1 |
港、澳基本法之比較研究 / A Comparision Study on the Basic Law of Hong Kong and Macau陳德正, Vic Chen Unknown Date (has links)
香港與澳門分別於1997年與1999年回歸中國大陸,其特區政府運作的依據便是香港基本法與澳門基本法.筆者試圖以比較法之觀點對兩法做綜合分析,首先論述兩法具有可比性,其次分別論述港'澳不同之政制與法律架構,再來針對港澳基本法之內容作全面性之分析與比較,最後並在結論中提出個人之淺見與看法.
事實上,港澳均屬於殖民地,但若干歷史與社會條件不盡相同.因此筆者嘗試討論兩地回歸前政制不同之主要差異點:三化問題,政治民主化問題,先易後難與先難後易.及探討其原因為何.另外筆者歸納出港澳基本法的同異之處,並得出兩法大同小異之結論,再分由小異 大同 同中存異 異中求同來分析.最後,筆者並試圖以前述觀點來分析台灣基本法存在之可能性,甚至描繪其大致輪廓與走向,以供當局研擬政策之參考.
第一章 緒論1
第一節 研究動機
第二節 研究目的
第三節 研究方法
第四節 資料來源
第二章 基本法與比較法理論第一節 『法學』研究方法概述一、『法學』之定義
二、『法學』之研究方法
第二節 基本法之一般研究方法
一、中共方面
二、港澳台方面
第三節 比較法理論概述
一、比較法理論之概念
二、比較法理論之特徵
三、比較法理論之範圍
第四節 基本法適用比較法理論之法理基礎與意義
一、港、澳基本法可為比較研究之對象
三、港、澳基本法適用比較法理論之意義
第三章 香港回歸前之政制與法律
第一節 香港政制
一、中國早期統治時期
二、英國佔領香港歷程
三、香港早期政制發展(第二次世界大戰前
四、香港後期政制改革
第二節 香港政制架構
一、總督
二、行政組織
三、立法局
四、公務員制度
第三節 香港司法體制
一、法院制度
二、法官制度
三、律師制度
第四節 香港法律制度
一、法律體系
二、法律淵源
三、法律內容
第四章 澳門回歸前之政制與法律
第一節 澳門政制沿革
一、中國早期統治與葡人東來時期
二、在澳葡人自治時期(華洋共處時期
三、殖民管治時期
四、葡管中國領土時期
第二節 澳門政制架構
一、總督
二、行政組織
三、立法會
四、公務員制度
第三節 澳門司法體制
一、法院制度
二、法官制度
四、檢察制度
第四節 澳門法律制度….78
一、法律體系
二、法律淵源
三、法律內容
第五章 港、澳基本法之內容比較
第一節 兩法之前身(中英、中葡聯合聲明)比較
一、兩部基本法之前身-『中英(中葡)聯合聲明
二、中英、中葡聯合聲明之異同
第二節 港、澳基本法之結構比較
一、章節排列方面
二、章節名稱方面
三、條文總數方面
四、各章節之條文方面
五、附件方面
第三節 港、澳基本法之條文比較
一、港、澳基本法相同之處
二、序言
三、第一章「總則」
三、第二章「中央和特別行政區的關係」
四、第三章「居民的基本權利和義務
五、第四章 政治體制
六、第五章 經濟
七、第六章 教育、科學、文化、體育、宗教、勞工和社會服務(文化與社會事務)
八、第九章 附則
第六章 結論
第一節 港、澳回歸前政制之比較13
一、兩地歷史沿革不同
二、兩地殖民政策不同
三、主要差異之指標
第二節 港、澳基本法之同異
一、港、澳基本法其『大同』之處
二、港、澳基本法其『小異』之處
三、港、澳基本法之『同中存異』與『異中求同』
第三節 試論『台灣基本法
一、對朱星羽版本『台灣基本法』之評析
二、『台灣基本法』與港、澳基本法之同異
三、『臺灣基本法』:不確定之未來
|
2 |
德國再統一之研究(1990) / The Research on the reunification of Geermany (1990)王哲齡, Wang, Jerry J.L. Unknown Date (has links)
一九九0年時十月三日東西德的重新統一,為第二次世界大戰後分裂國家
中以和平方式達成統一之首例,因此研究促成德國統一之因素及統一過程
中的談判交涉,將對中國統一問題之解決有所啟發;同時藉由審視歷史上
德意志民族的分合,尤其於探究第二次世界大戰後因列強介入而導致的德
國分裂事實及這四十餘年來兩德政策的互動時,更能使吾人對整各歐洲局
勢及二次戰後列強實力之拉距有一番宏觀之認識。 @ 因此本文首先以
歷史階段分期,鋪陳德國問題的演變,爾後從中抽繹出貫穿德國問題的中
心議題。第二章側重第二次世界大戰後,以美蘇為首之兩極國際體系變動
下,影響兩德在針對德國前途所作決策演變之脈絡。第三章則以系統模型
為架構,自國際環境-前蘇聯總統戈巴契夫之新思維及所引發之東歐局勢
劇變;國內環境-擇定法律基礎、民族認同、經濟情況、社會交流等面向
;研析德國再統一的各項可能因素。第四章則從決策機構本身及決策過程
來探討兩德對德意志民族前途共識建立的過程。第五章則一方面置德國統
一問題於歐洲及世界政治之議程上,探討德國在對國際社會將產生的衝擊
,及列強因應此種衝擊所展開的談判交涉,其中側重列強對統一問題而達
成之條約;另方面則從德意志民族內部觀察,於兩德統一條約中抽繹出統
一前夕兩德各自堅持點何在,彼此又過怎樣一各交涉妥協過程而達成最後
統一。結論部份則將德國問題置於國際體系之下,對德國統一的意義及影
響做一評估。 @ 本文研究法係系統決策分析,並輔以歷史描述方式,
同時以微觀及巨視兩種角度是就關係冷戰結束之世紀大事加以分析,囿於
不諳德文, 於諸多觀點,未盡精闢,然誠望於德國研究範疇中貢獻棉薄
。
|
3 |
智價經濟時代的智慧財產權管理-科技業產學研合作之研究 / The Intellectual Property Right Management in the Collaborated Research between Industry, University, and Research Institute.陳立昕, LI-HSIN, CHEN Unknown Date (has links)
台灣的產業型態已逐漸由勞力密集的傳統產業轉型為知識密集的科技產業,已成為資訊電子生產大國,共有十多項資訊設備佔有率高居世界第一。而我國以中小企業為主的產業結構,研發經費的投入往往無法與國外大廠相比,產學研合作研發便成為我國產業創新中相當重要的一個環節,大學與研發機構在研發創新上的成果是提升產業技術水準的重要來源。
智慧財產權在科技業可說是重要的競爭武器之一,智慧財產權管理更為各企業亟欲增進的能力。立法院於1998年底通過科學技術基本法,通過將合作研發成果的智財權中政府出資部分的權利下放給研發單位,對我國產學研合作的智慧財產權管理具有相當之影響,而後如何執行以達成技術擴散,更是需要深入探討。
本文希望從管理面與法律面來探討產學研合作的智慧財產權管理,透過(1)國內外文獻探討;(2)專家深度訪談;(3)先進國家產學研合作與智財權管理之探討;(4)國內產學研合作與智財權管理之個案分析等方式來進行探討。借重國外經驗,發現國內實行時的問題,以期經由良好的合作與技術移轉制度,使學研單位獲得經費補助與權利金回饋,且亦使廠商獲得切合需要之技術的使用權,讓創新成果獲得保護,並讓知識能充分移轉流通,強化我國國家創新系統。
本研究建議如下:
一、 對政府而言
(一) 以藏富於民的原則將智財權下放
(二) 例外介入以使成果充分使用
(三) 專利成果應用的限制
(四) 建立產業技術移轉服務體系(ITTS)
(五) 修改相關法令
二、 對大學而言
(一) 應設立專責的智慧財產權管理單位
(二) 與中介機構合作執行智慧財產權管理
(三) 將研究方向分為基礎研究導向與產業技術導向
(四) 鼓勵大學教授投入產業服務
(五) 設立創新技術公司
三、 對研發機構而言
(一) 研發機構應更積極鼓勵研發人員投入研發
(二) 積極與民間企業合作並從事技術推廣與技術移轉
(三) 加強智慧財產權管理能力
(四) 落實R&D人數/智財權業務人數比例
四、 對廠商而言
(一) 培養本身研發能力與技術承接能力
(二) 善用外在技術資源
(三) 建立智慧財產權權管理制度
(四) 與學研單位合作應秉持多次合作的誠意
(五) 與學研單位建立長期合作關係並合理的給予回饋
目錄
表 目 錄 3
圖 目 錄 5
第一章 緒論 7
第一節 研究背景 7
第二節 研究動機 10
第三節 研究目的與問題 12
第四節 研究大綱 13
第二章 文獻探討 15
第一節 智慧財產權 15
第二節 科技基本法 26
第三節 產學合作 29
第四節 產研合作 39
第三章 研究方法 45
第一節 研究取向 45
第二節 研究方法 47
第三節 訪談對象 48
第四節 個案範圍 49
第五節 研究限制 50
第四章 先進國家產學研合作與智慧財產權管理 51
第一節 美國產學研合作與智慧財產權管理 51
第二節 日本產學研合作與智慧財產權管理 83
第三節 德國產學研合作與智慧財產權管理 101
第五章 國內個案分析 119
第一節 工業技術研究院 119
第二節 台大慶齡工業中心 155
第三節 宏□電腦 175
第六章 結論與建議 191
第一節 結論 191
第二節 對政府的建議 195
第三節 對大學的建議 201
第四節 對研發機構的建議 204
第五節 對產業界的建議 206
第六節 對後續研究的建議 209
參考文獻 213 / Taiwan’s industry has transferred from traditional labor-intensive industries to knowledge-intensive technology industries. Furthermore, Taiwan has become a leading country for information and electronics manufacturing industries. According to statistical data, Taiwan has leaded more than ten items of components in their industries in the world and their marketing shares are getting up.
But our industrial structure is based on Small Middle Enterprise (SME). The R&D capability can’t keep up with the oversea big companies. The collaboration between industry, university, and research institute is very important for Taiwan’s industries. SME depend universities and research institutes’ research outcomes to bring up the industrial technology level.
Intellectual Property Right (IPR) is one of the most important competitive weapons for industry. As a result, IPR management ability is what every firm would like to cultivate. In 1998, the Legislative Yuan passed the Science and Technology Basic Law which allowing the IPR releasing from the government sponsored projects to the research institutes and universities. It would have a tremendous effect on the IPR management in collaborated research between industry, university, and research institute.
From the management and law’s point view, the purpose of this thesis is to (1) clarify and analyze the international and domestic data of IPR management; (2) compare the collaborated research between industry, university, and research institute in advanced countries such as the United State, Japan, and Germany; and (3) study the case of Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), Taiwan University, and ACER to discover the practical IPR management problems in Taiwan.
With proper university and industry collaboration and technology transfer system, universities will get proper return for the research fund and industry will be able to utilize the invention well. Therefore the innovative research outcomes would be protected and the knowledge would diffuse smoothly that reinforce Taiwan’s National Innovation System (NIS).
Consequently, this thesis makes the following suggestions for government, universities, research institutes, and industries:
1. For Government
(1) Allow the university and research institute to own the Intellectual Property Right.
(2) Government own the exceptional involvement right in order to apply the R&D outcomes well.
(3) Proper restriction to patent application.
(4) Establish Industrial Technology Transfer Service (ITTS).
(5) Amend the relative regulations and laws.
2. For University
(1) Establish specific IPR management office.
(2) Collaborate with the agency institute to executive IPR management.
(3) Divide research direction into basic research orientation and industrial technology research orientation.
(4) Encourage professors devoting the industrial service.
(5) Fund the innovation technological company.
3. For Research Institute
(1) Encourage R&D staff devoting more effort in their job.
(2) Actively collaborate with industry and engage in technology transfer and promotion.
(3) Enhance IPR management ability.
(4) Improve the R&D staff / IPR management staff ratio.
4. For Industry
(1) Cultivate R&D ability and technology receiving ability.
(2) Utilize outside technology resource well.
(3) Establish IPR management system.
(4) Remain condor when collaborate with universities and research institutes.
(5) Establish long-term partnership with universities and research institutes then give them reasonable feedback.
|
4 |
一國兩制與基本法在香港的實踐與挑戰—三次人大釋法案例研究 / The challenge of “One Country, Two Systems”in Hong Kong ── A study of the NPC interpretations of Hong Kong Basic Law陳智菡 Unknown Date (has links)
香港在西元1997年7月1日正式脫離英屬殖民地,回歸中國成為中華人民共和國領土的一部分,為了維持香港的穩定繁榮,中共以一國兩制、港人治港做為治港方針,並以中國憲法及在1990年通過並推行香港特別行政區基本法相關條例作為法律依據,給予港人高度自治的權力。
基本法推行至今業已九年,九年當中,中國最高立法機關全國人大常委會對基本法當中的模糊地界先後進行了包括「居港權案」、「雙普選案」以及「特首任期」案等三次釋法;人大釋法雖是寫入中華人民共和國憲法與基本法當中的合理權力,但在這三次釋法的過程中,仍存在有釋法的合法性、與中央是否干涉香港自治的爭議,這些爭議引起香港各界極大的討論,同時也影響了港人對一國兩制在港推行的信心。
香港特區基本法是以中國憲法做為依據的,其法律地位從屬於憲法,換言之,香港特區的自治權乃是由國家主權所派生出之地方自治權利。然而,所謂「一國兩制」,其最高原則就在於所謂「高度自治」之精神,因此,三次主要由北京當局主導的釋法行動難免引發中央過度干涉香港事務的疑慮,本文針對三次人大釋法之源起、內容、過程、及其所引發的爭議為主軸,試圖釐清中共中央是否意圖箝制香港的自治權限、抑或相關爭議只是港人過度恐慌所致?此外,特區政府與特區行政長官在釋法的過程當中又扮演何種角色?他們是否曾如實地反應民意?或者只是積極地配合中央,在相當程度上放棄自我管治的權利?這都是文中所欲釐清的焦點。撰者寄望能由本研究看出中共所大力宣揚的思想成就──「一國兩制」是否真能確實落實,也可為台灣在思考對中國大陸政策時更具體的思考方向。
關鍵詞:香港、基本法、一國兩制、人大釋法、中港關係 / Hong Kong has been a Special Administrative Region (SAR) of People’s Republic of China (PRC) since 1997, it maintains a high degree autonomy except it matters of defense and foreign affairs. It has well-established institutions that support the rule of law and vigorous civil society by the Basic Law.
The Basic Law has been published in nine years. During this period, The Standing Committee of PRC’s National People’s Congress (NPC) has been approved to interpret the law for three times. Although the interpretation rights of The Standing Committee of NPC is undeniable, those moves are still causing a great deal of concerns---such as the validity of judicial procedure of interpretations and whether the PRC government interfere with the Hong Kong’s autonomy affairs or not, and so on…. Those controversial issues are not only causing a huge controversy over Hong Kong society, but also lower people's confidence in “one country, two systems”.
If the Standing Committee of NPC’s thrice interpretation actions were just reflecting part of NPC membership’s opinions and Bejing’s will but totally disregarded of the view of the Hong Kong people. It will not only cripple the power of legal interpretation of Hong Kong’s judicial body. And even worse, it might cause Hong Kong’s judicial system towards to the mainland one. Meanwhile, by vesting power jointly with Bejing and the HK chief executive, the mainland authorities have succeeded in bring public opinions in HK under their thumb.
This essay is aimed at the thrice interpretations, including the source, contents, process and the following issues. The NPC interpretations will have a deep impact on the development of HK’s judicial and political system. I believe, by observing the following situation after the interpretations in the HK, we will have a better understanding of the “one country, two systems”.
Keywords:Hong Kong, Basic Law, One country two systems, the NPC interpretations, National People’s congress.
|
5 |
技術創業與智慧財產作價投資之研究 / Study on High Tech Start-Ups and the Consideration of Intellectual Property as Equity林姿伶, Lin, Tzu Ling Unknown Date (has links)
如果你是一名技術創業家,你會選擇在台灣創業,抑或直接到美國創業?如果台灣要成為技術創業家的「天堂」,這座天堂會是長成什麼模樣?若以美國創業環境作為現今台灣「打造創業天堂」的學習典範,台灣應如何「布置」這一座創業天堂?
知識經濟時代,以知識、技術為基礎而進行之創業活動勢必與智慧財產權密切相關,因此本研究即藉由對於與智慧財產作價投資有關的幾項重要議題,包括智慧財產作價投資之概念、智慧財產作價投資與國內投資、智慧財產作價投資與國際投資、我國研發能量之釋放與科技基本法、智慧財產作價投資之會計處理、智慧財產作價投資之租稅問題、智慧財產作價投資之契約與章程等,進行研究及探討,最後針對美國Google公司之技術創業進行個案研究。內容相當廣泛,涉及法律、投資、會計、租稅、契約、評價、智慧財產、技術移轉等面向,並於探討上述議題後,對於台灣現狀提出如下之政策配套及法令修改建議,期許營造台灣成為一座鼓勵創新及創業活動的技術創業天堂:
一、 公司法應允許投資人得以「勞務」出資,建議放寬公司法第156條第5項對於出資種類之限制,並輔以「勞務作價股份銷除制度」作為配套。
二、 公司法應允許得銷除特定股份,而非一體性地等比例銷除,建議修改公司法第168條,賦予公司得以章程規定就特定股份為銷除之權限。。
三、 智慧財產評價之進行,應嚴守於「評價當時」智慧財產權所具有的價值,詳細區分「智慧財產/技術」與「勞務」之不同,而非將經勞務提供後所帶來的經濟價值一併計算在內。
四、 公司法應允許包括「發起設立時」、「募集設立時」,及「發行新股時」等,均得以智慧財產作價投資,建議對於公司法第131條、第156條及第272條之適用要件,予以一致化。
五、 技術並非法律上所規範之權利客體,建議將公司法第156條第5項所稱「技術」修改為「智慧財產」。
六、 對於擁有龐大智慧財產的公立學校及政府機關,應為其尋思解套方法。建議立法規定公立學校及行政機關得另成立一法人組織或基金會,將其所擁有之智慧財產權全部移轉至該智權控股機構或基金會中,由該組織或基金會來運用該些智慧財產權。
七、 現行政府之對外投資政策及法令仍處於管制經濟之思維,建議應加快我國對外投資自由化之腳步。
八、 科技基本法將智財權下放予執行單位,而行政院及各主管機關又訂定辦法對於執行單位之各項智權運用活動課以程序上之繁瑣要求,包括公開、公正之程序,境外實施需事前經主管機關許可等等,此些限制實已造成「智財之不完全下放」現象,嚴重阻礙以智慧財產作價投資建構技術創業天堂之實現。
九、 關於專利權及專門技術之攤折問題,建議應委請公正單位評估該技術之有效生命週期,同時提出該專利權及專門技術之「可能享有年限」,以作為會計上攤折之依據,並顧及企業營運上財務報表資訊之如實揭露。
十、 針對課稅時點之問題,由於作價投資所取得之股票,乃是「財產形式之轉變」,投資人實際上並未獲取所得,必須等到賣出股票時才有所得產生,故建議應於「股票轉讓時」始進行所得稅課徵。
十一、 技術創業要成功,重點是技術移轉要成功,因此,技術移轉之內容及方法便需於契約中詳加規範。
十二、 美國矽谷地區,創業人擁有創新與創業精神,並持續進行技術研發;學校提供創業所需資源、人脈予新創公司及創業人;而創投公司及天使投資人的資金挹注及管理要求與導入,更是新創公司成功的重要因素。此外,整體的外在大環境,包括冒險精神、會計制度、公司制度、租稅制度、法令制度及專業服務機構等等,都是營造創業天堂所不可或缺的要素。 / If you are a technology entrepreneur, will you start your business in Taiwan or in the U.S.? What is the Paradise for technology entrepreneurs if Taiwan chooses to become one? What should Taiwan provide in the environment if Taiwan takes the U.S. as a model of Entrepreneurship Paradise?
In the era of knowledge-based economy, any start-up based on knowledge and technology will be closely related to issues of intellectual property. The thesis will focus on several important issues about investment with contribution of intellectual property as equity, such as its concept, domestic and international investment with contribution of intellectual property as equity, industrialization and commercialization of R&D results in Taiwan and the Science and Technology Basic Law, accounting procedures and taxation issues, contracts and regulations of investment with contribution of intellectual property as equity. The thesis will also illustrate with the case study of Google. The discussion tries to elaborate the issue from various aspects, including law, investment, accounting, taxation, contracts, technology evaluation, intellectual property and technology transfer. The thesis concludes with the following suggestions for governmental policy and law on the issues discussed, to build a paradise, friendly to innovation and start-ups, for technology entrepreneurs in Taiwan.
1. Labor should be recognized as an investment in Company Act. The limitation of investment category of Article 156 (5) should be expanded and be complemented with an elimination system of labor equity.
2. Elimination of specific shares, instead of elimination by ratio, should be allowed in Company Act. The thesis also proposes to amend Company Act Article 168 to authorize the enterprise to eliminate specific shares.
3. The evaluation of intellectual property should faithfully reflect its value for the time being. It should also distinguish the difference between the value of intellectual property/ technology and of labor, instead of a compound evaluation of both.
4. The investment with contribution of intellectual property as equity should be allowed when a company is established by means of promotion and by means of offer as well as when it issues new stocks. The applicable conditions of Company Act Article 131, 156, and 272 should be unified.
5. The term “technology” should be changed into “intellectual property” in Company Act Article 156 (5), given that “technology” is not an object of right defined by law.
6. There should be more channels for public universities and governmental institutions for the release of intellectual property. The government or legislators should enable public universities and governmental institutions to establish an institution or foundation and to transfer/ license their intellectual property to the institution for better use.
7. The government should abandon economic controlling measure through policy and regulation about overseas investment and speed up the liberation.
8. Science and Technology Basic Law authorize intellectual property rights to the executives. However, the Executive Yuan and other authorities set up orders and regulations on procedures about the application of intellectual property, including “public and fair procedure,” “overseas execution permission,” and so on. Those orders and regulations violate the spirits of Science and Technology Basic Law and prevent Taiwan from the Paradise for entrepreneurs.
9. Life cycle of patent and know-how should be evaluated by impartial organizations. The prediction of possible effective year of said patent and know-how should be taken for depreciation and amortization in accounting and be publicized as financial information of a company.
10. The investment with contribution of intellectual property should be taxed when stocks are transferred because such investments are transformation of asset types and the investors do not obtain actual income until the stocks are sold.
11. The success of a technology start-up depends on the success of technology transfer. Hence, the content and method of technology transfer should be defined in detail in the contract.
12. The entrepreneurs in the Silicon Valley in the U.S. possess the spirits of innovation and entrepreneurship and keeps on technology research and development. The universities provide resources and personnel network for start-ups and entrepreneurs. Financing, introduction and demand of effective management from Venture Capitals and Angel Funds are the key factors for the success of start-up companies. Besides, the environment, including venture spirits, accounting and taxation system, company structures, law and regulation, and professional institutions, are indispensible for the establishment of the Paradise for entrepreneurs.
|
6 |
文化創意、數位內容產業發展之比較研究─以台灣、韓國為例 / The Comparative Study of Culture Creative and Digital Contents Industry:Case Study on Taiwan & Korea孫正和 Unknown Date (has links)
本研究從探討台灣及韓國兩國目前為扶植文化創意、數位內容產業所推動之發展政策比較,介紹兩國目前的推動政策內容以及發展狀態,並探討為振興整體產業,如何運用相關政策而帶動產業發展,且從中國家力量在推動產業時所扮演的角色及力量。透過台灣、韓國對文化創意、數位內容產業之相關推動政策比較,試圖探討執行政策之優缺點,再進一步比較截至目前為止的發展成果。此外,本研究介紹了台灣、韓國兩國近期在相關產業發展過程中所引發爭論的智財議題,在比較分析兩國文化創意、數位內容產業所面臨的智慧財產議題後,探討兩國在知識經濟時代如何保護運用相關智慧財產,及其與產業發展的關聯。為了解台灣、韓國文化創意、數位內容產業界實際現況及對於政府輔助政策的意見,並探討相關推動政策的實效等,本研究在訪談兩國相關企業後,找出目前產業實際問題所在且蒐集來自產業界的意見,最終導出本研究結果,並依據韓國文化創意、數位內容產業發展的歷程,對台灣文化創意、數位內容產業發展提出本研究的建議。 / This study started from the comparison of the Taiwanese and Korean government policies that are intended cultivate the development of culture creative and digital content industry. By introducing the measures and activities taken officially, we can clearly see how each government acts in the development of their culture creative and digital content Industry, following by discussing the pros and cons of the policies and further comparison of the achievements until now in Taiwan and Korea. On top of the background analysis of the culture creative and digital content industry in Taiwan and Korea, this study introduced the intellectual property related issues that were raised during the development, and discussed how they manage to protect and commercialize their intangible assets and how this effects to the industry. Interviews of local companies were conducted in order to evaluate how the Taiwanese and Korean policies work and see if that really meet the demands of the industry. The conclusion of this comparative study comes from the opinions of the industry, and since the Korean had gone further in the development of culture creative and digital content field, the study came out a few suggestions for Taiwan for their future development in these industries.
|
7 |
中共的民族主義--對港政策之個案研究 (1978-1997) / Chinese nationalism--China's policy toward HongKong(1978-1997林孟和, Lin, Meng-Ho Unknown Date (has links)
為了深入了解中共的民族主義,本文從人類歷史面著手探討以下主題--
1.最初起源於歐洲時的民族主義之意義為何?而民族主義在中國又代表著什麼含義?
2.以「工人無祖國」為號召之馬克思主義建黨的中國共產黨,如何合理化本質為國際主義的馬克思主義與民族主義間的關係,以建立政權並建設國家?
3.以上述問題之探討為基礎,來解讀中共當局為何提出「一國兩制」為理論根據,以及如何透過「一國兩制」將民族主義運用在其對港政策中.
全文共有七章二十節.第一章「導論」;說明全文的研究目的、範圍、方法與架構,以及研究限制.
第二章「民族主義相關概念的定義」;先以起源於歐洲的現代民族主義為主軸,對貫穿全文的重要概念,包括「民族」、「國家」、「民族主義」予以定義,並從民族國家出發,探討民族主義可為國家達到什麼目標與功能,民族主義常以何種形式運作,和具備那些特質.再從世界史的範疇進入中國史,分析「民族」、「文化主義」等概念在帝制時期中國的意義,以及孫中山在十九世紀末引進現代民族主義時,如何詮釋並加以運用.
由於現代民族主義主要是一種基於特定區域和文化歷史結構下,對民族國家之安全與繁榮產生的情感和認同,以及為了達到民族國家之目標的意識型態和政治運動.又基於馬克思列寧主義、毛澤東思想和鄧小平思想在中共政權的意識型態中占有決定性的歷史地位,故第三章「民族主義在中共意識型態中的定位」,擬從這三個向度,來討論民族主義觀從中共建政前到建政後意識型態層面上的演變.
第四章「中共民族主義的運作方式」;筆者限於能力,僅以民族主義的目標與功能為分析主軸,概略歸納1949年後的中國,在種族性民族主義、文化性民族主義和政治性民族主義方面,以情緒、意識型態和政治運動為表現形式的運作.
分析過中共民族主義的整體理論與整體運作後,第五章「鄧小平時代民族主義的政策體現:主權宣示的『一國兩制』」,探討的主題是:以「實事求是建設
有中國特色之社會主義」與「一個中心,兩個基本點」為其意識型態核心理論的鄧小平思想,如何替其民族主義觀建構一套總體政策,即「一個國家,兩種制度」,來銜接鄧小平時代民族主義觀與個別政策的實踐.
第六章「改革開放後民族主義在中共對港政策中的角色」;以香港問題作為中共當局落實 修改「一國兩制」的機會,視國內政經體系與國際體系為中共決策者同時面對的整體情境,並從其對情境因素的認知出發,檢視其透過那些行動、手段,以達到其民族主義的目標.
第七章「結論」;即歸納全文研究發現,從毛澤東到鄧小平的中共民族主義,對於民族主義主觀條件的「社群成員」,一再更動認定標準,導致中國人民對於國家機器的恐懼遠多於認同,並且基於馬克思列寧主義的建國傳統,必須建構理論概念,來合理化其民族主義與國際主義意識型態間的矛盾.而從改革開放後中共對港政策中民族主義的運用,可以發現中共當局在政治性民族主義上,仗恃其與日遽增的國力,雖然試圖對人民塑造一種休戚與共的民族歷史認同感,但實際運作上卻只將香港人民視為和平收回主權的工具,並自法律層面防範香港人民,及剝奪香港人民的個人權利,因而喪失香港多數民心,故又尋求對香港人民訴諸於文化性民族主義.最後並就本論文主題未來更深入的研究,提出反思與建議.
|
8 |
智慧財產之國際授權-境外實施技術授權之研究 / International licensing of intellectual property--A study on off-shore technology transfer樊治齊, (Alex) Fan, Chih-Chi Unknown Date (has links)
『智慧財產』是二十一世紀世界產業競爭的決勝關鍵。智慧財產的佈局、產出及保護固然非常重要,但是最終還是需要積極的運用,發揮智慧財產這種無形資產獨有之國際性、重複利用性及同時異地併行使用實施之特性,彰顯其最大化之價值。世界各國政府在積極建置各種政策手段提升智慧財產運用之同時,也考慮到自身國家安全及國內產業競爭力消長之影響,大多規範了一系列智慧財產輸出到國境之外的運用管制。智慧財產之積極運用與境外實施管制,是兩種截然不同,有時甚至是互相衝突之面向,需要有清晰的觀念,才能建置雙贏策略,讓國內產業在決勝關鍵所向無敵。
我國科技基本法自民國88年公佈實施以來已有十年。智慧財產的產出、保護及運用在這十年間突飛猛進。雖然如此,但是仍有許多配套措施及觀念尚未成熟的建立起來。對於彰顯及發揮智慧財產價值所面對之『境外實施管制機制』更是有相對檢視之急迫性。在『國際技術移轉制度理論與實務』(王偉霖、劉江彬 著,2010年9月初版)劉江彬教授序中,劉教授特別指出這一點,認為應該突破其限制。我國在智慧財產方面之創新管理成就,中國也在快速學習,急起直追,從中國十二五計畫之政策可以看出他們更在發揚創新商業化之投資,學習我們企業的經營哲學。台灣有相當多的創新能量,蘊含智慧財產運用之潛力,政府可以從更宏觀的角度思考,發揮台灣的『軟實力』,實現台灣的願景。
本研究針對經濟事務財團法人研究機構,於政府資助產出之專利權在中華民國管轄區域外使用實施所需要事前陳報政府主管機關核准之規定嘗試提出更有效率之管理機制。
本研究比較美國、日本、大陸及台灣之政府資助產出之成果下放、技術出口管制、技術與投資境外實施管制相關法規之規範與作法,並訪問各國極具智慧財產管理運用代表性之組織--Association of University Technology Manager (AUTM) 及Licensing Executive Society (LES) 總會之會長、美國Stanford University技轉辦公室主任、美國前University of Washington負責技術移轉之副校長、日本東京大學技轉辦公室主任、前新加坡大學之技轉辦公室主任、徐小波大律師、台灣積體電路股份有限公司負責技術移轉之法務處宿文堂處長、政治大學商學院智慧財產研究所王偉霖教授及我國技術服務業之宇東公司副執行長等在智慧財產授權領域之產官學研專家學者,彙整歸納他們之看法及筆者之意見。再綜整工業技術研究院過去十年來向經濟部提出境外實施申請之案件,以三案不同技術、授權模式及授權區域之案件為案例探討。對照經濟部投資業務處對於我國境外投資之管理規範及審核要項,對於經濟部技術處目前審核境外實施作業,分析實務操作面之問題所在,進而提出『分類分級管理』之構想。視專利權之技術內容及授權模式,將審查作業分為高度管理、低度管理及事後報備。希望未來境外實施之管制也能夠兼顧行政成本降低、多元化彈性模式及商機時效。
本研究分別對政府及申請人提出建議,並由微觀到鉅觀,對我國智慧財產落實運用之全面性結構問題提出後續可繼續研究之議題供參。
對於政府處理其出資產出之成果的境外實施管制,建議涉及國家安全之技術輸出可比照國際作法採取『高度管理』。對於不涉及國家安全之智慧財產境外實施可採『低度管理』。同時建立具體明確可預期之審理標準、流程及正面或負面表列之技術清單。專利之非專屬授權及已經經過政府相關單位審核者,建議可採『事後報備』簡化流程。進一步考量規劃逐步建立企業及研發機構境外實施『自主管理』機制。至於境外實施之對價應回歸『商業談判』之市場機制,政府不需過多干涉。最後建議加強政府承辦人員對於智慧財產管理運用理論及實務認識之訓練。
在目前政府『境外實施』機制尚未調整之前,本研究綜整過去工業技術研究院申請境外實施之經驗,對於申請人提出建議作法,希望有助於審查流程之加速。事前與政府機關承辦人多溝通有絕對必要,充分瞭解其關切之事項,並備妥相關之文件。要求境外實施之廠商直接向政府承辦機關關切不必然有助於加速審核流程,有時反而弄巧反拙,造成承辦人之困擾,相對的攪亂了審核的節奏。
『境外實施』僅為提升智慧財產運用的一個點,必須要達到數個點的突破,形成面的結構調整,後續仍然有相當多的議題需要繼續研究,提出解決方案。例如修改科技基本法以明確擴大適用之層面至政府相關研究機關及學校—如中央研究院、公立大學等。這些機關是政府單位智慧財產之重要生產者,與下放之執行機構一樣,需突破國有財產法及政府採購法以發揮智慧財產之價值,但是同時適用之政府機關應配套建立智慧財產管理及評鑑機制。本研究以經濟事務研究機構之境外實施為限,其他仍然有教育體系之學校及經濟事務以外之研究機構之境外實施制度值得一窺。
本研究參酌世界各國之作法,搭配本研究生多年在工研院之經驗,檢視目前我國之實務運作,以學術討論之立場,結合實務與理論,嘗試提出一些看法,希望能夠提供給政府宏觀的思考,構建更契合打造台灣為亞洲樞紐之願景的機制。但本研究之所有論述純屬本研究生之個人觀點,不代表工研院或其他任何機構與單位之立場。 / “Intellectual Property” is the key factor to winning the industrial competition among competitive countries in the twenty-first century. Although domestic products and well-protected intellectual property are both extremely important, intellectual property should ultimately be used actively in order to maximize its core value. While governments around the world enthusiastically harness a variety of policy instruments to actively promote the use of intellectual property, they also take into account the security and competitiveness of their nations’ own domestic industries, as well as the impact of growth and decline on their economy. With these concerns, most of the intellectual property outputs are regulated by a series of overseas licensing restrains. The active usage of intellectual property and the control over overseas licensing are issues that are usually mutually independent. However, they sometimes conflict with each other. Only a clear and thorough understanding of both topics can allow one to establish a well-rounded strategy that creates a win-win situation in reference to the relationship between overseas licensing and domestic products.
The Fundamental Science and Technology Act of the Republic of China has been in effect for a decade since its original ratification. Even so, there are still a lot of support measures and concepts established by the Act that have yet to be fully developed. For example, the “Overseas Licensing” control mechanism within the Act is an important measure that has received minimal development, and is in urgent need of having its political limitations removed for it to become more effective.
This study compares United States, Japan, China and Taiwan’s export controls and overseas licensing laws. By visiting leaders of those intellectual property management representative organizations - -Association of University Technology Manager (AUTM) and Licensing Executive Society (LES), Director of the United States Stanford University Technology Transfer Office, former Vice President responsible for technology transfer of University of Washington, Director of Technology Transfer Office of University of Tokyo, Ex-Director of the Office of Technology Transfer of University of Singapore, Professor Paul S. P. Hsu, Chairman & CEO of PHYCOS International Co., Ltd, Director of Legal Transactions of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., Ltd., National Chengchi University Institute of Intellectual Property Business School Professor Wang Weilin and Vice President of Tanspercific IP Ltd. , the study summarized views and opinions of these professionals . The author analyzed overseas licensing cases that Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) applied over the last decade in their technology, business model, and licensing area. Using the analysis of the practical problems in the overseas licensing control regulations and rules under the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the author proposed a concept of “classification management” ideas. According to this concept, the technical content of patent rights and licensing models and their management will be reviewed in three different levels, including high degree management, low degree management and post-filing. In the future, the costs of administration, the diversity of business models, and the flexibility in time should be considered in all cases of overseas licensing.
The overseas licensing control that is related to national security should take a “high degree of management”. The rest of which do not involve national security can be reviewed under a “low degree of management”. Non-exclusive patent license and the case which has already been reviewed by any government agencies under the overseas licensing control should be reviewed under “post-filing management” to simplify the process. Furthermore, government should consider the gradual establishment of self-management mechanism as an “Internal Control Program” in the industry and research institute. Without excessive government interference, the terms and considerations of an overseas licensing should return to” commercial market negotiations mechanism”. Government administrators who are involved in the intellectual property management affairs need to strengthen their knowledge, vision and experiences in the field of intellectual property by training courses.
This study further points out several topics related to the need of follow-up studies which include extending the entity who can apply under the Fundamental Science and Technology Act to governmental natural research institutes and schools - such as Academia Sinica, public universities and so on in order to break through the National Property Act and the Government Procurement Law for getting more freedom and flexibility in Intellectual property management. Since this study focuses on Economic Affairs related overseas licensing control system, fields that are outside of this area such as educational system and other Minister which might have the same issue is worth a glimpse.
This study is based on the experiences that author had when working in ITRI and the general practice in overseas licensing field, trying to raise view point from broader angle for government’s consideration. Every view point raised under this study is the observation of the author himself purely which does not represent or reflect ITRI’s thoughts whatsoever.
|
9 |
我國教育政策制定過程之比較分析鄭棋瑋 Unknown Date (has links)
教育政策形成過程中的政治影響向來被視為重要的因素,但是是否重要成為主導力量卻甚少有系統性的研究。本研究使用多重個案的研究設計方式,一方面研究範圍擴大為兩類型(一般性質與統獨性質)五個案(教育基本法、教育經費保障、常態編班、開放大陸學歷、拼音政策)的重大教育政策,另一方面將五項個案運用共同一致的觀察指標(政策論述框架、自主性、動員性與聯盟性)以作為比較的基礎。以此兩項前提下,試圖實證整體教育政策研究上,政治因素對教育政策的涉入,提供較為系統性與完整的結論。
在一般的教育政策上,代表政治因素與考量的政治框架,則從沒在任何一項政策各案中成為運用最多的論述內容。但是在統獨性質的教育政策上,政策的產生的確深受政治因素為最多的考量。
在自主性上,一般性質的教育政策中利益團體的自主性相較於政黨與教育行政機關是相當高的,但是在統獨性質的教育政策上,利益團體的自主性卻不如政黨與行政機關。
在動員性方面,一般性質的教育政策,較常處於行政機關(特別是主管教育事物的中央教育部),被動地面臨單方或多方的利益團體的壓力,利益團體間也不見得總是全面合作,而是也存在著角力與對抗的過程。至於統獨性質的教育政策則是十足的反映出由於政治上各政黨對於統獨意見的分歧,使得統獨教育政策的結果主要是在政黨對抗的情況下產生。
綜合以上研究結果顯示,教育政策的互動過程的確因為政策性質的不同而有不一樣的互動型態。證實了相較於一般性質的教育政策,統獨性質的拼音政策與大陸學歷開放政策的形成過程,的確在各指標上都顯示有較高的政治決定因素。
|
10 |
德國海外派兵政策:1991-2009 / Germany's overseas military deployment: 1191-2009謝佳振, Hsieh, Chia Cheng Unknown Date (has links)
90年代起,德國再統一後躍上全球政治舞臺,從過去歐洲安全的顧慮之國,轉型成為今日歐洲政治、經濟與軍事穩定力量。但是在後冷戰時期,過去許多次級威脅因子失去了壓抑力量後,成為後冷戰時期新形態的安全議題,威脅全球政治與經濟的穩定與安全。面對這些紛踵沓至的威脅,德國一方面必須鞏固與維護自身冷戰期間所累積的經貿成就,另一方面則積極配合聯合國、北大西洋公約組織與歐洲聯盟的決策,派遣聯邦國防軍遠赴海外,從事維和、軍事、人道與救援等國際性任務,追求自身外交正常化的目標。
本文研究發現,1991年至2009年為止,聯邦國防軍在過去19年來的71項海外維和、軍事、人道與救援等國際性任務,都嚴格限定在聯合國、北約與歐盟憲章的框架下,恪遵既有的國際秩序與國內憲法規範,實踐身為聯合國、北約與歐盟成員國的義務,成為上述三大國際組織最倚賴的軍事力量。
雖然歷年來德國政府已透過具體的立法與釋憲過程,排除《基本法》限制德國海外派兵政策的規範,但是行政部門的決策過程中仍須面臨國內外輿論對於德國海外派兵政策的反對與疑慮;加上德國政府每年投入國防建軍的經費有限,聯邦國防軍的軟硬體設備未必能夠負擔高頻率與海外派兵任務,眾多因素都使聯邦國防軍多年來的派兵成效有限。
德國再統一後雖於積極參與三大國際組織框架行動,配合自身的外交折衝談判與軍事影響力,欲積極重塑其國家的地位。面對諸多主客觀的限制與未臻成熟的條件,德國重返正常化國家的過程仍將艱辛無比。 / Since the re-unification in 90’s, Germany has leaped upon the stage of the global politics. With much effort, Germany has successfully rendered itself from “a nation of grave concern to European security” into “a stable political, economic and military power in modern Europe.” However, during the post-Cold War era, those probable and minor threats, which were suppressed by the huge atmosphere of U.S.-Soviet confrontation, will appear to became the new forms of security issues in the 21st century, and further to jeopardize the global political and economic security and stability. Dealing with these countless and non-stopping new forms of threat, Germany, on the one hand, must secure its existent accomplishment in trade and the miracle of economic development, and also, on the other hand, actively accommodate the decisions and charters of the United Nations, North Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Union, to pursue Germany’s “normalized diplomacy ”by deploying its Federal Defense Army, Bundeswehr, into the overseas hostile spots, to implement the peacekeeping, military, humanitarian and rescue operations.
From 1991 to 2009, Bundeswehr has participated in 71 international peacekeeping, military, humanitarian and rescue operations, which were all implemented strictly under the framework and the charters of the UN, NATO and EU. Over the past 19 years, Germany has obediently complied with the existent regulations of the international laws and the German constitution, Grundgestez, and fulfilled the compulsory obligations as the member of the 3 institutions stated above. For this matter of fact, Bundeswehr has become the reliable military force in these institutions.
This thesis has drawn the humble conclusions that although the German executive branches has overruled the legal obstacles and set new paths of deploying Bundeswehr overseas by the legislative move and the explication of the Grundgestez, the executive branches will always tackle the domestic criticism and the international skepticism; meanwhile, the executive branches have never allocated even more sufficient annual budget for the military branches to maintain its readiness-rate, therefore the training of personnel, software, equipment and facilities may not genuinely satisfy the needs for actual battles and afford the frequent and distant operations. The combination of these problem has compromised the actual consequence and the efficiency of Germany’s overseas military deployments in the past two decades.
Having endeavored so hard to comply with the operations under the framework of the three major institutions, accompanying its maneuvering of diplomacy and military significance, Germany will still have to give much toil and labor to re-shape its international status. Nevertheless, being obstructed by the immature subjective and objective conditions, Germany’ road returning to its Normalcy of the state will still be long and difficult.
|
Page generated in 0.0293 seconds