在競爭激烈的產業環境中，企業必須具有產品價值的創造能力，才能開發新產品以滿足顧客的需求。故本研究欲探討當企業宣告取得專利權、專利授權與代理權促使競爭優勢提升之資訊內涵。本研究以民國94年及95年宣告取得專利權、專利授權與代理權之公司，及依同產業及相似公司規模配對之公司組成研究樣本。首先以事件研究法探討宣告樣本是否能獲得正向報酬，並將樣本分為專利權、專利授權與代理權三組子樣本以觀察不同競爭優勢對報酬影響之程度是否有差異，最後再將專利權樣本分為發明專利與新型式專利兩組子樣本以瞭解不同種類專利權對報酬影響之程度是否有差異。實證結果如下：一、當企業宣告取得專利相關競爭優勢時，有正向報酬產生。但惟有當企業宣告取得專利授權與代理權時才能獲得顯著正報酬；二、企業宣告取得不同競爭優勢對報酬影響之程度有差異，企業宣告自行研發專利與取得專利授權所能獲得的報酬有顯著差異，宣告自行研發專利與取得代理權在事件宣告後的報酬有顯著差異，而宣告取得專利授權與代理權所能獲得的報酬則無論短期或長期皆無顯著差異；三、企業宣告取得發明專利或新型式專利，兩者所能獲得的報酬並無差異。 / In the keenly competitive environment、enterprises must have the abilities of product value creation to develop new products and to satisfy customers』 demand. So this essay want to discuss the information content that enterprises announced that they acquired patent、patent licensing、and authority of agency to enhance competitive advantage. Based on the use of a control sample design and the firms selected have announced acquiring patent、patent licensing、and authority of agency in 2005 or 2006、and are listed on the Taiwan Security Exchange or the OTC. At first、this research employs event study to discuss whether sample of announcement could acquire positive abnormal returns. And then、in order to compare the degree of returns affected by different competitive advantage、this research divided the whole sample into three subsamples including patent、patent licensing and authority of agency. Finally、it also divided patent sample into two subsamples including invention and non-invention in order to compare the degree of returns affected by different types of patent. The empirical finding indicates that (1) when enterprises announced that they acquired competitive advantage、they will have positive abnormal returns significantly. However、only enterprises announcing that they acquired patent licensing and authority of agency could have positive abnormal returns significantly. (2) The degree of returns affected by information is different from different kinds competitive advantage、especially between patent and patent licensing、and between patent and authority of agency. (3) When enterprises announced to acquire different types of patent、they will have insignificant variance of abnormal returns.

本論文主要是在探討延展性權利金(reach-through royalty)條款的競爭法規制。首先，本文對於研究工具專利及延展性權利金條款的意義及概念作一說明，接著簡介目前各國之競爭法制與專利法制的權衡概況，並探討一些與延展性權利金條款有關之授權條款，以了解目前競爭法對於延展性權利金條款所可能導致之相關效應的評價，作為後續分析該條款適法性的基礎，再來整理美國實務及學說對於延展性權利金條款的看法，最後綜合檢討相關論述，提出本文見解。經研究後，本文認為，延展性權利金條款有其促進競爭效應(如提供風險分攤機制、幫助起始公司解決現金壓力問題以及提供授權雙方較佳的協商估價基礎)亦有其限制競爭效應(如降低被授權人研發誘因而有限制研發的效果及權利金堆疊效應)，因此一概禁止或一概允許此種條款皆非適當，而應視個案情形依合理原則的標準加以權衡，以決定系爭行為的適法性。 / The present article discusses the antitrust regulation for reach-through royalty provisions which mainly used in biotechnology research tool patent licensing. First, this article introduces the meanings of research tool patent and reach-through royalties. Second, it illustrates antitrust regulations for patent licensing in foreign countries specifically in U.S., European Union, together with R.O.C. and, furthermore, it also discusses provisions similar or related to reach-through royalties. Third, this article introduces the discussions about reach-through royalty provisions in U.S., including the NIH Guideline, case law regulations and other related discussions by scholars. Finally, the present article analyzes the effects of reach-through royalties more deeply based on the mentioned discussions and makes a suggestion for the regulation of reach-through royalties. This article argues: since reach-through royalties have both anti-competitive and pro-competitive effects, a total ban or allowance is not appropriate and a “rule of reason” inspection should be applied to such provisions for better efficiencies.

知識經濟時代的來臨，代表知識早已經取代勞力、土地、資本，成為最重要的生產要素，而知識創造的具體果實就是智慧財產，此項無形資產占企業財產的重要性已遠超過有形資產。個人、企業和國家唯有專注在智慧財產的創造、保護、管理和運用上，方可成為知識經濟下的大贏家。 近年來，隨著人類科學知識與生活智慧的增長與演進，與人類日常生活和生命安全息息相關的生物醫學技術日益突破且其重要性與日俱增，國際間生技產業發展迅速，並帶領生技產業走向多元化的發展；除此之外，生技產業也是台灣兩兆雙星計畫中所追求的新興產業之一。然而，台灣在這股趨勢洪流中，整體生技產業的發展上並不蓬勃。歸根究柢，生技產業乃為典型的高附加價值、知識導向型產業，智慧財產的重要性不言可喻並且更加突顯。智慧財產如同其他企業資產一樣，需要善加管理與運用才能發揮其價值，若企業擁有大量之智慧財產，但對該智慧財產欠缺有效之管理運用，亦無法為公司創造任何價值。因此，如何為智慧財產尋求正確的運用管道，應是智慧財產所有人最為關心的議題。由於生物技術產業十分重視技術的掌握與應用，故本論文研究將焦點放在與技術知識保護有關的「專利授權與技術移轉」上，並特別針對屬於智慧財產行銷管理層面的策略進行探討。 《時代》雜誌年度風雲人物華裔科學家何大一曾說過要用人才賭生技，其需要的是什麼樣的人才?又該如何賭?本論文研究希望能提出相對應之見解，藉由個案研究方法分析找出台灣生技企業在「專利授權與技術移轉」上的策略思考邏輯，並更加釐清智慧財產行銷管理對產業發展影響的角色與位置。 由於台灣生物技術公司目前本身先天條件不佳且資源不足，無法透過商品化與產業化之智慧財產實施方式來創造最大利益，因此透過智慧財產交換方式乃是其最佳模式，而考量相關環境條件後，其中又以「專利授權與技術移轉」為最具經濟效益且最可能成功之智慧財產商業模式與型態，因此本論文研究便針對此方面進行深入探討，以提供產業後續發展之參考借鏡。 本論文研究目的包括：1.探討推動台灣生物技術產業公司發展過程中，考量「專利授權與技術移轉」的重要因素。2.瞭解台灣生物技術產業公司目前在「專利授權與技術移轉」方面的運作機制。3.介紹台灣生物技術產業公司之指標性個案，分析其智慧財產行銷策略，歸納其關鍵成功因素，以茲其他業者參考。4.了解智慧財產行銷策略的核心結構，提出智慧財產行銷策略規劃上的建議。5.綜合研究結果，提出對台灣生物技術產業公司「專利授權與技術移轉」策略之建議，並分析該產業之潛在問題與可能限制。 本論文研究提出理論強調台灣生物技術產業公司必須考量智慧財產行銷的六大要素(6P)，以『主導產業鏈』、『控制價值鏈』、『分配供應鏈』等三鏈為目標，因而決定採取「專利授權與技術移轉」之正確的智慧財產商業模式後，站在目標被授權人的立場思考，透過「策略九說」來作檢驗，以找出最適合的智慧財產行銷之執行策略，並在執行時確實考量組織行銷之特性。 本論文研究方式採用個案研究法以及質化研究法，獲得以下結論： 1. 「專利授權與技術移轉」必須著重於專利品質，以更貼近產業與市場需求，進而強化技術移轉之成效。 2. 「專利授權與技術移轉」是屬於相當複雜且專業性高的領域，與市場互動至關密切。 3. 任何產業的任何公司當其智慧財產行銷策略之方向目標正確，且手段方法合理，則成功便是可以預期的。 4. 一旦擬定正確的智慧財產行銷策略，則後續的執行力，便成為是否成功之唯一重點。 / The coming of Knowledge-based Economy Era indicates the fact that knowledge had taken the place of labor, land and capital to become the most important production factor. The results of knowledge creation are Intellectual Property (IP). The Intangible Assets are much more important than Tangible Assets for industries in nowadays. It becomes crucial for individuals, industries, and countries to achieve success in the Knowledge-based Economy Era to concentrate on the creation, protection, management and application of intellectual property. In the recent years, because of the developments of scientific knowledge and life wisdom, the progress and importance of the biomedical technology which closely related to human life and safety advances rapidly. Besides, the biotechnology industry is also one of the booming industries of Taiwan “Two Millions, Two Stars” projects. However, the Taiwan Biotechnology Industry does not follow the trend well. The biotechnology industry is a typical high value added and knowledge oriented industry, and the importance of IP is much more distinct. Same as other corporation’s property, intellectual property needs to be managed and put to use well to manifest its value. If a corporation owns a lot of IP without effective management and application, none value or benefit will be produced for the corporation from the IP. Therefore, for the IP owner, how to find out the correct application ways of IP will be the most important concern. Since technology familiarity and application is a highly emphasized issue for biotechnology industry, this study will focus on the technology knowledge protection concerning “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring,” especially on the IP Marketing Management Strategy. David Ho, a Chinese American scientist and the Man of the year 1996 of “Time” magazine, once said that “we have to bet on biotechnology with talents”. The question is what talents are needed, and how to bet? This study aims to provide some corresponding thoughts and find out the strategy of “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” for Taiwan biotechnology corporation through case study. Furthermore, the study will manifest how IP Marketing Management will influence industry development. Due to the immature company structure and small business size of Taiwan biotechnology corporations, these corporations are unable to create the best profit through IP commercialization or industrization. Thus, the best model for them will be through IP Exchange and the “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” will be the most effective and feasible IP Business Model given the conditions of Taiwan biotechnology industry. This thesis will concentrate on this aspect and provide advices for industrial developments. The purposes of this study include: a. the important factors and the significnace of “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” in the promotion of Taiwan biotechnology corporation development; b. the current mechanism of “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” of Taiwan biotechnology corporation; c. a case study of Taiwan biotechnology corporation, including the IP Marketing Strategy analysis and the key successful factors as reference for other corporations; d. the core structure of IP Marketing Strategy and IP Marketing Strategy planning; and e. strategy suggestions for “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” and the potential problem analysis of the industry to Taiwan biotechnology corporation. This study proposes that the Taiwan biotechnology corporation must put the 6P factors of IP Marketing into consideration and target to dominate Industry Chain, to control Value Chain, and to allocate Supply Chain. They should also take the correct IP Business Model of “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring”, and then think in the position of the targeted licensee through the examination of “9 Theories of Strategy” to find out the most suitable IP Marketing strategy. They should also take the characteristics of “Organizational Marketing” into consideration in practice. This study comes to the conclusions below with case study and qualitative methods: a. The quality of patents is always important in “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” to meet the industry and market demand and thus to reinforce the technology transferring achievement. b. “Patent Licensing and Technology Transferring” is complicated, highly professional and closely related to the market. c. The success of any corporation of any industry lies on a correct IP Marketing Strategy and a legitimate method. d. Once the correct IP Marketing Strategy is settled, the only key factor to success will be how to enforce the strategy.

人類經濟活動重心之變革推動著產業競爭的樣貌，於二十一世紀的今日，知識已成為經濟活動中最主要之價值驅力，與之相應的，產業中智慧財產層面的競爭也逐漸受到重視，發展至今，智慧財產已深入產業鏈且細化為各種以智慧財產運用為中心以創造獲利之企業。 半導體產業於台灣經濟發展之推進中佔有關鍵性之地位，隨著台灣廠商在全球產業鏈中扮演的角色重要性與日俱增，難以避免必須因應半導體產業中由智慧財產所造就的新興商業模式，其中，智慧財產研發公司拋棄舊有以生產製造為主之商業模式，開創以知識為本的競爭場域，並挾其智慧財產進行全球化的授權以及訴訟，扮演著遊戲規則的創造者，尤其記憶體產業之兩大智慧財產研發公司Rambus Inc.以及Tessera Technology Inc.，自2000年起不斷於全球提起專利訴訟，對整體產業乃至於台灣廠商帶來無法忽視之影響。 本研究試圖建立分析智慧財產研發公司之架構，亦即由該等公司之策略演進出發，宏觀的了解其於變動的競爭環境中如何發揮企業優勢；其次，以公司策略定位為基礎，進一步推動資源投入之分配，並形塑商業模式的產生；最後，本研究萃取智慧財產研發公司商業模式中較具特色且影響廣泛之訴訟階段，藉由記憶體產業中之個案分析比較之方式進行深入之實證研究，以管窺該等公司之專利運用模式，期能透過提升對於智慧財產研發公司策略定位、商業模式以及訴訟模式之了解，活化企業智慧財產之管理，並提供台灣廠商面對專利授權與訴訟時因應之基礎。 / The revolution of economic activities of human beings has been the force behind the changing format of competition among industries. In the contemporary 21st century, knowledge has become one of the most valuable forces in economic activities; correspondently, the competition strategy of intellectual property also seized much attention. As of today, intellectual property has already been integrated in each and every industry chains and developed into various enterprises which earn profits by operating it. Semi-conductor industry played an important role in the process of Taiwan’s economic development. As Taiwanese companies claim more crucial roles in the global industry chain, they are inevitably forced to deal with the new business model established by the creation of intellectual properties. Among them, intellectual property development companies have withdrawn from old business model of production and manufacturing and create a new competition field on the basis of intellectually properties. Intellectual property development companies engage in global wide license and litigation, acting as the rule-maker within the new frame of competition. Rambus Inc. and Tessera Technology Inc. are the two leading intellectual property development companies which brought lawsuits internationally since 2000, creating serious impacts on both the entire industry and Taiwanese companies. This research aims to establish an analytical framework to observe intellectually property development companies, starting from the progress of strategy, try to understand how to exercise their advantages in the ever-changing competitive business world; furthermore, based on business strategies, this research look further into the distribution of resources and the creation of business models; lastly, this research closely examines the litigation phase of the business model of intellectual property development companies by comparative case studies, in order to conclude the operation pattern of patents of such companies. With further exploration on the strategic positioning, business model and litigation pattern of intellectual property development companies, this research provides not only a deeper understanding on the management of IPRs but also a framework for Taiwanese companies to cope with patent licenses and litigations.

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。

過去台灣LED產業伴隨著面板業的發展而崛起，但目前正是投入LED照明，放眼進千億美元市場的機會，本研究針對傳統照明大廠OSRAM於技術、專利、與商業策略等角度分析，探討LED照明的佈局策略，期望能給台灣LED廠商一些啟發。整體而言，LED照明取代傳統照明的趨勢是肯定的，關鍵在於LED照明的價格走勢以及政府政策的支持。目前雖然LED照明市場仍然以美國為主，但以整體亞洲市場而言，市佔率已經越來越高。而亞洲區域市場最重要的國家－中國，目前在LED照明應用市場僅次美國，差距已經越來越小，未來極可能成為最主要的市場。 在一開始進入半導體照明時，OSRAM受惠於母公司Siemens，在專利、技術上就已取得領先，OSRAM並採取垂直整合的策略，從磊晶、晶粒、封裝、模組都有佈局，使LED的生產更有效率。除此之外，由於未來LED照明產業的趨勢是照明整合服務，OSRAM也透過併購的方式，補強照明設備、照明系統的能力。未來OSRAM不僅供應LED元件，也提供照明解決方案，觸手一路延伸至終端應用。OSRAM初期都是以合資為主以分散風險，若合資公司經營順利，OSRAM便以併購的方式，強化OSRAM的全球佈局。此外，OSRAM 建立了一個平台，聚集了熱管理、光學、電子相關的專業廠商，以及照明整合的系統廠商，形成產業群聚，一方面可以鞏固供應商、被供應商關係，一方面透過產業群聚的效果，建立緊密的合作網路。此外，於經營策略方面，不僅提供整合型產品，開拓銷售管道，且透過生產基地的轉移，降低生產成本，並隨著市場導向，轉換銷售區域，加強於亞太地區的在地化發展。最後，OSRAM之專利申請策略配合市場需求，且除了LED以外，也鞏固OSRAM於省電燈的領先地位；在專利授權部份，OSRAM採取開放式專利授權策略，為Nichia增加競爭者，也為自身帶來大量的授權金以及代工廠商。 研究結論顯示，OSRAM成功的因素在於掌握專利、品牌以及通路，以及LED元件垂直整合的供應鏈，並積極的貼近市場，瞭解市場趨勢，將LED光源技術的挑戰成功的轉化成OSRAM新的產品線。因此本研究建議台灣廠商應與中國之照明廠商合作，台灣廠商於LED技術以及製造仍具優勢，但缺乏品牌以及通路的佈局，台灣LED廠商與其自己發展品牌，不如以代工的方式與既有的傳統照明品牌廠商合作，與中國照明廠商合力抵抗來自國際照明廠的威脅。此外，台灣廠商應認清產業定位，台灣於半導體、電子領域擁有領先技術，可以從LED照明產業鏈的中游模組切入，像是熱處理或是驅動IC等，會是台灣廠商切入照明產業的利基。 / The LED manufactures in Taiwan now actively involved in the general lighting application of LED. In order to provide the manufacturers with some suggestions, the main goal of this thesis is to study OSRAM’s LED lighting layout and strategy, including patent, technology and business strategy. In the long run, LED lighting replacing traditional lighting is in a positive direction. Key factors are the price of LED lamps and the support of government policies. At the present time, the US market is still the main market. However, the market share in Asia-Pacific is steadily increasing. The most important country in the Asia-Pacific region, China, is getting closer and very likely to become the most important market in the near future. Benefited from parent company, Siemens, OSRAM took the leading position at the beginning of semiconductor lighting. OSRAM then adopted the strategy of vertical integration of epitaxy, chip process, packaging and end applications. Therefore, OSRAM can manufacture LED products in a more efficient way. Furthermore, OSRAM also reinforces the capability of the lighting fixtures and lighting systems via mergers, acquisitions, and joint ventures. OSRAM not only provides LED components but also lighting systems and solutions. To spread risks, OSRAM use joint ventures instead of mergers and acquisitions in the beginning. Once the company has operated smoothly, OSRAM will then merge the company. In addition, OSRAM has established a platform to gather companies that provide electronic, optical, or thermal solutions. Industry cluster is formed. With the effect of cluster, the relationship between buyers and suppliers is enhanced. About business strategies, OSRAM developed integrated products to extend channels and moved manufacturing overseas. Referring to patent application strategy, OSRAM meet the demand of market. In addition to LED-related patents, OSRAM also filed many efficient lamp patents these years. And OSRAM actively licensed patents to other companies, not only created competitors against Nichia but also received licensing fee. In conclusion, the main reasons why OSRAM succeed are the strategies of brand, channel and patent. As the lack of branding and channel, this study suggests that Taiwan manufacturers could cooperate with traditional lighting companies in China. With the OEM service of Taiwan manufacturers, supplying LED components, and the channels and brand of China lamp manufacturers, Taiwan and China may have a chance to compete with other international companies. In addition, Taiwanese firms should recognize their positions in the industry value chain. In addition to building a brand, investing in LED lamp, there’ll be a better choice to develop midstream light engines like thermal management or driver IC.

台灣科技業代工廠常面臨購買合法來源零組件，仍無法擺脫專利侵權控訴之命運，亦或常居於談判地位劣勢之被授權方角色，只能接受授權方完全排除自身擔保責任之契約條款，導致國內廠商始終擺脫不了高額權利金及侵權損害賠償金之累。本論文之核心研究問題，即在於探討如何在專利授權之架構下，降低未來潛在之第三人侵權責任風險？並區分法律制度層面、契約設計層面、管理制度層面，三個面向進行探討，嘗試提出可行之風險管控策略。個案研究方面，選擇美國最高法院Quanta v. LG專利侵權訴訟案，此案受各界宣稱為近期美國司法界對於專利制度最具指標性之判決，本論文透過判決評析探求美國法院見解真意，並在此架構下，提出個人意見及看法，進而對於專利權人未來之策略轉變，以及台灣代工業者應之因應方式提出建議。 1、法律制度面管控： 被控侵權者可運用專利制度下賦予專利權本質上限制之「專利權耗盡原則」，衡平原則發展下之「默示授權原則」，以及「再授權理論」對於專利權人之權利主張限制，以達降低侵權責任成立之風險。美國法下針對專利權耗盡原則及默示授權原則發展出多種態樣，惟其是否於個案中有所適用空間，往往仍取決於授權契約條款之解釋，此即彰顯出事先明確定義授權條款之重要性。 2、契約設計面管控： 由於我國法與美國法下對於專利授權契約定性上之差異，進而推衍出我國法下相較於美國法較加重授權人責任之結果，是以我國學說有主張當被授權人因運用授權標的遭受第三人主張侵權時，應準用民法瑕疵擔保規定使授權人承負一定責任者；反之，美國學說則普遍否認授權人存在有此等法定契約責任，此亦和雙方政策選擇保護立場互異之結果不謀而合。惟在現階段實務及學說對於授權人是否承擔被授權人之侵權瑕疵擔保責任尚無定見之下，以契約條款預先分配侵權風險最可達成管控風險之目的。美國企業之授權契約發展已十分成熟，與侵權責任分配相關之典型條款，如：授權條款、聲明擔保條款、補償條款，均存有許多附隨之細節需於契約設計談判時預先留意。惟若於契約條款中無法獲得有利於己之責任分配模式，即應評估風險性高低，決定是否採行其他之風險管控方式，如：專利侵權責任保險、企業自行提撥風險準備金、進行專利侵權訴訟評估與管理等。 3、管理制度面管控： 授權做為專利眾多換價模式之一，其背後最終之目的即在於具體落實為企業利潤收益，自然無法背離商業策略思維而獨立運作。國內現階段之專利授權實務發展成效不彰，其原因即在於國內普遍認為授權是單純法律之範疇，而未於企業內建立一套完備之授權管理制度。事實上，授權契約設計亦應與智財行銷要素、商業模式建構要素，以及企業營運流程相互配套，藉由平時有效之管理制度，方能確實將侵權風險防患於未然。 4、個案判決評析結論： 國內代工業者Quanta雖於本案中獲得最終勝訴判決，可說是貫徹了美國最高法院近年來持續傾向限縮專利權人權能之見解。然其是否代表台灣代工業者獲得了完全的勝利？往後不需再為合法採購之零件是否侵權一事苦惱？本論文採取保留之態度。因本案判決事實上僅圍繞在判斷LG與Intel授權範圍之解釋，並未對於能否以契約條款限制專利權耗盡原則表示見解。且本案判決出爐後，專利權人未來勢必轉變其授權策略，亦可預見其授權條款將更趨嚴苛，以規避判決中劃定之界限。台灣代工廠商實應謹慎集思因應策略以對。 / Taiwan OEMs are often situated in the role as licensees with inferior bargaining power when negotiated license agreements with foreign companies, and usually had no choice but to accept unfair contract terms. Therefore, Taiwan companies cannot get ride of high royalties and infringement penalty for all these years. This paper aims to discuss how to reduce potential patent infringement risk under the license system. The discussion will be elaborated from three aspects: Legal, Contract, and Management, and it will also try to propose some feasible risk management strategies. Furthermore, the paper will include a case study on Quanta v. LG, which is believed to be the most significant patent infringement case in United States Supreme Court in 2008.Through the analysis of Court opinions, the thesis then proposes some different suggestions about conversion of the patentee’ license strategies and how Taiwan OEMs should cope with the change in the future. 1.Legal Aspect: The defendant of a infringement case can apply for the doctrine of patent exhaustion, implied license, and sublicense. These doctrines are derived from patent right essential limitation. The U.S. law develops a lot of different models of patent exhaustion and implied license. It often depends on the interpretation of the terms of license agreement whether theses doctrines should be applied to individual case. This demonstrates the importance of precise definition and arrangement of contracts in advance. 2.Contract Aspect: The contract qualification of patent license agreement are different in Taiwan Law and the U.S. Law. Taiwan law intensifies licensor’s liability than American Law. Some Taiwan theories consider that when the licensee is accused of infringement because of the use of licensed articles, the licensor should have liability corresponding to the liability of warranty against defects in Civil Law. On the contrary, the majority of American theories deny such contract liability from law of licensor. Such difference corresponds to the different policies adopted in both countries. Since the defect warranty liability of the licensors are still in dispute, it will be the best way for risk management to distribute the infringement liability of both parties in contract explicitly. License agreement research has been fully developed in the U.S.. Grant Clause, Representations & Warranties and Indemnifications are all accompanied with details to be concerned. If the corporation unfortunately cannot obtain favorable clauses for its own side, it should evaluate risk to decide should it adopt another way for risk control, such as insurance, setting up risk reserves or litigation management. 3.Management Aspect: License is one of business models for corporation to make profit from patent. Its main purpose is to realize intangible patents into tangible profit. Accordingly, licensing strategy cannot be apart from commercial strategies. Patent license practice is still immature in Taiwan. Domestic corporations generally consider license as only a legal issue and do not properly construct a management system. In fact, license agreement design is a multidisciplinary subject and should coordinate with IP marketing strategies, business model, and enterprise operation procedure. Effective management system can establish necessary precautions against infringement liabilities. 4.Case Study: United States Supreme Court finally decided in favor of Quanta, Taiwan OEM, in Quanta v. LG case. The judgment does not mean a complete victory for Taiwan OEMs and neither did it indicate that the manufacturers do not need to bother for patent infringement by combining licensed components. Because the Court opinion only focuses within the scope of the license agreement by LG to Intel, without mentioning about if license conditions could break free of the doctrine of patent exhaustion. Furthermore, the stricter license conditions from the licensor is expectable after this case. Taiwan OEMs should make their best to find a solution.

自從美國最高法院在廣達與LGE案中作出解釋後，便將權利耗盡理論亦稱為第一次銷售理論帶往另一個層次。此案已被普遍認為對於美國過去的判例影響甚鉅，對於產業界的商業活動發展更是具有深遠的影響。智慧財產權旨在保護發明及創造公眾利益間取得一平衡點，權利耗盡理論長久以來已被視為專利法中重要的一環，並藉以杜絕專利權人的過當控制。而最高法院對於第一次銷售理論的解釋，則進而撼動專利權人長此以往對限制性銷售策略的仰賴。 即便銷售後限制(Post-sale restriction)確實提供了專利權人避免耗盡其權利的好方法，但專利權範圍則限縮了專利權人所享有的權利控制範圍，換言之，專利權人僅能擁有專利法所賦予的權利，且其加諸於被授權人的購買條件限制僅限於該專利之功能及使用目的。而超越該專利功能及使用目的的過分限制，則可能導致專利權濫用。而在開放WTO框架下，國際貿易的頻繁也使得權利耗盡衍生出了在散佈等方面的相關討論，平行輸入/輸出的議題亦隨著跨國交易的興盛而隨之重要。 故此篇論文的研究目的不僅僅探討權利耗盡理論及其相關議題，更旨在藉由廣達案的啟發，提供台灣的IT產業一有效的專利授權策略，並提供不論專利權人或被授權人於制定授權契約時，能有一更具有策略性的思考方向。 / The Supreme Court’s current decision in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. brings the exhaustion doctrine also known as first sale doctrine up to a new phase. This case is believed significantly overcome quite a lot of past precedents and will effectively influent industry business operations in the future. The core goal of intellectual property right aims to find a balance between protecting the incentives to create and innovate, and providing the benefits to public interests. Exhaustion doctrine has been long standing as part of patent law to prevent patentees’ over control. The interpretation made by Supreme Court regarding the first sale doctrine does vibrate the conditional sale strategies long believed by patentees. Now the Supreme Court brings the issue from the phase of patent law down to the contract law level. Subsequently, the litigations of antitrust and fair trade are therefore involved while patentees are tempting to make an “end-run” control over the downstream purchasers. Though applying post-sale restriction provides a way out for intellectual property owner from triggering the exhaustion, however, the scope of the patent claims determine how far the privilege is given to the inventors. A patent owner or licenser can only enforce its patent right while the right is truly granted by the patent law. Subsequently, the restriction set forth to limit the licensees or purchasers must be accordance with the function or feature of the patent claims for. On the contrary, the patentee intends to restrict its purchasers by holding the exclusive right which beyond the scope of the patent granted may result to patent misuse, for instance, the resale price maintenance, prohibition of manufacturing the competing products, the conditional license which incorporates another license, and overwhelming royalties on the price of the whole product instead of the actual usage of the patented article. Under WTO, the concern of intellectual property protection has become more critical in the perspective of international trade, different issues and disputes regarding exhaustion have also been generated. Not alike the traditional domestic exhaustion, the discussion regarding distribution has therefore been derived. Moreover, the issues related to parallel import/export are generated in accordance with the frequent cross-border transaction. The purpose of this research does not merely lead us look into the doctrine and restriction patentees used to impose for avoiding exhaustion. But I intend to further illustrate a guideline based on the inspiration from Quanta and the explanation of the Courts. This guideline should provide both patentees and licensees an orientation while considering making a licensing agreement.

美國聯邦最高法院廣達v.LG案的判決結果，再次確認「專利權耗盡原則」之適用原則及標準。被告廣達電腦乃為台灣資訊代工產業的龍頭，該判決除了限制專利權人對產業鏈的不當控制外，也將影響整個產業供應鏈對於專利風險的承擔及專利授權策略。廣達案除了建立「未完成品足以體現專利物之必要特徵，且唯一用途係該專利物」及「方法權利項」適用專利權耗盡的重要標準，但也留下「附條件銷售或授權」合法性的爭議。在廣達案後續判決，對「專利權耗盡原則」的詮釋及適用，更值得加以重視。台灣資訊產業在產業供應鏈多居於「製造或組裝」角色，卻受制於上游關鍵元件的強勢及品牌客戶的訂單壓力，而被迫必須承擔產品引發的所有專利侵權的風險。如何善用廣達案及後續各國相關判決，將有助於台灣資訊代工廠商處理國際專利爭訟、專利授權等議題，並做為專利侵權抗辯手段的參考。 本論文首先從經營策略及代工模式，探討台灣資訊代工產業發展與面臨的困境。其次，從專利權與專利侵害的法律規範，到專利權耗盡原則的法理基礎做一完整論述，加以美國先前相關案例的整理及類型分析，對「專利權耗盡原則」的理論與發展做一完整的探討。更進而整理廣達案判決後美國、中國大陸及台灣重要案例，探討「專利權耗盡原則」在其專利法制及實務案例的適用及影響。接著，探討在「契約自由原則」與「專利權耗盡原則」的衝突與調和下，其對於專利授權實務的操作及影響。最後，整理台灣資訊代工產業的代工類型化與廣達案前後美國、中國大陸及台灣權利耗盡重要判決之關聯性，並提出看法及建議。本文初步結論，美國法院案例可初步解析侵權風險及專利權耗盡的適用，並在專利授權談判可提出有效因應條款。廣達案後，美國各級法院均大致遵守此一判決先例，惟中國大陸及台灣法院實務判決仍未完全採取美國的判斷原則。對於後續的研究建議，新興3D列印科技發展及應用，其引發的複雜智慧財產權及「專利權耗盡原則」適用的爭議，確實值得重視。 / Quanta v. LG reaffirmed the applicable principles and standards of the "patent exhaustion principle". As the Quanta plays the lead role in Taiwan’s Information ODM/OEM industry, this US Supreme court’s decision not only limits the patent holder improper control of the industrial chain, but also affects the entire supply chain face the risks and patent license strategies. Quanta establishes the index that "unfinished finished enough to reflect the essential features of the patent and the sole purpose thereof " and "method claim" apply to patent exhaustion. However, "conditional sale or license" is still controversial. Therefore, the Post-Quanta interpretation is worthy of attention. Taiwan's IT Industries most account for the role of "manufacture or assembly" in the supply chain. Subject to the upstream suppliers of the key components or downstream brand customers, they bear all risks caused by infringement of patented products. The Quanta case and its post development will help Taiwan Information foundries to deal with international patent litigation, patent license and etc., and take it as a means to defend against patent infringement claim. Firstly, this thesis explores the development of Taiwan's information ODM/OEM industry and the difficulties of its business strategies and ODM/OEM models. Secondly, it turns to discuss the development of the "patent exhaustion doctrine", and then reviews US critical cases of "patent exhaustion doctrine". In addition, it analyzes post-Quanta cases of the United State, China and Taiwan to discuss the application and impact of the "patent exhaustion doctrine". Furthermore it explores its operation and effect on patent license practice under the conflict and reconciliation of "freedom of contract" and "patent exhaustion doctrine". Then, it identifies Taiwan’s information OEM/OEM industry in a variety of models and associates the models with the important cases of the United States, China and Taiwan regarding patent exhaustion, and makes remarks and suggestions. Finally, this thesis preliminarily concludes that US court cases basically resolve the risk of infringement and patent exhaustion application, and patent license negotiation may be made to respond effectively to the situation. After Quanta, US courts are substantially in compliance with this precedent judgment, but not for China and Taiwan. For subsequent study suggestion, it is worth attention about dispute of the emerging 3D printing technology development and application, which link complex intellectual property rights and the application of "patent exhaustion doctrine".