A Comparative Study On Service Invention System Between China And Japan

Service invention system plays an important role in the legal system of intellectual property rights,based on the consideration of the political system and economic development, different position in distribution of technological innovation rights, and cultural, ethnic traditions difference, there is a big difference in countries service invention institutional arrangements mode. The service invention system design touches so much of independent intellectual property rights’produce and uses, it is effective to improve the ability of technological innovation, promote the development of scientific and technological and economic,the significance of building an innovative country. Comparability of the Chinese and Japanese service invention system of intellectual property rights is that the location of the two countries is very similar, homologous historical, cultural homogeneity, legal systems, are closely related in terms of political trust, economic and trade exchanges, build in the legal system of intellectual property rights aspects of both contact and differentiated,analysis and comparison of the two countries the legislative history of intellectual property rights, basic content as well as major development model for China to establish a legal system of intellectual property rights can learn from experience.In this paper, as the research object,Chinese and Japanese service invention system trying to trends and legislative ideas by observing the positions of the two countries in system of the invention,thinking on perfecting of our country’s institution of inventions and creations at professional posts:Chinese legislative choose whether mining of employers or employees first mode?Is the current service invention system suits with Chinese national conditions?Do we need to modify and how to modify?In this paper,comparative jurisprudence as the main tool, a full range of comparative analysis and study about Chinese and Japanese service invention system including the historical origins,the background, the nature and characteristics of the rights of ownership, remuneration allocation and implementation results and other aspects.By comparing the study, I believe that the Chinese and Japanese service invention system have many essential differences:Legislative mode,Chinese main unit priority mode is employee’s first,and Japan is the typical country of employer’s first;Nature, Chinese major service invention reward as remuneration for labor to look at, Japanese service invention is part of the intellectual property right of return;Scoping, Chinese service invention range more widely than Japan; Ownership of rights,Chinese belong to the employee,Japanese belong to employer;Reward allocation, Chinese major form of law provisions amount of remuneration that Japanese law only provides for the principle of compensation standards do will develop the specific remuneration standards decentralization to enterprises;The implementation of the effect, Japan is much better than China,service invention patents accounted for the proportion of all patents throughout the year, Japan has held more than90%, while China is often less than60%;In the service invention to create enthusiasm, Japan motivate employees through the implementation of strong protection mechanisms and interests of employees, and our country due to the historical and institutional, and many other reasons, there is no fully safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the service invention, and the lack of effective incentivemeasures to curb the inventor’s creative enthusiasm;Japanese companies through intellectual property licensing, transfer, and its investments, cooperation in commercial operation in the corporate strategy of choice, value-added intellectual property has become an important strategic enterprises dominate the market, sustainable development, and many of our units delay in exercising rights,often shelved duties inventions,don’t want to spend more on follow-up research and development, transformation and marketing of intellectual property products; Social benefits, Japan embarked on the promotion of intellectual property rights Country Strategy Wells Fargo Limin road, and we are facing in brain drain of its elites is becoming serious, less independent intellectual property rights situation.Explore the causes of Chinese and Japanese service invention system such a huge difference, inseparable with the two countries’ historical and cultural heritage, legal traditions and the current social situation.China is an ancient civilization, the respected spirit lives on in the traditional culture, the concept of substance to share, do not attach importance to the protection of intellectual property rights, a modern intellectual property system after the founding of New China has gradually established up.Due to the impact of Chinese political system, economic development, the service invention system pay more attention to the protection of the interests of the unit.Ancient Japan in the development process by the influence of Chinese civilization, the entire culture is also inhibit the development of intellectual property, but with the comprehensive reform of "knowingly Restoration", in1909,Japan follow the example of the patent system in Europe and America for the first time in the "Patent Law"the relevant provisions of the service invention.In2005, new Patent Law perfect service invention system, focusing on through incentives for employees to improve the capability of independent innovation, enhance the competitiveness of enterprises.The author believes that the comparison in Chinese and Japanese service invention system, it’s not simply to get a winner of the stage performance of a rule and the conclusion, we should not be reckless assertion which country is more effective or excellent, in each country to adopt a different system model has its inevitable legitimacy reason, and it’s difficult to construct a perfect system to much the needs of all stakeholders. We only based on our own national conditions, to develop the best national interest, most balanced system to protect the interests of our country.