論文摘要
以刑罰作為保護智慧財產權的手段，不論在政策面或法律面都極具爭議性，特別是因刑罰權屬於國家對內統治人民的特權，與國家主權息息相關，與智慧財產權法制全球化，本有其內在的緊張關係。惟自「WTO與貿易有關的智慧財產權協定」(TRIPS)之後，基於刑罰作為有效的執行智慧財產權保護手段，以及全球貿易對於防制智慧財產權侵害的實際需求，有關智慧財產權的國際性協定或條約日漸要求會員國或簽約國制定刑罰條款，以刑事手段制裁智慧財產權侵害行為。
時勢推移，美國、日本、歐盟等已開發國家為保障自身的貿易利益，進一步推動「反仿冒貿易公約」(ACTA)談判，目標係在國際間建立一致的智慧財產權保護執行規範，其中最重要也最有爭議性的，即為擴大智慧財產權侵害行為的刑罰制裁範圍。另方面，也透過雙邊或多邊貿易協定，試圖影響貿易相對國的智慧財產權國內法規範，美國所主導的「跨太平洋戰略經濟夥伴關係協議」(TPP)即強烈要求參加國納入ACTA的相關規定，特別是刑罰條款。
本文試圖透過TRIPS及ACTA對於違反智慧財產權的刑罰規定的脈絡分析，以及目前TPP所要求的刑罰權制裁範圍與WTO爭端解決小組在實際案件所建立的規範，尋找可資遵循的標準，作為我國未來如需修正對於智慧財產權侵害行為刑罰範圍的參考。更進一步，在進行TPP或其他貿易談判時，我國如面對擴大刑事處罰範圍的要求，應有如何的基本認識與戰略上的思考，盼能以本文作為討論的起點。
ABSTRACT
It is very controversial, no matter at legal or political aspects, to protect intellectual property rights (IPR) by the mechanism of criminal penalty. Since the power to enforce criminal penalty is a privilege belonging to the nations and regarded as the core of sovereignty, there is an inner paradox between the criminal penalty and the trend of globalization of IPR legislation. WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) regulates the member states to implement criminal penalty against IPR infringements for the efficiency to protect IPR and the actual needs to prevent violations of IPR on world trade. Ever since, the international agreements and treaties, which are related to IPR, require the member or participating states to legislate criminal penalty against IPR infringements.
Furthermore, to protect and maximize their benefits and interests on international trading, United States, Japan, and European Union lead a new round of negotiation regarding Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) and purport to establish a consistent system of IPR enforcement regulations. The most critical clauses of ACTA is the expansion of the implementation of criminal penalty against IPR infringements. On the other hand, the above entities also influence their trading partners regarding IPR protection legislations via bilateral or multilateral trading treaties. United States strongly drives Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) and requires the participants to include the regulations under ACTA, especially the criminal penalty clauses.
This article is to analyze the contexts of the criminal penalty regulations against IPR infringements, from TRIPS to ACTA, and to research the criminal punishment requirements of TPP and the empirical rules retrieved from the WTO dispute resolution panel decisions. In order to find and reach the standards and principles, which our legislature may refer to in the foreseeable future, and moreover, the essential knowledge and strategic thinking, which are in want on the table of negotiating TPP or the other trading agreements, this article is determined to be the starting point to gaze and discuss such a difficult issue.
眾律專業團隊與業務範圍 (10)