本論文主要是在探討現行公平交易法第四十五條「依照著作權法、商標法或專利法行使權利之正當行為，不適用本法之規定」，其中有關專利權之部分。蓋專利權屬於智慧財產權之一種，係國家以法律授予私人的一種獨占、排他權利，亦即，專利權人就其所獲之專利請求範圍，係處於一種法定專有排除他人未經其同意而製造、販賣、使用或進口該專利之獨占權能地位。專利法藉由此一賦予專利權人特定期間之專屬排他權 (Exclusive Right)/獨占壟斷權，以提供一定之經濟上利益為誘因，藉此鼓勵發明人『公開』符合可專利要件；而競爭法制係為維護公平、自由競爭秩序與環境而必須規範獨占、聯合、結合等限制競爭行為及不公平競爭行為，兩者之糾結關係應如何釐清？素有經濟憲法高地位之稱之競爭法制，應如何在法律特設專利獨占權之制度目的考量下，揮舞它這把大刀？又法律特設專利獨占權之制度目的，又會如何影響競爭法制規制專利權利之界線，是本文想要探究、嘗試解決之議題亦為本文研究目的所在。 鑑於目前我國對於公平交易法第四十五條之法律定位爭議甚大，復以目前我國對於專利權之正當權利行使行為之實務摸索尚處於萌芽之未臻成熟階段，本文擬以專利制度之制度目的及專利財產之本質出發，再借鏡國美國法制百餘年之行政執法、司法實務之實證觀察方式，試圖對目前我國越來越多之專利權權利行使與公平交易法之交錯相關議題及爭議，提出一些可能的思考方向與解決之道，並以法律體系解釋、法律目的解釋、市場經濟以及專利制度之制度目的等思維角度，嘗試定義公平交易法第四十五條之專利權正當權利行使行為，並將本文所建議之審查基準與審查步驟作成審查流程圖，作為本文之總結。

在保險市場中，保險商品主要透過保險經紀人、保險代理人以及保險人所掌握的直接通路予以販售，特別是在大型商業財產及責任保險的行銷通路上，保險經紀人扮演了舉足輕重的角色。本論文主要是以商業財產及責任保險市場為研究重心，並由經濟觀點探討保險經紀人的仲介角色、市場競爭態勢、報酬結構以及業務安排方式等，同時以保險監理的角度檢討保險經紀行業存在的誠信自律、利益衝突以及客戶公平對待等問題。 不同於保險代理人，保險經紀人係基於保單持有人之利益為其安排保險。因此，保險經紀人必須透過多家保險人提供報價的方式，從中選擇價格及條件最佳者做為保險業務安排之對象；換言之，誠實的報價程序，方足以保障客戶之利益並維繫保險市場的健全。然而國外近年發生的大型保險經紀人與部分保險人共謀提供不實之報價事件，不僅嚴重影響到保單持有人的權益，更引發了對於保險經紀人不當市場力量運用以及或有佣金（contingent commissions）制度存廢的廣泛討論。2004年10月14日紐約州總檢察官Eliot Spitzer向紐約州最高法院針對全球最大保險經紀商Marsh & McLennan及部分保險人所涉及的投標詐欺、操縱價格、收受保險公司或有佣金等三大罪狀提出了民事訴訟。此案例不僅使得涉案公司付出鉅額賠償，更暴露出大型保險經紀人公司存在已久的市場壟斷、價格操控、利益衝突等問題。 對照於英、美等國在保險經紀人制度方面的成熟與發達，我國在此方面尚屬新興發展階段，所謂他山之石可以攻錯，借重先行者的經驗，不僅可以避免重蹈覆轍，更可加快成長的腳步；在全球化的浪潮衝擊之下，保險經紀市場唯有與國際充分接軌，並健全相關制度，才能為國內保險市場的業務成長，帶來蓬勃生機，並立下永續發展的堅固磐石。 / In the insurance market, policies are sold through direct channels controlled by insurance companies or intermediaries, such as brokers and agents. Brokers play a vital role in the property & casualty insurance market and serving commercial clients with complex and large exposures. This report focusing on the commercial property & casualty insurance market, we look at the economic performance by brokers, the competitive structure of the marketplace, the compensation arrangements for brokers, and the placement with insurers. Furthermore, we also from regulators’ point of view to study and review a variety of issues, such as the ethics and conduct , conflict of interest, treating customers fairly, which are raised from insurance brokers industry. In contrast to captive agents, brokers act on behalf of the insured, for this circumstance, the role of the brokers is to increase price and coverage competitiveness, by providing the customers access to a wider range of possible insurers. Clearly the integrity of the bidding process is very important to protect the interest of customers and to the health of the insurance brokers market. Unfortunately, the integrity of the placement process by brokers has been questioned due to the allegations of bid rigging in which one or more global brokers and a few insurers appear to have conspired to submit non-competitive bids. This anti-competitive practice is not only detrimental to the customers but also cause public concerned that too much market power lead to abuses by brokers and that contingent commissions should be abolished. On October 14, 2004, New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer filed suit against Marsh & McLennan alleging that the insurance brokers engaged in bid rigging and received widespread kickbacks from insurance companies. On January 31, 2005, Marsh agreed to pay $850 million in restitution to buyers as part of an agreement to settle the suit, but lawsuits still in progress. The above-mentioned case has revealed conflict of interest, anti-competitive and market manipulation for meg-brokers, in fact, these problems existed for a long time. Comparing with US and UK insurance brokers market, Taiwan is belong to emerging market, to gain knowledge of pioneer’s developing experience, we could shorten the time to get more progress. When we deal with the globalization challenge, local insurance broker market should be complied with international practices, improve relative rules and regulations is also necessary, once above situations are available, it could help domestic insurance market rapid and healthy growth.

隨著世界各國開放市場，事業間的競爭已步入國際化，是以競爭法制與政策也必須國際化，然而各國間競爭法規範的調和並未隨著經貿自由化而自然達成。本文點出競爭法與國際接軌的重要性，進一步檢視各國就競爭法案件在單邊、雙邊、複邊等層次將面臨哪些執法上的問題。又因國際反競爭案件越趨頻仍，競爭法主管機關間的合作需求隨之提高，究竟在執法合作上可能面臨哪些困難與限制，未來在合作上發展的趨勢如何，本文將循序漸進加以探討。目前國際間迄未形成一套強勢的競爭法制，世界貿易組織（World Trade Organization, WTO）亦放棄在杜哈談判回合處理競爭議題，然經貿自由化對國際競爭法制仍持續注入新元素。譬如各國簽訂之自由貿易協定與區域經濟整合，多設有競爭相關章節，並開始關注國營事業涉及的反競爭問題（即競爭中立的問題），此等新發展亦屬本文探討之範圍。 / Along with the trend of trade liberaliztion, the competition among enterprises has gone global. However, the competition rules seem to have no chance to reach international coordination in the near future. This article emphasizes that it’s important for a nation to coordinate its own competition law with other countries. Thus, the issues of competiton law enforcement at unilateral level, bilateral level, plurilateral level, regional level, and mutilateral level are also well discussed in this article. Due to the increasing number of anti-competition cases, the need for enforcement cooperation has risen. As a result, this article spends many efforts on recognizing the restraints and obstacles when cooperating with other competition authorities, trying to find the solutions to the problems of cooperation. Despite the fact that WTO failed to deal with international competition issues, there are many ambitious FTAs and reginal trade agreements trying to make common competition rules, which induce new elements into the field of international competition laws and policies. For exaples, TPP and many FTAs are in the negotiation of competitive neutrality requirement in the draft agreements. Such new development will not be excluded when speaking of international competition laws and policies.

不論是反全球化或是支持全球化，我們都無法否認，全球化已經是一個現在進行式。另外一個與全球化一樣逐步成長的乃是市場經濟體制，市場經濟體制植基於開放競爭有助於資源合理分配的觀念，而全球化則擴大了資源分配的範圍。然而，全球化和市場經濟體制的發達，貿易壁壘的消除，也帶動跨國界限制競爭活動的發展，反托拉斯不再是單純的國內問題，而是國際問題。 國際反托拉斯所帶來的問題大致可分為下述兩種，一是阻礙國際貿易的發展，二是因為各國不同的反托拉斯標準造成國際緊張以及企業成本。第一類問題可以細分為下述幾種情況：1. 國際卡特爾破壞市場競爭機制以及消費者福祉； 2. 跨國公司在全球濫用獨占力，影響國際競爭秩序和消費者福祉；3. 競爭法的缺乏以及競爭法的不力執行構成市場進入障礙。第二類問題亦可以細分為下屬幾種情況：1. 國際合併的多國標準造成企業的額外成本，不利國際合併之進行，並造成國際緊張；2. 國與國間產業政策以及競爭政策的衝突。 面對上述這些跨國性的反托拉斯問題，各界紛紛提出競爭法調和的呼籲，此議題近來在各國際組織也漸獲重視。事實上為了處理國外限制競爭行為對國內所產生的影響，以保護本國利益，國內法方面已有所謂的「域外適用（extraterritorial application）」對策產生。但是競爭法的域外適用並無法全然解決現時國際限制競爭行為所帶來的問題，反而還帶來了新的問題，並造成國際緊張。為了在國際案件有效執行反托拉斯法，不論是在卡特爾案件或是獨占力濫用案件，各國競爭法主管機關互相合作與協調都是不可或缺的。至於將競爭法提升至國際法層次，避免國家以非關稅措施破壞自由貿易制度，似乎也有需要。 本文目的在於藉著對競爭法調和現況的瞭解和其成就之分析來尋求目前全球化時代，貿易自由化時代下跨國限制競爭問題的解決之道。 全文一共分為六章，第一章為緒論，為本論文做出開端，闡明全球化時代國際競爭秩序的問題，並提出研究範圍與目的。 第二章研究關於國際競爭秩序的雙邊條約，著眼於美國和歐盟，澳洲和紐西蘭，以及我國和世界各國所訂立的條約。討論範圍為該些雙邊關係所建立之合作內容，其具體成效，成功失敗之因素，以及可供世界各國借鏡之處。台灣部分則著眼於我國目前現狀之檢討，和未來走向之研究。 第三章為從事競爭法調和的區域性國際組織，研究範圍包括歐盟、APEC以及NAFTA。其中APEC所從事的活動較近於政策性的調和，屬於競爭政策的宣導；NAFTA則進一步具有競爭法的實體規範；歐盟不但具有實體規範，並具有一套全球獨步的競爭法執行架構。 第四章為國際組織，將討論UN, WTO和OECD在國際競爭法的發展。UN基本上雖為政治組織，但是對於競爭議題也相當重視；WTO部分則將討論目前競爭議題在WTO體系的進展，並進一步討論WTO進行國際競爭法調和工作的可行性和不可行性；OECD對於競爭議題也一直相當重視，本文將探討OECD在競爭議題方面的研究成果。 第五章為全球性的競爭法規範，討論的範圍有UNCTAD所提出的「管制限制性商業行為的一套多邊協議的公平原則和規則（Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restrictive Business Practices）」以及DIAC。這兩套全球性的競爭法不但都具有實體規範也都提出一套制度性規範，雖然兩者都未能成為具有拘束力的國際競爭法，但是其所提出的實體規範內容和架構設計仍值得我們做進一步的研究。「管制限制性商業行為的一套多邊協議的公平原則和規則」本身是以聯大決議的形式呈現，因此在某一角度而言，「管制限制性商業行為的一套多邊協議的公平原則和規則」並未失敗，然而DIAC原本乃是預定成為WTO的附件之一，唯最後這樣的理想並未實現，因此我們有必要去問，DIAC的失敗因素為何？是基於其實體內容的設計問題，或是制度面的設計問題？或者是因為其他的外在因素？ 最後，在第六章的結論，本文將試圖分析各種競爭法調和方式的利弊得失，並且提出建議。 / Some people oppose globalization, while others support globalization. However, it is undeniable that globalization is an on-going trend. Another on-going trend is market-oriented economy structure. The structure of market-oriented economy bases on the theory that competition contributes to reasonable allocation of resource. On the other hand, globalization expands the scope of the allocation of resources. However, the proliferation of globalization and the structure of market-oriented economy and the elimination of trade barriers also promote the development of transnational anticompetitive activities. Antitrust is no more a pure domestic issue, it is also an international issue nowadays. International antitrust problems could be divided into two parts. First, the international antitrust activities hinder the development of international trade. Second, different antitrust standards of each country cause international tense situation and increase enterprises’ cost. First situation contains following aspects: 1. International cartels ruin market competition system and welfare of consumers. 2. Transnational companies abuse their dominant power all globally and affect international competition order and consumers’ welfare. 3. Absence of competition law and unenforcement of it constitute market entrance obstacles. Second situation also contains following aspects: 1.Different standards of international mergers bring many results, such as increasing enterprises’ extra cost, hindering the proceedings of international mergers, and causing international tensions. 2. The conflict between industry policy and competition policy of countries. Facing those transnational antitrust problems, the issue of the harmonization of competition law has been raised. This issue is drawing more and more attention in several international organizations day by day. In fact, to deal with the domestic effect of abroad anticompetitive activities to protect national interest, the theory “extraterritorial application” of domestic law has been raised. However, the extraterritorial application of domestic law is unable to solve all the problems that the international anticompetitive activities have brought. Furthermore, it has also made new problems and caused international tensions. To enforce antitrust law effectively in international cases, cooperation and coordination between national competition agencies are unavoidable. In addition, bringing antitrust law up to international law level and avoiding nations ruin free trade system by non-tariff strategy seem also be needed. The main purpose of this essay is to understand and analysis the current situation of the harmonization of competition law and to find out the solution of transnational competition problems in the era of globalization and the era of free-trade. This essay has been divided into 6 chapters. The first chapter is the introduction, which illustrates the international competition problems in the era of globalization and brings out the studying scope and purpose of this essay. The second chapter talks about international competition bilateral treaties between U.S. and E.U., Australia and New Zealand, Taiwan and other countries. The discussing scope contains the cooperation content which was set up by the bilateral treaty, its concrete result, and the reasons of its failure or success. As for Taiwan, this essay focuses on the review of its current situation and where its future is. The third chapter talks about regional international organizations which involve in the harmonization of competition law, such as E.U., APEC and NAFTA. APEC’s activities are more closer to the harmonization of policies, which promote competition activities. NAFTA has substantial competition regulations. E.U. not only has substantial regulations but also has the first set of enforcement system of international competition law in the world. The forth chapter is international organization, which talks about the development of international competition law in U.N., WTO and OECD. Although basically U.N. is a political organization, it also highly emphasizes competition issues. In addition, this chapter talks about the development of competition issues in the WTO system and the possibilities of promoting the harmonization of international competition law in WTO. Additionally, OECD also emphasizes competition issues very much. This chapter also talks about the study result of OECD in the competition issues. The fifth chapter is the global competition regulations, which contains “Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restrictive Business Practices” of UNCTAD and “ Draft International Antitrust Code”. Both of the global competition laws contain substantial regulations and the design of enforcement systems. Although both of them ended up in unrestrictive regulations, they also deserve further research. “Set of Multilaterally Agreed Equitable Principles and Rules for the Control of Restrictive Business Practices” was brought out with the form of UN General Assembly Resolution, but it is successful in some aspect. DIAC was meant to be an Annex of WTO originally. However this idea was not realized at the end. Why DIAC failed? Was it because of the design of its substantial content or the design of the enforcement structure or other outside factors? At last, this essay will analysis the shortages and advantages of all kinds of the harmonization of competition law and bring out recommendations in the conclusion of chapter 6.