首页> 外文OA文献 >Mapping the intersection of intellectual property and competition law : misusing market power when refusing to license biomedical patents
【2h】

Mapping the intersection of intellectual property and competition law : misusing market power when refusing to license biomedical patents

机译:绘制知识产权与竞争法的交集:拒绝授予生物医学专利许可时滥用市场支配力

摘要

This thesis considers the conflict between intellectual property and competition law. There have been many attempts by noted scholars, regulatory authorities and courts to resolve this conflict, and determine how competition laws should be applied to dealings in intellectual property. Issues at the interface of intellectual property and competition law are exemplified by bargaining breakdowns in high technology, innovative industries. This thesis examines an issue arising from the balance between intellectual property and competition law in the context of a particular industry.udSpecifically, it analyses competition law regulation of refusals to license patents within the Australian medical biotechnology industry. A foundation for this analysis is provided through consideration of some characteristics of the medical biotechnology industry. This preliminary material allows the conclusion that there are a number of preconditions that make the Australian medical biotechnology industry particularly prone to refusals to license patents.udAgainst this backdrop, the issue of refusals to license patents is considered in an empirical context. The thesis presents the results of an empirical study that investigated the preponderance of restrictive licensing practices within Australian medical biotechnology. While the potential for refusals to license exist within this industry, the empirical data suggests that this issue is occurring to only a limited extent in practice. This evidence is relevant to the analysis contained in the remainder of the thesis, because it assists in informing policy debate over the appropriate parameters for competition law in monitoring refusals to license intellectual property.udThe issue of regulation of refusals to license patents is far from resolved in the literature or by the judiciary. This thesis proposes that the issue is one that must be approached flexibly, and any attempt to circumscribe rigid rules for analysis is likely to fail. As such, it considers the role competition law plays in regulating dealings in intellectual property, and establishes a flexible framework for assessing the legality of refusals to license patents. This framework provides a basis for examining existing legislative provisions under which refusals to license will be evaluated.udThere is no Australian case law dealing with the issue of refusals to license intellectual property. The analysis contained in this thesis therefore proceeds from first principles. A refusal to license a patent will be dealt with pursuant to s 46 of the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). The existing law and its limitations are considered in some detail, and it is concluded that recent judicial interpretations of this provision have rendered it virtually redundant. Due to the lack of judicial guidance in relation to this issue in Australia, some comparative case law from the United State and European Union is examined. Consideration of this case law provides some basis for assessing the flexible framework established in the thesis, and it would be taken into account if an Australian court were required to consider the issue of refusals to license intellectual property.udThe thesis considers the likely application of s 46 to refusals to license patents in medical biotechnology. It concludes that although there may be some circumstances where a refusal to license a patent will be anti-competitive, s 46 will not operate to provide redress. General deficiencies in the section are likely to be intensified where dealings in intellectual property are at issue. Accordingly, it argues that legislative amendment is necessary to rectify these problems, and makes a number of recommendations to this effect. It also considers the relevance of the empirical evidence presented in shaping regulatory policy.
机译:本文考虑了知识产权与竞争法之间的冲突。著名学者,监管机构和法院进行了许多尝试来解决这一冲突,并确定如何将竞争法应用于知识产权交易。讨价还价的高科技,创新型产业就是知识产权与竞争法交界处的问题。本文研究了特定行业背景下知识产权与竞争法之间的平衡所引起的问题。 ud特别是,它分析了澳大利亚医疗生物技术行业内拒绝许可许可的竞争法法规。通过考虑医疗生物技术行业的某些特征,为该分析奠定了基础。此初步材料得出的结论是,有许多前提条件使澳大利亚医疗生物技术产业特别容易拒绝专利授权。 ud在此背景下,在经验上考虑了拒绝专利授权的问题。本文介绍了一项实证研究的结果,该实证研究调查了澳大利亚医疗生物技术中限制性许可实践的优势。尽管该行业存在拒绝许可的可能性,但经验数据表明,在实践中此问题仅在有限的范围内发生。此证据与本论文其余部分中的分析有关,因为它有助于为竞争法的适当参数提供政策辩论的信息,以监督对知识产权许可的拒绝。由文献或司法机构解决。本文提出这个问题是必须灵活解决的问题,任何限制严格的分析规则的尝试都可能失败。因此,它考虑了竞争法在规范知识产权交易中的作用,并建立了一个灵活的框架来评估拒绝许可的合法性。该框架为检查现有立法规定提供了基础,在该规定下将评估拒绝许可的情况。 ud澳大利亚没有判例法涉及拒绝许可知识产权的问题。因此,本文所包含的分析是从第一原理出发的。根据《 1974年贸易惯例法》(联邦)第46条的规定,将处理拒绝授予专利的许可。对现有法律及其限制进行了详细讨论,得出的结论是,最近对该条款的司法解释实际上使该条款变得多余。由于澳大利亚在此问题上缺乏司法指导,因此研究了美国和欧盟的一些比较判例法。对本案法的审议为评估论文中确立的灵活框架提供了基础,如果要求澳大利亚法院考虑拒绝授予知识产权许可的问题,则会予以考虑。 ud本文考虑了可能的适用第46条,拒绝授予医疗生物技术专利。结论是,尽管在某些情况下,拒绝许可专利会构成反竞争,但第46条将不会提供补救。在知识产权交易存在争议的情况下,本节中的一般缺陷可能会加剧。因此,它认为必须进行立法修正以纠正这些问题,并为此提出了一些建议。它还考虑了制定监管政策时经验证据的相关性。

著录项

  • 作者

    Nielsen JL;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2005
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号