Comparative Study On Us And Eu Ipr-related Antitrust Policy

Intellectual property rights related antitrust, or the abuse of intellectual property has long been the regulation of economic importance in developed countries. Intellectual property rights is given a monopoly right by antitrust law, but the exercise of power in the intellectual property rights will exist beyond the boundaries of its powers under the law, is called the abuse of intellectual property rights. This behavior would have negative effects of free competition, leading to economic inefficiencies, is not conducive to rational allocation of resources. European and American antitrust field for intellectual property law practice has been stretching for over 200 years, which has a wealth of experience. In 1995 the US introduced the "Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property" (hereinafter referred to as the "Guidelines"), issued by the EU in 2004, "COMMISSION NOTICE Guidelines on the application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to technology transfer agreements (2004/C101/02)" is the most authoritative documentation of this fields in recent years, also affected other countries and regions in the formulation of policies in this area. "Guidelines" introduce the acts of enforcement standards and methods in detail of intellectual property rights related antitrust law on the U.S. and EU. There is a strong operational and legal certainty, but also fully embodies the United States and European Union antitrust in the field of intellectual property policy direction. So this article studied by compared to the policy of the United States and the European Union. Through the study of the "Guidelines" of United States and the European Union found that although the general direction of convergence, but in some of the details of the deal, and there are still differences. By studying both sides of the "Guidelines" to compare the two regions to develop policies and standards of the strengths and weaknesses, it is have the meaningful to draft the "Guideline" of intellectual property rights related antitrust in China for reference. This article is divided into six chapters to introduce. The first chapter is the introduction, the papers of the problem, namely, antitrust legislation of intellectual property's difficulties and mistakes in china, why I should choose the policies of Europe and America to study and put forward for the establishment of China's proposed antitrust policy of intellectual property. Next is the relationship between intellectual property law and antitrust elaboration and on the "Guidelines" in the framework of general principles and analysis are briefly introduced.The second chapter describes the United States, "Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property", this chapter is divided into three parts. The first part is the background of US intellectual property antitrust legislation introduced. The second part is the economic theory on the U.S. legislation. The third part is the US "Guidelines" in detail, readers can learn about by reading the United States in the field of law enforcement objectives, general principles and advanced methods of analysis. Concern is the "rule of reason" in use.The third chapter describes, known as the EU's "Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property the ", "COMMISSION NOTICE Guidelines on the application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty to technology transfer agreements(2004/C101/02)"and the important bills and legislative background of the EU policies in antitrust field of intellectual property. "The block exemption" principle is the core of the European Union intellectual property policy is the best place to reflect the superiority of EU policy.The fourth chapter is the contrast the US "Guidelines" with the EU "Guidelines". The reader can understand their similarities and differences directly. By comparing the two policies can better understand the different external or internal factors about the formulation of laws and regulations, can analyze its advantages and disadvantages, and provide a reference for our country's regulations.Chapter five of the article is to develop guidelines for the Chinese antitrust of intellectual property. Firstly it is analysis for the present status of the legislation of intellectual property rights related antitrust in China. The "Guidelines" of United States and the European Union can provide our country reference for their essential parts. The third part is discussed that the "Guidelines" of intellectual property rights related antitrust in China. The sixth chapter is the conclusion.Through to the United States and the European Union intellectual property rights related antitrust policy expounding and analysis, this paper mainly research conclusion is obtained from four aspects.First, intellectual property law and antitrust although fundamentally different in the way of law enforcement, one is the exclusive protection of intellectual property rights, that is, the legalization of its monopoly power, the other one is act against monopoly, but the presence of the two methods not contradictory. Because the policy goal is to maintain competition and promote efficient allocation of economic resources, improve the social economic efficiency and consumer welfare. In fact, their cross section is understandable that the legal monopoly conferred by intellectual property rights also have limits, and once beyond the powers of the antitrust laws to regulate it is necessary, and those who sanction the abuse of intellectual property rights. So the two methods are complementary and indispensable, but there is a better balance efficiency and innovation.Secondly, the analysis for the background of the in United States and the European Union showed that the formulation of any policy are inseparable from the social background and economic background, or that policy objectives can not be separated at the time. IPR-related antirust policy is no exception, although there have been errors in the development and implementation of the policy in U.S. and Europe, also the general policy followed in a timely manner to gradually improve and supplement. Therefore, intellectual property rights to China antitrust policy, revelation is also to develop suitable economic environment and social background of the policy, so as to play its effectiveness, and national policy objectives.Again, the comparative study of "Guidelines" of intellectual property rights related antitrust in the United States and the European Union, obtained the two countries in the policy objectives and analysis methods are consistent, but there are still many details on the error. Severity, such as law enforcement, dynamic and flexible, and so has its own characteristics and advantages.Finally, the analysis of antitrust legislation in China's Intellectual Property Rights, obtained by the law in this area very imperfect, the operational law enforcement is not strong, to be more detailed guidance documents issued. This article presents some constructive suggestions, according to the characteristics of China's intellectual property market, SMEs can give some of the private liberal trading environment in order to promote intellectual property dissemination of technology innovation and stimulate private enterprise motivation. Further research can be view on the characteristics of China's intellectual property market, the establishment of what intellectual property antitrust policy, that can stimulate small and medium enterprises and private enterprises passion for innovation, but also to prevent the abuse of intellectual property rights of enterprises are not subject to conduct violations.