法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 營業秘密侵害之準據法(Applicable Law for Misappropriation of Trade Secrets)
編著譯者: 王欽彥
出版日期: 2021.06
刊登出處: 台灣/輔仁法學第 61 期 /87-176 頁
頁  數: 90 點閱次數: 257
下載點數: 360 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 輔仁大學法律學院 授權者指定不分配權利金給作者)
關 鍵 詞: 營業秘密智慧財產權侵權行為不正競爭保護國
中文摘要: 營業秘密之侵害在涉外事件如何定性,頗有疑問。我國營業秘密法立法之主管機關將營業秘密定性為智慧財產權。涉外民事法律適用法(涉民法)第 42 條(智慧財產權)之立法理由亦將營業秘密定性為該條之單位法律關係。不過,本文考察發現,就國際私法之問題而言,國際上一般解係將營業秘密侵害定性為不公平競爭之問題。營業秘密法之主管機關將營業秘密定性為智慧財產權之根據似亦缺乏合理性。且涉民法第 42 條所採取之保護國連結,應不適合用於不具屬地性、並非絕對權之營業秘密。因此,本文認為不應將營業秘密侵害定性為智慧財產權之侵害。又我國涉民法第 27 條就不正競爭行為僅規定了市場地之連結,未若其所參考之瑞士法般設有僅損害特定競爭者時之連結規定。因此,雖營業秘密侵害可定性為不正競爭行為,但解釋上宜認為營業秘密侵害若尚未影響市場競爭秩序(例如僅不正取得而尚無不正使用),仍不適用涉民法第 27 條以市場地法為準據法,而應依涉民法第 25 條所定之侵權行為連結方式決定其準據法。也可能將營業秘密侵害直接定性為第 25 條之侵權行為,視個案狀況並得以市場地法為關係最切之法。
英文關鍵詞: Trade SecretIntellectual PropertyTortUnfair CompetitionLex Loci Protectionis
英文摘要: How to decide the applicable law in misappropriation of trade secrets case is an unnoticed problem. In Formosa, the drafter of the Trade Secret Protection Law 1996 regarded trade secrets as intellectual property rights, so does the drafter of Formosan Private International Law 2010. However, this characterization might not be correct. Article 39 of TRIPs cannot serve as a ground for arguing that the trade secrets are intellectual property rights. Nor is the Article 10bis of Paris Convention. In many jurisdictions such as in EU, Germany, Japan, even in ALI Principles of the American Law Institute, trade secrets are not treated as intellectual property rights. Article 42 of Formosan Private International Law is suitable for intellectual property rights with territoriality. However, the protection of trade secrets should not be confined in the territory of a state, and the application of Article 42 will lead to unsatisfactory results. Hence, misappropriation of trade secrets should be characterized as unfair competition. Formosan Private International Law has provision for unfair competition, namely its Article 27. However, different from the EU Rome II Regulation or Swiss IPRG, Article 27 of Formosan Private International Law only envisages the affected market as the connecting factor, it does not have a special provision for the so called bilateral unfair competition. Since in trade secrets misappropriation the market order is sometimes not or not yet affected, or we do not even know where the trade secrets will be used and thus affect the order of the market there, the difficulties in identifying the market location will lead to difficulties in determine the applicable law. This article suggests that the misappropriation of trade secrets can be merely characterized as tort and apply Article 25 of Formosan Private International Law to determine the applicable law.
目  次: 壹、序言
貳、營業秘密本身之準據法
  一、概念上之必要性
  二、營業秘密可否視為動產
  三、營業秘密應否定性為智慧財產權
參、營業秘密侵害之準據法
  一、涉民法第 42 條(智慧財產權)
  二、涉民法第 27 條(不公平競爭)
  三、涉民法第 25 條(侵權行為)
  四、強行法規的特別連結
  五、依請求性質為不同定性
肆、總結
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列