以及使用品質檢驗表分別檢核美國廠商及台灣廠商美國專利之品質。所得結果顯示多數研究對象之專利被引證數確實高於該年度的平均被引證數。專利品質檢驗表檢核結果顯示研究對象確實可能獲得極高分,然台灣廠商之美國專利,也有可能得分不低。
    整體研究結果顯示,專利品質被多種因素影響,被引證數只是其一,其餘包含專利技術本身、撰寫品質、前案檢索等,皆影響一篇專利的品質。台灣廠商若在專利撰寫初期即注意這些特徵,應可提升其專利品質,並在訴訟方面有較佳之表現。
    Reference: 1. Allison, John R. and Lemley, Mark A. (1998). Empirical Evidence on the Validity of Litigated Patents. American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) Quarterly Journal, Vol. 26, p. 185. http://ssrn.com/abstract=118149 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.118149
    2. Allison, John R. and Lemley, Mark A. and Moore, Kimberly A. and Trunkey, R. Derek.. (2003). Valuable Patents.
    3. Allison, John R. and Mann, Ronald J..(2007). The Disputed Quality of Software Patents. Law and Economics Research Paper.No. 97.
    4. Amber。(2005)。專利引證(citing)與專利被引證(cited)。科技產業資訊室。http://cdnet.stpi.org.tw/techroom/pclass/pclass013.htm
    5. Anthon C. (2005). A Classical Dictionary: Containing the Principle Proper Names Mentioned in Ancient Authors. Kessinger Publishing.
    6. Abrams, David and Akcigit, Ufuk and Popadak, Jillian A.(2013). Understanding the Link between Patent Value and Citations: Creative Destruction or Defensive Disruption? PIER Working Paper No. 13-065; U of Penn, Inst for Law & Econ Research Paper No. 13-23. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2351809 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2351809
    7. Bronwyn H. H. & Dietmar H. (2004). Post-Grant Reviews in the U.S. Patent System—Design Choices and Expected Impact. Berkeley Tech L. J. 19(1).
    8. Dar-Zen Chen and Wen-Yau Cathy Lin. (2005).Essential patent indicators for the evaluation of industrial technological innovation competitiveness. Proceeding of ISSI 2005. P. 490-498.
    9. Ernst H. (1998). Patent portfolio for strategic R&D planning. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. 15, 279-308.
    10. Global Patent Quality Statistics & Investment Analysis. 2013 U.S. Patent Quality Statistics spreadsheet. http://www.bustpatents.com/statistics.html
    11. Graf, S. W. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis &clarkl.rev. p. 495-519. http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/LCLARKUS/L070524G.pdf
    12. Hall & Harhoff, supra note 23, at 991.
    13. International Patent Classification (IPC) Official Publication. WIPO. http://web2.wipo.int/ipcpub/#refresh=page¬ion=scheme&version=20060101
    14. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. 35 U.S.C. (2011). Appendix L Consolidated Patent Laws. http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/consolidated_laws.pdf
    15. Maria V. H. (2002). The U.S. Patent System Celebrates 212 Years. [Press Release]. http://www.uspto.gov/news/pr/2002/02-26.jsp
    16. Mariagrazia. S., Hélène D., Chiara C. (2013). Measuring Patent Quality. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2013/03. http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/download/5k4522wkw1r8.pdf?expires=1377082761&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=9EAAF3C435E342BC19AB83FC1D089B40
    17. Narin F. (2000). Inventing our future: The link between Australian patenting and basic science. AusInfo, Canberra, ACT.
    18. Narin F. and Olivastro D. (1998). Linkage between patents and papers: an interim EPO/US comparison. Scientometics. 41(1-2). P. 51-59.
    19. Narin F., Hamilton K. S. and Olivastro D. (1997). The increasing linkage between U.S. technology and public science.ResearchPolicy. 26(3). P. 317-330.
    20. Ocean Tomo Ratings™ System. http://www.oceantomo.com/ratings/system
    21. Ocean Tomo. Ocean Tomo Ratings™ Brochure. http://www.oceantomo.com/system/files/OTRatings_Brochure_Final.pdf
    22. OECD. (2011). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2011, OECD Publishing.doi: 10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2011-en
    23. PAIR: http://portal.uspto.gov/pair/PublicPair
    24. Patent Scope. (2013). WIPO. http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/patents.html
    25. Patentgesetz von Venedig. (2001). http://www.wolfgang-pfaller.de/venedig.htm
    26. Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper Series. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=426020
    27. Stephen A. M., Richard C. L., and Mark B. M. (Eds). (2004). Patent System for the 21st Century. The national academies press. [Adobe Digital Editions version]. http://www.nap.edu/html/patentsystem/
    28. Susan S. D. (2003). To promote innovation: the proper balance of competition and patent law and policy. Report by the Federal Trade Commission. http://www.ftc.gov/os/2003/10/innovationrpt.pdf
    29. Susan W. G. (2007). Improving patent quality through identification of relevant prior art: approaches to increase information flow to the patent office. Lewis &clarkl.rev. p. 495-519. http://immagic.com/eLibrary/ARCHIVES/GENERAL/LCLARKUS/L070524G.pdf
    30. U.S. P Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2006, at 19, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2006/ 2006annualreport.pdf
    31. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2003, § 4.2.1, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2003/index.html
    32. U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, performance and accountability report fiscal year 2005, § 4.2.1, available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/annual/2005/index.html
    33. United Kingdom Patent Applications. (2004). http://w3.nexis.com/sources/scripts/info.pl?278252
    34. University of Houston Law Ctr., Decisions for 2000–2004. http://www.patstats.org/Composite%20Table%20(2000−2004).html
    35. University of Houston Law Ctr., Decisions for 2005. (2005). http://www.patstats.org/2005.html
    36. USPTO Performance and Accountability Report fiscal year 2012. (2012). http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2012PAR.pdf
    37. USPTO. (2013). Patent. http://www.uspto.gov/patents/
    38. WIPO. (2013). Standard St.9. Recommendation Concerning Bibliographic Data on and Relating to Patents and Spcs. http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/standards/en/pdf/03-09-01.pdf
    39. 周延鵬。(2006)。一堂課2000億。台北市:工商財經數位。
    40. 周延鵬。(2009)。專利的品質、價值與價格初探。科技與法律。79(3)。P. 40-44。
    41. 李淑蓮。(2013)。台積電法務長告訴你什麼是「高品質」的專利組合。北美智權報。http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Industry_Economy/publish-70.htm
    42. 林國塘。(2012)。專利實務講義。附錄2。P. 1-5。
    43. 潘治良。(2005)。專利之品質與價值評量方法—以TFT-LCD產業為例。未出版之碩士論文。政治大學智慧財產研究所。P.24-28。
    44. 經濟部智慧財產局。(2013)。何謂專利?http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=502690&ctNode=7633&mp=1
    45. 經濟部智慧財產局。(2013)。專利申請表格暨申請須知。http://www.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=203009&CtNode=6672&mp=1
    46. 許履塵。(2012)。專利的品質及價值。笑談專利演義:唐老鴨和乒乓球。p.181。
    47. 談定宇,James Long。2008。專利品質是灰色的─美國專利個案研究。北美智權報。http://www.naipo.com/Portals/1/web_tw/Knowledge_Center/Patent_Skill/publish-4.htm
    48. 談定宇。2009。不是黑或白「專利品質」是灰色的。北美智權報。http://naipo97.pixnet.net/blog/post/18085318-%E4%B8%8D%E6%98%AF%E9%BB%91%E6%88%96%E7%99%BD-%E3%80%8C%E5%B0%88%E5%88%A9%E5%93%81%E8%B3%AA%E3%80%8D%E6%98%AF%E7%81%B0%E8%89%B2%E7%9A%84
    49. 賴晏翎。(2013)。我國智慧局與各大專利局最新專利申請相關數據摘要。 http://www.taie.com.tw/tc/p4-publications-detail.asp?article_code=03&article_classify_sn=64&sn=786
    50. 阮明淑,梁俊齊。(2009)。專利指標發展研究。圖書館學與資訊科學。35(2)。
    51. 陳世顯。(2012)。專利價值大勢觀。科技產業資訊室。專利情報。http://cdnet.stpi.narl.org.tw/techroom/pclass/2012/pclass_12_A001.htm
    52. 陳乃華。(2000)。專利權評價模式之實證研究。臺灣銀行季刊。第六十一卷第二期。P. 270-272。
    53. 陳達仁、李思宏。(2005)。由專利指標看TFT-LCD中段製程技術。http://www.tipo.gov.tw/PCM/pro_show.asp?sn=183
    54. 陳達仁。(2007)。由專利看美國大學科技創新研發能量的表現。評鑑雙月刊。第8期。http://epaper.heeact.edu.tw/archive/2007/07/06/294.aspx
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    科技管理與智慧財產研究所
    100361009
    102
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0100361009
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    100901.pdf2410KbAdobe PDF1011View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback