메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
이봉문 (연세대학교 산학협력단)
저널정보
한국지식재산연구원 지식재산연구 지식재산연구 제3권 제1호
발행연도
2008.6
수록면
75 - 100 (26page)
DOI
10.34122/jip.2008.06.3.1.75

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The sale of a product generally gives the purchaser the right to the full enjoyment of that product. When one or more patented inventions are related to the use or enjoyment of the product, the purchaser might assume that the right to use these inventions is included in the sale of the product. In reality, these rights are not always included. This comment discusses one way patent law controls the purchaser"s enjoyment: implied license. When a product either embodies an invention or can be used in a process invention, the transfer of the right to use that invention may be controlled by express or implied license. An express license operates by written or oral contract between the patent owner and the purchaser of the product. If, however, the sale is unaccompanied by an express license, an implied license may still arise to control the exchange of the right to use an invention. Without a license to use the patented invention, the purchaser may be liable for the tort of patent infringement. As technology becomes more complicated, determining which inventions are transferred by implied license also becomes more complicated. However, determining whether patented inventions directly embodied in a product are included in an implied license rarely presents a challenge; the purchaser will almost certainly get such a license. To find otherwise would very likely make the product unusable. The more challenging issue arises in determining whether there are rights to use inventions that are more indirectly related to a product. The further removed from a product the invention is, the more difficult the analysis becomes. This complication is a problem not only because the purchaser may unknowingly be exposed to infringement liability, but also because the patent owner"s competitors may use implied license as a loophole to escape infringement liability. Before examining these aspects of implied license and infringement, part I of this comment will familiarize the reader with some fundamentals of patent law. Part II outlines the development of the law of implied license in the courts. Because that development has resulted in a confusing array of tests to determine if an implied license arose in the sale of a product, part III compiles the various tests into a coherent, unified analysis for applying implied license. Part III also includes a model flow chart which should assist the reader to apply the implied license tests consistently. Following this analysis, part IV discusses and critiques recent district court decisions concerning the application of implied license. Those district court opinions undermine patent owners" statutory protection from contributory infringement. Accordingly, part V recommends actions that patent owners can and should take to protect themselves in the wake of this emerging trend. The comment concludes with an evaluation of the viability of implied license theories, and urges the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to clarify the currently opaque and elusive interaction of the various tests.

목차

제1장 들어가며
제2장 특허법상 특허침해행위
제3장 묵시적 실시권의 이론 전개
제4장 묵시적 실시권의 분석
제5장 간접침해 항변사유로서 묵시적 실시권
제5장 결론
Abstract

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0