登入帳戶　 |　訂單查詢　 |　購物車/收銀台( 0 )　|　在線留言板　 |　付款方式　 |　聯絡我們　 |　運費計算　 |　幫助中心　|　 加入書簽
	全部範圍 - 圖書 - 　- 中文簡體書(大陸書) - 　- 英文書（原版） - - 音碟 - 　- 音樂 - 　- 影視 - - 雜誌 - 全文 精確	會員登入 新註冊 |　新用戶登記

HOME新書上架暢銷書架好書推介特價區會員書架精選月讀2023年度TOP分類閱讀雜誌

香港／國際用戶

最新/最熱/最齊全的簡體書網

品種：超過100萬種書，正品正价，放心網購，悭钱省心

送貨：速遞 / EMS，時效：出貨後2-3日

新書推薦： 《 全球城市发展报告2023：基于全球城市网络的合作与竞争 》 售價：NT$ 1277.0 《 为什么只见树木不见森林：从简单现象到复杂系统 》 售價：NT$ 442.0 《 大英帝国的兴衰：全景式俯瞰英国千年历史沧桑剧变，回首日不落帝国的初升、辉煌与没落 》 售價：NT$ 549.0 《 意大利文艺复兴新艺术史 》 售價：NT$ 4474.0 《 2023年《咬文嚼字》合订本（精） 》 售價：NT$ 437.0 《 世界银行营商环境成熟度方法论手册 》 售價：NT$ 1501.0 《 变革时代的公司契约：法律能否与时俱进？ 》 售價：NT$ 437.0 《 我国城乡融合发展基本格局及典型形态研究 》 售價：NT$ 386.0

建議一齊購買： + NT$ 634 《 最高人民法院知识产权审判案例指导（第9辑） 》 + NT$ 353 《 赢在IP：知识产权诉讼实战策略 》 + NT$ 634 《 2017中华人民共和国知识产权法律法规全书（含司法解释） 》 + NT$ 641 《 法律规则的提炼与运用：人民司法案例重述.知识产权卷（2011-2015） 》 + NT$ 660 《 最高人民法院知识产权审判案例指导（第8辑） 》 + NT$ 2460 《 人民法院知识产权案例裁判要旨通纂（上下卷） 》 編輯推薦： 《*人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2008~2015中英文版》图书收录了*人民法院2008到2015年度年度发布的知识产权年度报告，该报告已经成为*人民法院指导知识产权审判工作的重要载体和社会公众了解*人民法院知识产权审判发展动态的重要渠道。案件年度报告在明晰法律规则、指导审判实践、统一法律适用方面的作用和意义也越来越大。随着知识产权越来越国际化，为进一步加强对外交流与合作，出版了中英文对照版本，翻译团队专业水准高，法律专业术语准确*威，案例内容精确可指引，可读性增强，更有利于读者了解*人民法院在知识产权和竞争领域处理案件的审理思路和裁判方法，方便读者在涉外案件中直接援引。 內容簡介： 本次出版的年度报告分析了2008到2015年度*人民法院各类知识产权案件的审理情况，收录了2008到2015年度*人民法院审结的知识产权和竞争案件中的典型案例。案件类型覆盖专利、著作权、商标、反不正当竞争等民 事案件，知识产权刑事、行政案件以及涉及知识产权诉讼证据与程序的案件，并涵盖已经入选年度中国法院10大知识产权案件和50件典型知识产权案例的案件。*人民法院从上述具有代表性、指导性和典型性的案件中归纳出具有普遍指导意义的法律适用问题，反映了*人民法院的审理思路和裁判方法。为进一步与国际知识产权司法保护对接，本次出版的年度报告特别由中国法院知识产权司法保护国际交流上海基地组织专业力量将其译成英文,以中英对照体例进行发行,是一本对中外知识产权工作者具有很强的实务指导意义的图书。 關於作者： 最高人民法院知识产权审判庭为民三庭。从1993年北京市高、中级人民法院设立专门审理知识产权案件的业务庭开始，全国部分高、中人民法院先后设立了知识产权审判庭，案件比较集中的部分基层法院也设立了知识产权审判庭。据不完全统计，全国共有14个高级法院设立了知识产权审判庭，包括北京、上海 、天津、重庆、黑龙江、河北、广东、福建、江苏、四川、海南、浙江、河南、安徽;30个中级法院设立知识产权审判庭，包括北京市*一、二中院、天津市*一、二中院、上海市* 一、*二中院、哈尔滨、石家庄、秦皇岛、保定、邢台、济南、烟台、青岛、成都、南京、盐城、安阳、合肥、滁州、景德镇、太原、武汉、福州、厦门、广州、深圳、佛山、汕头、 海口;设立知识产权审判庭的基层法院有海淀、朝阳、浦东、黄浦等4个。 目錄： 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告20081 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 200811 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告200923 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 200985 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2010171 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2010243 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2011339 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2011399 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2012481 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2012545 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2013631 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2013691 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2014777 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2014849 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2015947 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 20151015 目录 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2008 序言 一、知识产权民事案件 一专利案件 二著作权案件 三商标案件 四不正当竞争案件 五技术合同案件 二、知识产权行政案件 一专利授权确权案件 二商标授权确权案件 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2008 Preface I.Civil Intellectual Property Cases I Patent Cases II Copyright Cases III Trademark Cases IVAntiunfair Competition Cases V Technology Contract Cases II.Administrative Intellectual Property Cases I Patent Authorization and Determination Cases II Trademark Authorization and Determination Cases 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2009 序言 一、专利案件审判 二、著作权案件审判 三、商标案件审判 一商标授权确权行政案件审判 二商标民事案件审判 四、竞争案件审判 五、知识产权合同案件审判 六、关于知识产权侵权责任承担 七、关于知识产权诉讼证据 八、关于知识产权诉讼程序 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2009 Preface I.Trial of Patent Cases II.Trial of Copyright Cases III.Trial of Trademark Cases ITrial and Judgment of Administrative Trademark Right Authorization and Affirmation Cases IITrial of Civil Trademark Cases IV.Trial of Competition Cases V.Trial of Intellectual Property Contract Cases VI.Liability for Intellectual Property Infringement VII.Evidences for Intellectual Property Litigation VIII.Procedures for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2010 序言 一、专利案件审判 一专利民事案件审判 二专利授权确权行政案件审判 二、著作权案件审判 三、商标案件审判 一商标民事案件审判 二商标授权确权行政案件审判 四、竞争案件审判 五、知识产权合同案件审判 六、关于知识产权侵权责任承担 七、关于知识产权诉讼证据与程序 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2010 Preface I.Trial of Patent Cases ITrial of Civil Patent Cases IITrial of Administrative Patent Authorization and Determination Cases II.Trial of Copyright Cases III.Trial of Trademark Cases ITrial of Civil Trademark Cases IITrial and Judgment of Administrative Trademark Right Authorization and Affirmation Cases IV.Trial of Antiunfair Competition Cases V.Trial of Intellectual Property Contract Cases VI.Liability for Intellectual Property Infringement VII.Evidences and Procedures for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2011 序言 一、专利案件审判 一专利民事案件审判 二专利行政案件审判 二、商标案件审判 一商标民事案件审判 二商标行政案件审判 三、著作权案件审判 四、竞争案件审判 五、知识产权合同案件审判 六、关于知识产权侵权责任承担 七、关于知识产权诉讼证据与程序 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2011 Preface I.Trial of Patent Cases ITrial of Civil Patent Cases IITrial of Administrative Patent Cases II.Trial of Trademark Cases ITrial of Civil Trademark Cases IITrial of Administrative Trademark Cases III.Trial of Copyright Cases IV.Trial of Competition Cases V.Trial of Intellectual Property Contract Cases VI.Liability for Intellectual Property Infringement VII.Evidences and Procedures for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2012 序言 一、专利案件审判 一专利民事案件审判 二专利行政案件审判 二、商标案件审判 一商标民事案件审判 二商标行政案件审判 三、著作权案件审判 四、竞争案件审判 五、关于知识产权诉讼程序与证据 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2012 Preface I.Trial of Patent Cases I Trial of Civil Patent Cases II Trial of Administrative Patent Cases II.Trial of Trademark Cases I Trial of Civil Trademark Cases II Trial of Administrative Trademark Cases III.Trial of Copyright Cases IV.Trial of Competition Cases V.Procedures and Evidences for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2013 序言 一、专利案件审判 一专利民事案件审判 二专利行政案件审判 二、商标案件审判 一商标民事案件审判 二商标行政案件审判 三、著作权案件审判 四、竞争案件审判 五、知识产权合同案件审判 六、知识产权侵权责任承担 七、关于知识产权诉讼程序与证据 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2013 Preface I.Trial of Patent Cases I Trial of Civil Patent Cases II Trial of Administrative Patent Cases II Trial of Trademark Cases I Trial of Civil Trademark Cases II Trial of Administrative Trademark Cases III.Trial of Copyright Cases IV.Trial of Competition Cases V.Trial of Intellectual Property Contract Cases VI.Liability for Intellectual Property Infringement VII.Evidences and Procedures for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2014 序言 一、专利案件审判 一专利民事案件审判 二专利行政案件审判 二、商标案件审判 一商标民事案件审判 二商标行政案件审判 三、著作权案件审判 四、不正当竞争案件审判 五、垄断案件审判 六、植物新品种案件审判 七、关于知识产权诉讼程序与证据 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2014 Preface I.Trial of Patent Cases I Trial of Civil Patent Cases II Trial of Administrative Patent Cases II Trial of Trademark Cases I Trial of Civil Trademark Cases II Trial of Administrative Trademark Cases III.Trial of Copyright Cases IV.Trial of Antiunfair Competition Cases V.Trial of Monopoly Cases VI.Trial of New Plant Variety Cases VII.Evidences and Procedures for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 最高人民法院知识产权案件年度报告2015 序言 一、专利案件审判 一专利民事案件审判 二专利行政案件审判 二、商标案件审判 一商标民事案件审判 二商标行政案件审判 三、著作权案件审判 四、不正当竞争案件审判 五、植物新品种案件审判 六、集成电路布图设计案件审判 七、关于知识产权诉讼程序与证据 结语 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2015 Preface Overview of Intellectual Property Case Trial I.Trial of Patent Cases I Trial of Civil Patent Cases II Trial of Administrative Patent Cases II.Trial of Trademark Cases I Trial of Civil Trademark Cases II Trial of Administrative Trademark Cases III.Trial of Copyright Cases IV.Trial of Antiunfair Competition Cases V.Trial of New Plant Variety Cases VI.Trial of Integrated Circuit Layout Design Cases VII.Evidences and Procedures for Intellectual Property Litigation Conclusion 內容試閱： 最高人民法院知识产权审判庭负责审理本院受理的各类知识产权民事纠纷案件和部分专利、商标授权确权行政纠纷案件。自2009年7月11日起，最高人民法院受理的专利、商标等知识产权授权确权行政纠纷案件全部归其知识产权审判庭统一审理。2008年，最高人民法院知识产权审判庭共新收包括侵犯专利权纠纷、侵犯著作权纠纷、侵犯商标权纠纷、不正当竞争纠纷和各类知识产权合同纠纷以及专利、商标授权确权纠纷等知识产权案件277件，加上2007年旧存的各类案件52件，全年共审理各类案件329件，比2007年增长1039%。最高人民法院通过依法履行知识产权审判职责，解决各类知识产权纷争，充分保护了当事人的合法权益。同时，最高人民法院通过一系列疑难复杂和新类型知识产权案件的裁判，不断明确相关法律适用问题，维护了知识产权司法标准的统一。最高人民法院裁判的这些知识产权案件中有关法律适用问题的阐释，对于全国法院知识产权司法保护工作具有指导和借鉴意义。为及时总结审判经验，加强审判监督和指导，促进知识产权法律适用标准的统一和完善，最高人民法院知识产权审判庭在2008年度审结的184件案件中，选取了23件典型案件的判理摘要，形成本年度报告，现公开发布。 一、知识产权民事案件 一专利案件 1在施特里克斯有限公司与宁波圣利达电器制造有限公司、华普超市有限公司侵犯专利权纠纷申请再审案中，最高人民法院2007民三监字第51-1号驳回再审申请通知认为，公知技术抗辩的适用仅以被控侵权产品中被指控落入专利权保护范围的全部技术特征与已经公开的其他现有技术方案的相应技术特征是否相同或者等同为必要，不能因为被控侵权产品与专利权人的专利相同而排除公知技术抗辩原则的适用。 2在辽宁省高级人民法院关于朝阳兴诺公司按照建设部颁发的行业标准《复合载体夯扩桩设计规程》设计、施工而实施标准中专利的行为是否构成侵犯专利权问题请示案中，最高人民法院2008民三他字第4号答复函认为，鉴于目前我国标准制定机关尚未建立有关标准中专利信息的公开披露及使用制度的实际情况，专利权人参与了标准的制定或者经其同意，将专利纳入国家、行业或者地方标准的，视为专利权人许可他人在实施标准的同时实施该专利，他人的有关实施行为不属于专利法第十一条所规定的侵犯专利权的行为;专利权人可以要求实施人支付一定的使用费，但支付的数额应明显低于正常的许可使用费;专利权人承诺放弃专利使用费的，依其承诺处理。 3在浙江杭州鑫富药业股份有限公司诉山东新发药业有限公司、上海爱兮缇国际贸易有限公司发明专利临时保护期使用费纠纷及侵犯发明专利权纠纷管辖权异议申请再审案中，最高人民法院2008民申字第81号民事裁定明确了发明专利临时保护期使用费纠纷的管辖确定原则。最高人民法院认为，发明专利临时保护期使用费纠纷虽然不属于一般意义上的侵犯专利权纠纷，但在本质上也是一类与专利有关的侵权纠纷，应当依据民事诉讼法第二十九条有关侵权诉讼的管辖确定原则来确定发明专利临时保护期使用费纠纷的管辖。发明专利临时保护期使用费纠纷在案件性质上与侵犯专利权纠纷最为类似，因此，在法律或者司法解释对这类案件的管辖作出特别规定之前，可以参照侵犯专利权纠纷的管辖规定确定管辖。对于被控侵权的实施行为跨越发明专利授权公告日前后的，其行为具有前后的连续性、一致性，从方便当事人诉讼出发，应当允许权利人一并就临时保护期使用费和侵犯专利权行为同时提出权利主张。 4在蓝星化工新材料股份有限公司、江西星火有机硅厂与山东东岳有机硅材料有限公司、山东东岳氟硅材料有限公司、北京石油化工设计院有限公司侵犯实用新型专利权纠纷上诉案中，最高人民法院2008民三终字第7号民事裁定认为，受理法院对案件有管辖权是审理案件的前提，当确定诉讼主体与确定管辖权发生冲突时，受理法院应当首先就管辖权问题作出裁定。 5在蔡朗春与佛山石湾鹰牌陶瓷有限公司、江门市新力塑料厂有限公司、朱根良侵犯专利权纠纷管辖权异议申请再审案中，最高人民法院2008民申字第19号民事裁定认为，杭州市中级人民法院已审理过再审申请人就涉案专利权提起的多个侵权诉讼，且本案不属于在浙江省内具有重大影响的案件，因此，为便于案件的审理，上级人民法院可以根据民事诉讼法2007年10月28日修正，自2008年4月1日起施行。第三十九条的规定将本院管辖的第一审民事案件交下级人民法院审理。 ANNUAL REPORT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CASES OF THE SUPREME PEOPLES COURT 2008 Preface The Intellectual PropertyIP Division of the Supreme Peoples CourtSPC is responsible for the trial of various cases involving civil IP disputes and some administrative disputes over authorization and affirmation of patent and trademark. Since July 112009, the IP cases over authorization and affirmation of patent and trademark have been allocated to the IP Division of the SPC for trial. In 2008,the IP Division of the SPC accepted 277 IP cases involving patent infringement disputes, copyright infringement disputes, trademark infringement disputes, unfair competition disputes, various IP contract disputes and authorization and affirmation disputes over patent and trademark, along with 52 unsettled cases accepted in 2007,the IP Division tried 329 cases totally in 2008,increased by 103.9% on a yearly basis. The SPC performed IP trial duties in accordance with laws, resolved various IP disputes and protected the legitimate rights and interests of the parties concerned. In the meantime, the SPC constantly clarified issues concerning the application of relevant laws and preserved the unification of IP judicial standards through the trial of a series of complicated and new types of IP cases. The interpretation on issues concerning the application of relevant laws presented in the IP cases concluded by the SPC is of guidance and reference significance for the IP judicial protection conducted by all the courts across the country. In order to summarize the trial experience in a timely manner, reinforce trial supervision and guidance, and promote the unification and perfection of the application standards of the IP law, the IP Division of the SPC has compiled this annual report on trial summaries of selected 23 typical cases chosen from 184 cases concluded in 2008,and now releases it to the public. I. Civil Intellectual Property Cases I Patent Cases 1.In the case of application for retrial of patent infringement dispute between Strix Limited and Ningbo Shingled Electric Manufacturing Co.,Ltd.,Jian Mart Co.,Ltd.,the SPC 2007 MSJZ No.511 Notification on rejection of the retrial application held that, the application of unconfined public technique defense relies on identicalness or equivalence between all the technical characteristics of accused infringing products that fall into the scope of patent right protection and the relevant technical characteristics of other prior technical solutions that open to the public, and the application of unconfined public technique defense shall not be denied due to the identicalness between the accused infringing product and the patent of the patentee. 2.In the case tried by the High Peoples Court of Liaoning Province on the patent infringement of Chaoyang Xingnuo Company about its implementation of patent included in the industry standard Design Code for Composite Ramcompaction Consolidate Piles issued by the Ministry of Construction in the process of design and construction, the SPC 2008 MSTZ No.4 Response held that, considering that currently there is no public disclosure and usage regulations on patents included in the standards established by the standard formulation institution in our country, if the patentee participated into the establishment of standards or agreed to incorporate the patent into national, industrial or local standards, it shall be held that the patentee allowed other to use the patent during the implementation of standards, and the relevant implementation behaviour does not constitute infringement of patent rights as stipulated in Article 11 of the Patent Law; the patentee may charge the implementation party with certain fee, but the amount shall be obviously lower than normal licensing fee; if the patentee promised to waive the licensing fee, the issue shall be handled in accordance with such promise. 3.In the case of application for retrial, Zhejiang Hangzhou Xinfu Pharmacy Co,Ltd.v.Shandong Xinfa Co.,Ltd. And Shanghai Aixiti International Trade Co.,Ltd.,over the patent royalty during temporary protection period of invention patent and objection on jurisdiction of infringement of invention patent dispute, the SPC 2008 MSZ No.81 Civil Ruling explicated the jurisdiction determination principle on royalty dispute during temporary protection period of invention patent. The SPC held that, although the dispute over royalty during temporary protection period of invention patent do not pertain to normal patent infringement disputes, but in essence its a kind of patent infringement dispute, and the jurisdiction of royalty dispute during temporary period of invention patent shall be determined in accordance with jurisdiction determination principle related to infringement litigation stipulated in Article 29 of the Civil Procedure Law. In its nature, royalty disputes during temporary protection period of invention patent are similar to patent infringement disputes.Therefore,its jurisdiction can be determined by referring to the jurisdiction regulations on patent infringement disputes before particular regulations on the jurisdiction of this kind of cases are provided by law or juridical interpretation. For implementation behaviour accused of infringement spanning the date of authorization proclamation of invention patent, the behaviour features continuity and consistency, and for the purpose of facilitating involved parties prosecution, the patentee shall be allowed to claim for the royalty during the temporary protection period and protection of patent rights at the same time. 4.In the appeal case of utility model infringement,Lanxing Chemical New Material Co.,Ltd.,Jiangxi Xinghuo Organic Silicon Factory v.Shandong Dongyue Organic Silicon Material Co.,Ltd.,Shandong Dongyue Fluorinesilicon Material Co.,Ltd.,and Beijing Petrochemical Designing Institute Co.,Ltd.,the SPC 2008 MSZZ No.7 Civil Ruling held that, as the precondition of proceedings of a case, the appellate court should have jurisdiction over the case. When there is conflict in determining the subject of litigation and the jurisdiction, the appellate court shall give ruling on jurisdiction in the first place. 5.In the case of application for retrial of the dispute over the objection on jurisdiction of patent infringement,Cai Langchun v.Foshan Shiwan Yingpai Ceramics Co,Ltd.,Jiangmen Xinli Plastics Co.,and Zhu Genliang,the SPC 2008 MSZ No.19 Civil Ruling held that, since Hangzhou Intermediate Peoples Court had tried several infringement cases filed by the retrial applicant on the patent right, and this case does not pertain to significant cases in Zhejiang province, to facilitate the proceeding of this case, the peoples court may transfer the first instance civil case under the jurisdiction of the court to a peoples court at lower level in accordance with the provision of Article 39 of the Civil Procedure Law. Revised on October 28 2007,enforced on April 1 2008.

書城介紹　 |　合作申請　|　索要書目　 |　新手入門　|　聯絡方式　 |　幫助中心　|　找書說明　 |　送貨方式　|　付款方式	香港用户　 |　台灣用户　|　海外用户
megBook.com.tw
Copyright (C) 2013 - 2024 （香港）大書城有限公司　All Rights Reserved.