IC(積體電路)產業是台灣過去三十多年來發展最完整、且在世界上最具有競爭力的創新型產業。研發與技術專利成長快速，也代表這個產業的技術創新成果。台灣IC 產業技術創新和專利的研究累積了一些成果，但較缺乏使用研發創新發明人網絡所做的分析。本研究使用IC 產業專利發明人網絡資料，從結構洞(structural holes)和地位訊號(status signal)這兩個過去西方半導體和生物科技等創新產業研究中，最能解釋創新行動者與網絡系統和創新表現理論機制的學術研究累積成果出發，並反省台灣特有IC 產業分工技術利基位置、流動型勞力市場，發展出專利發明人網絡對專利發明成果影響機制之模型。研究發現，分析結果支持發明人地位訊號、結構洞網絡理論機制有助於專利創新發明的假設。而比較特殊的例外是，上游的專利發明網絡，結構洞低的類型反而有比較好的專利創新。這是由於上游的IC設計產業技術特性，需仰賴同一團隊的人重複合作方能完成設計，所以大多與重疊的人合作，結構限制較高，因此呈現與結構洞理論不同的情況。此外，研究發現，流動並不一定帶來較佳的技術創新，台灣IC產業專利人才流動對於技術發展與創新的正面影響，較多是在上游的IC設計產業。 因此創新發明鑲嵌在台灣特有半導體的不同技術利基環境中，還必須考慮到不同產業位置的技術特性，與產業技術發展所在的階段，才能正確解釋台灣IC產業的創新發明機制。 / The IC (integrated circuit) industry has been the most complete, competitive and innovative industry in Taiwan over the past three decades. The rapid growth of patents in this field demonstrates the marvelous outcomes of technological innovations. A huge amount of patent-based research has been accumulated in this industry, but only a little is related to the inventor network. Structural holes and status signal are two competing perspectives in explaining the dynamic mechanisms between innovative actors and network systems of the most innovative industries, semiconductor and biotechnology, in advanced countries. We use these two theories and network data of patent-based inventors to discuss the specific niche of vertical disintegration and fluid labor market in Taiwan IC industry, and develop models on mechanisms of how inventors’ networks affect the outcome of inventors’ patents. The findings reveal that the hypothesis on the effects of status signals and structural holes in inventors’ collaboration networks on the citations of inventors’ patents was supported. However, the patent inventions of the upstream IC design firms, the collaborative invention teams seem to be small or high structural constraints. Most of the patents of these newly growing firms in IC design industry are specialized in consumption products. The structural constraints are high, but the impact of is large. Besides, inventors’ fluidity would not necessarily create more influential patents. The fluidity of patent-based inventors was positive impact to the patent inventions, more was found in the IC designs company. The IC industry has been vertically differentiated into three sectors: the IC designs, the IC foundry, the package and test. In principle, these three sectors demand different levels of technology. The maturity of technological niches will affect the impacts of the patents.

隨著科技快速發展，為鼓勵發明人多加研發，並公開其研發成果，以促進產業發展，專利權之保護日漸重要，以賦予發明人研發之誘因。然並非所有研發成果均得以取得專利權之保障，各國均設有專利要件，由專利專責機關就是否核准專利予以審查，惟審查過程中難免有些疏失，而造成原本不應核准專利之研發成果受到專利權之保護，此乃公眾審查制度之重要性，公眾得以向專利機關提出相關證據，請求撤銷專利權，藉由公眾之力量過濾出本不應取得專利之研發成果，以提供專利品質。 本文旨在探討歐洲、美國及台灣專利核准後之公眾審查制度，有鑑於美國及台灣於2011年均對專利法有所修正，於公眾審查制度方面有大幅變動，舉例而言，美國新增核准後複審制度、廢除雙方再審查制度，改以雙方複審制度取代之、我國舉發制度由全案審定改採逐項審定等，對公眾審查制度之變革影響重大。且由於美國本次修法新增之核准後複審制度乃參考歐洲異議制度之精神而制定，二者間雖有相似之處，然並非整個制度直接移植，因而二者間仍有差異性，有鑑於此，本文乃於探討美國公眾審查制度前一併先對歐洲異議制度作一探討。職是，本文章節編排順序乃先為歐洲異議制度，其次為美國公眾審查制度，最後為我國舉發制度，以便藉由比較歐洲和美國制度，檢視我國舉發制度有無可資借鏡之處，期使我國舉發制度得以更臻健全。

在技術快速變遷的環境中，如何迅速掌握與研發相關的情報以協助研發決策的制訂，已經成為企業重要的競爭優勢來源。近年來，由於電腦運算能力的快速提昇，使用電腦輔助企業自動、快速地從大量增加的科技資訊（特別是專利和論文）中淬取出攸關的資訊，就成為了近年來產業界和學術界積極研究的目標。 在眾多方法中，使用書目計量分析和專利分析方法是最引人注目的方法之一。使用書目計量分析和專利分析可以從龐大的論文和專利資訊中，快速瞭解科技發展的動態：包括瞭解科技發展的階段為何，熱門的科技領域為何，重要的作者和企業為何等等。然而，現階段的書目計量分析和專利分析雖然可以協助瞭解科技發展的全貌，對於科技發展下技術發明活動與科學研究活動的關聯性，以及不同的科技發展階段裡發明人和作者的動態關係，卻仍然缺少相關的研究。 因此，本研究提出以下三點研究問題： 1. 不同類型的論文作者和專利發明人的科學研究／技術發明活動，與技術發展階段的關聯性為何？ 2. 發明作者的技術發明／科學研究活動與一般發明人或作者的差異為何？ 3. 發明作者的技術發明活動與科學研究活動關係為何？ 針對以上的研究問題，本研究首先通過回顧相關文獻以建立分析發明人和作者的研究架構，再蒐集專利和論文的資料並依照架構的需要處理資料，最後進行分析與討論以得到研究結論。 本研究主要獲得以下三點研究結論： 1. 天才發明人是技術發展處於萌芽期時專利發明的要角，而關鍵發明人大多在技術發展進入成長期時才投入專利發明。至於頂尖作者，則在技術發展的萌芽期、成長期和成熟期都是論文發表的要角。 2. 關鍵發明人有很高的機會是頂尖作者，而發明作者如果不是關鍵發明人，則其專利發明的表現有略高的機會較其他發明人更差。 3. 大部份發明作者的專利發明活動在論文發表活動之後；但是關鍵發明人則較傾向先申請專利，再發表主題高度相關的論文。 / Mining information to improve corporate R&D decision making had been an important source of competitive advantage in the rapid changing technological environment. Recently, extracting relevant information quickly and automatically from massive amount of technological data (especially patent and scientific publications) with the aide of computer had become an active research area for both industrial and academic researchers due to ever-growing computing power. Among the methods of retrieving technological information, bibliometrics and patent analysis are two of the most attractive ones. Bibliometrics and patent analysis provide a quick way to capture the dynamics of technological development, including the stage of technological development, active technological research area and important researchers/corporates, etc. Although bibliometrics and patent analysis are helpful to understand the landscape of technological development, there still lacks researches about the relationship between scientific invention and research activities as well as the dynamics between patent inventors and publication authors along different stages of technological development. Hence, this research raises the following questions: 1. What is the relation between scientific research/invention activities and technological development stages for different categories of publication authors and patent inventors? 2. What is the difference of scientific research/invention activities between Inventor-Authors and other inventors/authors? 3. What is the relation between scientific research and invention activities of Inventor-Authors? This research reviews related researches to define a research framework connecting authors, inventors and technological development stages. Then patent and publication data are collected and processed based on the research framework. This research conclusion is made after analysis and discussion. Conclusion of the research includes the followings: 1. "Talent Inventors" play important role when the technological development is in "Emerging" stage, and "Key Inventors" starts patent inventions after the technological development enters "Growth" stage. "Top Authors" play important role across "Emerging", "Growth" and "Maturity" stages of technological development. 2. "Key Inventors" are more probable to be also "Top Author". "Inventor-Authors" who are not "Key Inventors" are more probably to perform worse than other inventors. 3. Most "Inventor-Authors" apply for patents after papers of highly related topics are published. But "Key Inventors" tend to apply for patents before papers of highly related topics are published.

本研究以研究發展費用作為專利的投入變數，以專利數作為專利的產出數量變數，以平均專利範圍及平均專利發明人數作為專利的產出品質變數，使用長期間與大範圍的台灣樣本來探討專利資訊與企業財務績效之關連性，並透過專利資訊的使用者-分析師的觀點來判別哪些專利資訊是資訊使用者眼中的攸關資訊。研究結果發現大量的專利並不會對企業未來盈餘有明顯助益，擁有高品質的專利才是對企業未來盈餘有所助益的關鍵因素，研究結果亦發現分析師在進行盈餘預測時，並未適當的利用專利產出品質與專利產出數量資訊，且這些未經適當利用的專利資訊會增加盈餘預測誤差。故本研究建議資訊揭露相關準則及法規可針對專利資訊給予更完整、更透明的揭露。 / Patent’s value is hard to accurately identify under current generally accepted accounting principles. This paper uses firms in the Taiwan Stock Exchange to investigate the association of firm’s patents, future financial performance and the information used in analysts’ earnings forecasts. The patents were measured by the proxies of R&D expenditures, granted patents, patent claims and the number of patent inventors. The evidences show that possessing a large number of patents does not help future financial performance, but granting high quality patents does. The evidences also show that analysts do not appropriately use the information provided by patents, and this truly causes analysts’ forecast errors. Therefore, I suggest giving patents clearer and more complete disclosure, so that investors can obtain more value-relevant information.

在知識經濟時代下，無形資產的對於公司的重要性愈來愈高。有別於在工業時代下的生產重心，著重在大量的土地，機器設備...等有形的資產，在二十一世紀競爭中致勝的關鍵因素卻是那些無實體存在的知識累積，例如：研究發展的能力、員工的素質、顧客關係的維持…等;然而，會計處理對於無形資產卻是停留在歷史的取得成本，而不是現時的市場價值，更甚，有些無形資產根本無法入帳;因此，資本市場如何看待與反應公司的無形資產就是一項有趣的議題。本研究之研究目的是：依據Fama and French (1993)三因子模型，以橫斷面的分析方式，欲控制了系統風險、規模效果和淨值與市價比效果後，進一步分別探討研究發展活動與專利權對於股票報酬之影響，是否擁有投入愈多的研發活動與專利可以在股票市場獲得愈高的報酬？是否研究發展費用與專利權數對於股票報酬有遞延效果的影響？ 樣本期間從民國七十一年到民國九十三年，包含上市與上櫃公司，總共有21717筆觀察值，在研究發展活動方面，本研究採用了當期研究發展費用與依五年資本化後之研究發展費用二種替代變數，專利權方面，採用專利權數與累積專利權數二種代理變數，其實證結果發現： (1)當期研究發展費用溢酬與股票超額報酬呈現顯著的正向相關，將研究發展費用依五年資本化後，資本化後之研究發展費用溢酬仍與股票超額報酬呈現顯著的正向相關。 (2)專利權數之溢酬與股票超額報酬卻是顯著的負相關，累積專利權數之溢酬與股票超額報酬也是呈現顯著的負向關係，可能的原因是：在本研究樣本裡的大部分的專利權數量是非常集中在少部分的公司。 (3)研究發展溢酬對於超額報酬最多有三年的遞延效果，專利權溢酬對於超額報酬至少有五年遞延的效果。 (4)當期研究發展費用溢酬與資本化後之研究發展費用溢酬對於超額報酬有顯著不同的影響，二者比較下，當期研究發展費用溢酬對於股票報酬的影響程度大於資本化後之研究發展費用溢酬。可能的原因是:Fama and French三因子模型某種程度上代表著流量的概念，因此，當期研究發展費用溢酬的效果較為顯著。 (5)在專利權數之溢酬與累積專利權數之溢酬二者之間，對於超額報酬不具有顯著差異性的影響。可能的原因是:大部分的樣本都沒有專利權，因此，專利權數之溢酬與累積專利權數之溢酬沒有太大的差異。 (6)以研究發展與專利來說，二者對於超額報酬具有顯著不同差異的影響。 / Since the change in the global economy in the last decade, from manufacturing and industry-based to knowledge-based, it has created new interest in intellectual capital and increased the demand for measuring and reporting the effect on business and profitability. Nonetheless, accounting conventions based on historical cost often understate their value. Thus, from a practical point of view, how the stock market responses to the innovative activity is an interesting issue. Here, the major objective of this study is, on the basis of the three-factor model in Fama and French (1993), to investigate the relationship between innovation activities in firms and stock returns. That is, the aim in this study is to examine whether the intellectual capital, in particularly focusing on R&D and patents, has impact on stock returns. Does the market provide the premium for the value of the innovation in firms? Do the stocks with more innovation efforts worth the higher market rate of returns? Do R&D and patents have time lag effect on returns? We find that: (1) The return premiums are significantly greater for high-level of R&D than for low-level R&D. The mimicking returns both for the R&D-expense factor and capitalized-R&D factors are significantly positive related to excess stock returns. (2) Contrary to our intuition and expectation, the mimicking returns both for patent count and cumulated patent count are significantly negative associated with excess stock returns. One possible explanation is that the distribution of patented innovation is known to be extremely skewed, implying that a few patents are very valuable and many are worth almost nothing. (3) R&D-related return premiums have 3-year lag effect on excess stock returns at most. As for patent-related return premiums, it shows 5-year lag at least for excess stock returns. (4) R&D expenses have more impact on stock returns than the R&D capitalization. One possible explanation is that the “flow” concept is more suitable than the “stock” concept in the Fama and French (1993) regression of stock returns. (5) There is no difference between patent count and cumulated patent count in explaining stock returns. It is likely that, for a large proportion of the sample, they do not possess any patents. (6) When it comes to compare R&D to patents, we find that there is statistically significant difference between the two in explaining excess stock returns.

長期以來，商業交易多半是單純為取得某種物品或權利，由交易雙方協商並訂立合約，如買方為取得房地而願給付價金，賣方為取得金錢乃願出售房屋。然而二十世紀之後，經濟型態的轉變為交易的內容帶來了重大的轉變，智慧財產權的讓與或授權交易漸趨熱門，在商業經營中時時刻刻上演。如同典型的交易一樣，就取得權利者而言，其願意將所有的專利、商標、著作權等權利加以利用，以獲取金錢利益；反之，欲利用者則透過與權利擁有者訂立合約的方式，將之利用於所生產的商品或服務，增加其邊際效用，獲取更大的利潤。 在此背景之下，智慧財產的讓與或是授權，其交易的型態與方式漸行複雜，對於企業的經營更是有著決定性的影響，加上智慧財產權，可說是法律所創設出來的權利，其異於傳統財產實體的特質，更難以令習慣傳統交易的我們加以掌握，因此有深入研究的必要，本論文即基於此背景，開始關於智慧財產諸多活動中的一個課題-「授權」活動展開研究。 因此，本篇論文研究有以下的目的： 一、 從高科技產業獨特的環境去瞭解智慧財產授權所扮演的角色。 二、 智慧財產授權對於高科技企業經營策略之影響與作用，反之，高科技經營策略之擬定後，是否可以傑由授權達成其目的。 三、 高科技企業在面臨智慧財產授權契約談判時，應如何爭取最佳利益。 四、 高科技企業營運策略中，關於簽訂授權契約可能引發的法律相關議題應如何面對。 本研究即基於上述目的，從法律面及商業管理的角度去探討智慧財產授權活動所引發企業經營的策略意涵，以三個層次分別來說明：一、企業經營層次；二、授權契約談判層次；三、相關法律議題層次。透過三個層次的分析與歸納，本研究針對高科技企業之經營與智慧財產權授權的策略運用提出下列數點之建議： （一） 智慧財產授權是一個複雜的領域，涉及法律、管理、技術等面向，因此我國高科技企業必須走出權利金追索與授權的泥沼中，重新架構授權與企業的經營策略。 （二） 我國高科技企業若欲藉由授權活動予以獲利，則最重要的是將企業轉型為真正的知識型企業，持續研發，蓄積優質的智慧財產權，如此才能將智慧財產授權活動的功用發揮到最大。 （三） 企業應培養相關智慧財產權授權相關人才，並考量是否建制一個獨立的智慧財產授權部門。 （四） 授權契約的簽訂將會影響企業未來研發的發展方向，因此建議企業於簽署授權契約時，必須考量企業本身是否可以自行研發該技術，或是其他替代性技術的可行性，切勿因為被國外的企業一警告，即簽署智慧財產權的授權契約。 （五） 反之，既然專利訴訟需耗費大量的人力、物力、時間與金錢，因此面對專利侵權訴訟時，應考量接受授權的可能性，授權所付出的成本與進行訴訟的成本相較後取其較低者。但是需注意的是，縱使獲得他人授權，然亦不代表會侵害第三人之專利，換言之獲得一家企業的授權，並不表示已經一勞永逸的無侵權可能性。故建議企業在接受專利授權時，必須詳細的評估該專利的範圍。 （六） 授權與智慧財產的保護與執行有緊密的關係，因此企業應加強智慧財產的保護與執行，才可以降低授權活動所面臨的風險。 （七） 智慧財產授權，基於智慧財產的無形性的特性而生，與傳統的有形財產有迥然不同的性質，善加利用智慧財產權的特性，將可使企業擺脫傳統的營業模式，邁向新的獲利境界。建議企業應重新的審視自己所有的智慧資產，加以稽核與評估，結合本研究所提出的授權策略架構，重新思索企業的營運方向與智慧資產的利用是否完善，有效的提升企業的競爭地位，創造更多的經營優勢。

近年來全球在生物科技上發展迅速，尤其是其中農業科技部分之基因改造作物的發展，更對於消費者、農民和農業發展造成不小衝擊。且就我國生技產業而言，由於國外生物科技產業之發展已遠遠超過我國現今之發展，為提高產業之競爭力，實有必要選擇具備競爭優勢的項目，將研發、生產、資金能力集中於這些項目上。而在生物科技之眾多領域中，我國在生物科技各產業中最具發展潛力的即為農業生物科技下之基改作物產業，因此就此方面之相關法規建構應加以重視。 基因改造作物之快速發展一方面雖帶給人類社會許多創新的福祉與商機，但也同時引發了許多不同型態的社會議題與科技風險。而在基因改造作物之所有相關爭議問題中，最重要的即集中在「相關智慧財產權之保護」與「安全之管理」兩者上，而這也是本論文主要之重心所在。對於農民來說，影響最深之為基改作物相關技術的智慧財產權化，相關重要案例如本論文第四章第二節中所探討之Monsanto Co. v. McFarling案與Schemeiser v. Monsanto案。對於消費者而言，由本論文第三章可知基因改造作物所帶來之利益與潛藏危機並存，因此在發展基因改造作物，享受其優點之同時，對於基因改造作物之管理則更突顯出其重要性。而對於基因改造作物之管理制度，各國採取不同之立場，尤其是美國與歐盟更可說是採取相對立之立場態度，而經由分析可知其採取不同立場係由於歐盟消費者對於基改作物產品之食用接受度較低、社會大眾著重生態環境保護之程度較高，以及基因改造作物在歐、美之個別不同農業生產環境下所擁有之優勢不同，而因此所帶來之經濟效益有所落差所致。因此透過對於歐、美制度之檢討，本論文在我國制度之制訂上，即針對我國消費者對於基改作物產品之食用接受度、我國社會大眾對於生態環境保護之關心程度，以及基因改造作物在我國農業生產環境下所擁有之優勢等因素加以探討。

在此網路普及、電子商務發展、全球化經營等趨勢下，倉儲管理要面對的是更有效與精確的處理以及儲存更多的品項，以較低的成本並滿足多樣的顧客需求；為維持企業競爭力，倉儲技術已經成為企業營運在產業競爭中的關鍵議題。 本研究是一個探索性的個案研究，研究對象為PCHome24小時購物事業部，分析基本架構為Chen(1996)所提出的動態競爭理論架構。依據PCHome論述有關倉儲管理的創新技術，透過專利資料分析，先以宏觀的角度來探討類似之倉儲管理技術樣貌，再以微觀的層面，探討其他擁有關聯性技術資源的廠商和PCHome 24小時購物之競爭關係以及策略。 研究結果顯示，擁有與PCHome 24小時購物創新倉儲管理類似技術的專利權人，其所屬於產業有與PCHome 24小時購物相同的電子商務，其他還有製造、健康照護、軟體資訊以及供應鍵自動化系統顧問服務業等，呈現多廣泛多元。依據Chen(1996)的動態競爭理論架構分析發現，擁有與PCHome所論述之創新倉儲管理技術概念類似技術專利的廠商，在不同的產業，依不同的市場共同性與專利技術資源相似程度，產生不同的市場策略與技術專利策略。其中包含PCHome面對相同市場時的優先專利佈局以防堵競爭對手進入策略，或透過專利訴訟發動攻擊性行動；面對已被專利的技術特徵時做回避以及差異化專利佈局以保護市場的防禦性行動；透過不同市場的相關專利技術做交叉授權或直接併購/取得技術專利授權，以強化自身專利技術來確保市場競爭力；以及最後，將其倉儲創新技術專利化商品化來開拓新市場，以及透過專利授權來賺取授權金以增加營收等策略。 / Basing on the popularity of internet, development of e-commerce, and business globalization, enterprises need more efficient and accurate warehouse management technology to meet diverse customer needs. In order to maintain the competitiveness of enterprises, innovative technology has become a key issue of the enterprises operating in industrial competition. This study is an exploratory case study and we select PCHome 24-hour Shopping as the subject. The foundation of this study is basing on the theoretical framework of dynamic competitive proposed by Chen (1996). According to the PCHome discourse on the warehouse management of innovative technologies, we started with the macro perspective to explore the similar appearance of the technologies basing on patent analysis; and then, to the micro level, we investigate the other enterprises which have similar technical resources and discuss their competitive relationship and business strategy of PChome. The results show that, the patentees which have similar technologies patents belong to diverse industries including e-commerce, manufacturing, health care, software information technology and supply chain automation systems consultancy services. Basing on the dynamic competitive framework, PCHome would produce different market strategy and patent strategy to the patentees depending on the market commonality and patented technology resources similarity. These competitive strategies include launching offensive action through patent litigation or attempt to prevent the entry strategies of competitors. Facing to the patentee who has patented similar technology, PCHome should avoid patented technical features and differentiate patent portfolio to protect the market. Further, through cross-licensing patented technology or directly to M & A / access to relate technology patents could strengthens the innovative technology to ensure market competitiveness. And finally, patenting or commercializing the innovative technologies could develop new markets, as well as through patents to earn licensing fees to increase revenues.

法院處理涉外標準必要專利之案件時，經常面臨國際管轄以及準據法適用的問題。涉及議題包含授權契約之成立與效力、專利侵權、違反競爭法等。本文先分析我國涉外民事法律適用法在智慧財產案件上之實務適用情形，認為目前涉外民事法律適用法第42條第1項應僅適用與智慧財產權利內容本身相關之爭議，智慧財產契約或侵權行為案件，則應適用契約與一般侵權行為之選法規則。 其次，本文透過研究日本、中國、韓國、美國、英國等國之標準必要專利案件，探討標準必要專利案件中，標準制定組織的智財權政策與F/RAND承諾，經常約定以標準制定組織所在地法為準據法，因此所生之授權契約爭議與競爭法爭議，包括法院是否有權管轄，以及應該如何適用之準據法。在與F/RAND相關之爭議裡，各國法院鮮少有拒絕管轄的情形。準據法方面，實務上基於當事人意思自主原則，適用標準制定組織之智財權政策與F/RAND承諾之準據法，判斷F/RAND承諾之性質，以及當事人間授權契約是否成立以及其效力為何。競爭法方面，實務上各國皆適用內國競爭法，以決定標準必要專利權人之行為是否濫用其市場地位。 經由比較法與實務案件之分析，本文主張標準必要專利之中基於F/RAND所生之契約爭議，仍應適用標準制定組織之智財權政策與F/RAND承諾中所約定之法律。適用涉外民事法律適用法部分，法院實務判決應更清楚明確定性案件以及適用涉外民事法律適用法之依據與理由，俾使涉外民事法律適用法第42條第1項之意義更為明確。競爭法之部分，由於其強行法規之性質，實務皆適用法庭地法，原則上僅就影響國內市場之涉外行為判斷。此外，就我國立法就智慧財產之國際管轄規定付之闕如，應該針對智慧財產之特殊性增加相關規定。 / In cross-border SEP-related cases, courts often face the problems of international jurisdiction and the choice of law. SEP-realted cases often involve issues such as the nature of the F/RAND declarations and the IPR policies of Standard Setting Organizations (SSOs), the formation and the effect of licensing agreements, and violation of competition law, etc. The thesis starts from the examination of Act Governing the Choice of Law in Civil Matters Involving Foreign Elements in Taiwan. Article 42(1) of the Act should be applied only to the issues related to the content of IP right itself. As for IP infringements and IP-related contracts, the choice of law rules on general infringements and contracts should be applied. Secondly, the thesis further looks into the practice of conflict of law in Japan Korea, PRC, the UK and the US on SEP-related cases, which mostly apply the principle of party autonomy to determine the nature of F/RAND declarations and the nature of SSOs’ IPR policies. As for the competition law argument, based on the mandatory nature of competition law, the court often applied lex fori to the issues. Back to the private international law in Taiwan, the thesis suggests that the court should elaborate more specifically on the process of the court determining the characterization of the case and further deciding the choice of law. Besides, Taiwan should also legislate the law on the international jurisdiction on IP cases.

現今科技日新月異，不斷突破創新，產業環境變動的步調也越來越快，新竄出之金融科技(Finance Technology)的應用，使得許多企業越加注重技術方面的研發創新，尤其，善加運用專利資訊能有效節省研發經費與時間。因此如何有效運用專利是企業維持競爭優勢不可或缺的一環。 有鑑於此，本研究搜集近年各國專利資料庫之專利資料，將資料分為三個時期，並區分申請中與已申請之專利資料，透過文字探勘技術與機會探索分析出金融科技之發展與趨勢，了解各時期詞彙間之關聯性與差異，再搭配視覺化工具KeyGraph，以描繪出金融科技領域之相關詞彙關聯趨勢圖，挖掘未來潛在趨勢。 本研究之結果了解金融科技在各時期的趨勢發展變化與尋求脈絡，以及過去各時期之專利佈局，因而從結果中發現金融科技之發展方向主體為支付領域，許多支付科技接連出現在三個時期中。然而近幾年，其他金融領域如投資、融資、保險、資料分析等也漸漸浮出，從本研究之第三個時期的高頻字詞高達34個可看出，可見金融科技之專利發展佈局已快速從支付領域拓展至其他金融領域。本研究所挖掘出之潛在趨勢顯示了未來金融科技領域中將會有五大重點發展領域，分別為服務整合領域之雲端科技、支付領域之生物辨識與穿戴支付與加密貨幣、資料分析領域之機器學習與人工智慧、信息收集與處理領域之遠程信息處理科技、以及理財投資領域之理財機器人。 期望本研究結果能幫助企業，在面臨新科技不斷衝擊產業，而產業不斷尋求創新發展之下，能夠快速檢閱目前市場趨勢，藉此釐清並改善自身之發展策略，以因應外部環境之變動，提供企業作為金融科技發展之策略參考，也能有助於企業釐清與制定金融科技之投資方向，以擁有持續的競爭優勢。 / Nowadays, with the rapid advancement of information technologies, the changes of business environment and the way to deal with the changes are becoming faster and faster. The development and adoption of new financial technologies has made many enterprises pay more attention to the research and development (R&D) initiatives. Besides, making good use of patent information can effectively save the budget and time of R&D, so how to effectively use patent information is an indispensable part for enterprises to maintain their competitive advantages. This study collected the patent data from the national patent database, and divided the data into three periods, and distinguished the data between the applying and the applied patents. Through the text mining techniques and chance discovery, this study explored the development and trends of financial technology and also aimed to understand the relevance and differences between the major terms in each period. Then, with the visual tool, KeyGraph, this study illustrated the associations between related terms, and proposed the potential future trends based on the graphs. The results of this study help monitor the changes of the trends and financial technology’s development in the three periods, and understand the patent portfolios in each period. This study has found that the main direction of financial technology’s development is the payment field. Many technologies related to payment have successively appeared in the three periods. However, in recent years, other financial areas such as investment, financing, insurance, data analysis and other areas are gradually emerging, since we found 34 high-frequency terms in the third period. This also shows that the development of financial technology’s patent portfolios has expanded from payment to other financial areas. The potential trends of financial technology’s development in this study are five areas, namely, technologies of cloud, biometric and wearable payment and cryptocurrency, machine learning and artificial intelligence, telematics technology, and robo-advisors. It is expected that this study can serve as a reference for the development of financial technology, and help enterprises be able to quickly review their current market trends, clarify and improve their own R&D strategies to respond to the changes in the external environment. Also, it is hoped that the results can help enterprises clarify and develop their own investment directions to maintain competitive advantages.