在高科技之推波助瀾下，新經濟與全球化之競爭模式儼然成形，也使得智慧財產在此競爭中扮演著重要的角色，成為高科技公司逐鹿中原的武器之一。相對地，也迫使高科技公司在全球割喉競爭之壓力下，開始思索如何更快進入戰場，並以智慧財產制敵機先。於是，企業併購策略開始成為高科技公司之經營決策者思考採行之策略。 企業併購（Merger and Acquisition）一詞，並非明確之法律定義，實乃商業管理實務界常用之名詞，因此，與其強加定義，不如從併購之模式加以說明，更為精確。併購模式概可歸納為二大模式：一為「收購」，一為「合併」。收購又可區分為「資產收購」與「股權收購」；而合併則有以吸收合併、新設合併及存續合併為主之「法定合併」類型，與以簡式合併、三角合併、強迫合併及實質合併為主之「特殊合併」類型。 所謂「收購」，係指收購公司以取得資產或經營權之目的，而以現金或債券、股票等有價證券買受目標公司全部或一部資產或股份之行為。而「合併」則係指兩家或兩家以上之公司，訂立合併契約，並經各當事公司之全體股東同意，或股東會之特別決議同意後，結合成一家公司之法律行為。其因合併而消滅之公司之權利義務，由合併後存續或新設立之公司概括承受，毋須再為個別資產或權利義務之移轉。 在企業採行併購策略之動機上，學理與實務上歸納出五種主要之動機，包括：綜效理論假說、多角化經營假說、策略性重組假說、價值低估假說，及代理成本理論與傲慢假說。綜效理論假說主要可歸納出，以追求規模經濟與範疇經濟之「營運綜效」；以風險分散或節稅考量為思考之「財務綜效」；企圖集中市場以形成壟斷之「市場綜效」；及為更精確掌握時機而追求之「起動綜效」。多角化經營則可分別從「複合式多角化」或「中心式多角化」切入討論。而策略性重組假說則著眼於「法規環境改變」或「技術創新改變」致使企業採取併購策略以為因應之面向，加以討論。此外，價值低估價說及代理成本理論與傲慢假說，則與企業經營決策者企圖追求本業之價值極大化無關，卻也經常成為經營決策者採行併購策略之動機。 前述企業併購動機之討論，事實上與美國併購歷史上所發生之五次併購浪潮息息相關，而這五次併購浪潮之興衰則亦與美國經濟發展之歷程有關。第一波併購浪潮發生於一八九七年至一九○四年間，其特色主要為「水平整合形成獨占市場」；第二波併購浪潮發生於一九一六年至一九二九年間，其特色主要為「垂直整合以利強化體質」；第三波併購浪潮發生於一九六五年至一九六九年間，其特色主要為「複合式併購擴大多角化」；第四波併購浪潮發生於一九八一年至一九八九年間，其則係以「金融工具激化敵意併購」為主要特色；時至一九九二年至二○○○年間所發生之第五次併購浪潮，則以「策略重組點燃超級併購」，逐漸將以取得智慧財產為目的之併購動機推上台面。亦即，由於全球化競爭而掀起跨國併購，及高科技產業併購之趨勢日盛，以智慧財產之取得規劃併購策略，成為高科技公司開始思考如何將企業價值極大化之策略之一。 高科技產業之競爭，已進入「超優勢競爭（Hypercompetition）」之態勢，惟有以動態競爭因應，始能勝出。而智慧財產之佈局與運用在動態競爭情境中，扮演著極為重要之角色。因此，透過併購以取得智慧財產，而得達成「控制新資源，加速企業外部成長」、「改變商業模式，大幅躍進新市場」、「動態競爭中，整合或對抗競爭者」，或「併購取得智慧財產權，待價而沽」之成果，已成為許多高科技公司之策略思考方向。 「世上沒有賣不出去的產品，只有賣不出去的價格」。在企業併購的過程中，如何就目標公司之企業價值進行評價往往是決定併購案是否能成功之關鍵。然而，對於企業的營運有重大影響之智慧財產，其「品質」究竟如何，將會對企業未來的營運造成重大的影響。因此，對於高科技產業之併購案，如何透過對於智慧財產進行查核評估（Due Diligence），協助併購交易雙方瞭解目標公司其智慧財產之品質，使雙方得以更正確評估目標公司之價值，並就併購案可能面臨之風險預先進行規劃，即為重要之課題。 換言之，由於企業併購交易之內容複雜且代價高昂，動輒為千萬至百億金額的現金交易或股份交換。雖然在交易過程中，賣方或買方通常會準備相關交易資訊及查核評估報告，以提供對方作為評估之用。但由於交易當事人自行提供之資訊通常過於簡略或可能隱惡揚善，為避免在交易價格之決定與交易後風險之承擔及效益之展現上出現問題，因此交易當事人有自行進行查核評估之必要。此即孫子兵法《謀攻篇》中所述「知己知彼，百戰不殆；不知彼不知己，每戰必敗。」所傳達之精神。 鑑於智慧財產查核評估是一項耗時費力，且所費不貲之工作，企業內部法律顧問或外部律師在進行智慧財產查核評估時，應對於其查核之範圍有所限制。並非所有智慧財產對於買方公司皆有顯著之影響，因此必須從公司之觀點加以檢視，並以其對於公司所可能產生之價值排序其先後。而除了時間、成本與專業人力投入等因素之考量外，「買方公司之策略目標」、「目標公司之核心競爭力」，與「企業併購交易之模式」將影響智慧財產查核評估所欲進行之範圍。 對於高科技公司而言，其企圖藉由併購活動所取得之智慧財產各異，然最主要者，尤其是對於我國公司而言，仍以「專利權」之取得以利企業在全球市場產業價值鏈中之佈局為首要考量。因此本文將就「專利查核」之相關議題，略做探討。而進行專利查核時，除從「專利申請案」、「專利審查歷程」與「法律意見書」等相關文件，進行概略初步審查外，概可聚焦於「目標公司是否確為真正之完整權利擁有者」、「發明之實施是否須依賴業已存在或第三人之權利」、「目標公司之發明是否獲得足夠之保障」、「目標公司之專利是否已為適當之利用」，及「目標公司之專利是否（或可能）涉訟」等面向出發，進行深入探查。 深入探究目標公司是否確為真正之完整權利擁有者之議題上，本論文將從「共同發明」、「受雇人之發明」與「部分讓與」所涉及之問題加以討論；而在發明之實施是否須依賴業已存在或第三人之權利之議題上，關於「技術改良與從屬專利」、「交互授權」及「技術輸入授權」涉及之契約約款（例如：契約存續期間、專屬性、可轉讓性與控制權之變更、轉授權、授權範圍、技術改良與回饋授權、擔保與賠償責任、最惠待遇，與過往侵權免責等）所衍生相關問題將為本論文關心之重點。 此外，在目標公司之發明是否獲得足夠之保障之議題上，本論文將討論關於「發明之檢討與揭露程序」、「專利權之地理範圍」，及「申請專利範圍與專利審查歷程之檢討」等問題；而關於「授權實施」及「專利濫用」將係買方公司查核目標公司之專利是否已為適當之利用時之重點。最後，在目標公司之專利是否（或可能）涉訟此議題之討論中，本論文將從評估目標公司之專利組合是否侵害第三人之專利權所進行之「專利侵權評估」與如涉及專利侵權訴訟時可能之「反訴或抗辯之評估」。 為印證本論文所提高科技公司以併購活動取得智慧財產之策略及所進行之查核評估活動，在結論與建議部分將以一家台灣公司之實際經驗為個案，探討其進行跨國併購時所面臨之問題，並就多數高科技公司所忽略之「競業禁止」問題，以美國法下之經驗，作為高科技公司進行跨國（尤其是美國）併購時，在專利查核之外，亦應注意之建議，以避免研發團隊於併購前後離職或被挖角，對買方公司所造成之傷害。 / A recent survey showed that between two and five emerging technology companies are acquired for every one that does an initial public offering （IPO）. Acquisitions can provide strategic, operating and financial benefits to both emerging technology companies and the company acquiring it. A strategic acquisition can provide emerging technology companies’ shareholders with earlier liquidity than an IPO, with less risk and dilution. It also can provide emerging technology companies with the immediate leverage of Buy Company's established manufacturing or distribution infrastructure, without the dilution, time and risk of internal development. A strategic acquisition can provide Buy Company with the new products and technologies necessary to maintain its competitive advantage, growth rate and profitability. Ill-conceived or badly done acquisitions, however, can result in expense and disruption to both businesses, the discontinuance of good technologies and products, employee dissatisfaction and defection, and poor operating results by the combined company. By understanding the key factors that lead to a successful acquisition, Target Company and Buy Company can improve the probability of achieving one. When considering an M&A transaction, Target Company first step should be to identify the strategic reasons why it wants to be acquired. For example, while Target Company may seek liquidity for its founders and investors, it also may have concluded that its future success requires the synergies of complementary resources and access to the infrastructure of a major corporation. An IPO could provide Target Company’s shareholders with liquidity, but would not immediately address Target Company’s need for product synergy or provide an established infrastructure. Those needs could be better met by finding a strategic buyer for Target Company. Equally important is to identify Buy Company’s strategic objectives in acquiring Target Company. For example, Buy Company may seek to acquire a product line or key technology, gain creative, technical or management talent, or eliminate a competitor. Ultimately, Buy Company will acquire Target Company because it believes M&A transaction is a more effective means of meeting a strategic need and increasing shareholder value than internal development. If Target Company understands its own and Buy Company’s strategic objectives, it can focus on candidates that are most likely to meet its needs and value the assets that it has to offer. While the objectives of individual companies will vary, the following table identifies common strategic objectives that Target Companies and Buy Companies try to achieve through an M&A activity. Target Company Reasons to Be Acquired Buy Company Reasons to Make a M&A Access to complementary products Access to complementary markets Access to working capital Avoid dilution of building own infrastructure Best and fastest return on investment Faster access to established infrastructure Gain critical mass Improve distribution capacity More rapid expansion of customer base Acquire key technology Acquire a new distribution channel Assure a source of supply Eliminate a competitor Expand or add a product line Gain creative talent Gain expertise and entry in a new market Gain a time-to-market advantage Increase earnings per share This study focuses on intellectual property due diligence, especially for the investigation of the benefits and risks associated with the ownership and exploitation of patent right when a company involves in a M&A activity. The increased profile, frequency, and value of intellectual property-related transactions have elevated the need for all legal, financial and managerial professionals and intellectual property owners to have a thorough understanding of the assessment and valuation of these assets and their role in commercial transactions; a detailed assessment of patent right is becoming an increasingly integral part of commercial transactions for the high-technology companies. Acquiring or investing in a business that owns intellectual property assets requires expanding the scope and depth of the due diligence that is usually conducted in such transactions. The process of gathering information and assessing the merits, issues, and risks associated with a business transaction is called “due diligence.” It is a critical exercise in the acquisition and strategic utilization of intellectual property assets. Due diligence is a necessary precursor to funding a new venture, and is critically important in many other business transactions, including mergers, acquisitions, licenses, initial public offerings, and in some instances litigation. In recent years, the commercial importance of patents and other intellectual property has become highly visible. Courts have imposed large damage awards for intellectual property misuse and infringement. Multi-million dollar judgments are no longer a rarity. Courts have also granted significant injunctions to limit the products which a company can market. For instance, Kodak was virtually eliminated from the instant camera market and subject to an extremely high damage award when it was found to infringe patents owned by Polaroid. As a result of these potential events, and the increasing value of intellectual property assets in today’s high technology society, intellectual property matters have become an important aspect of a traditional due diligence study. Intellectual property due diligence can be conducted in preparation for a wide variety of transactions. For example, intellectual property assets should be analyzed in the context of a share purchase or asset transfer, or may require assessment in connection with a capital contribution, in a joint venture or security for a loan, or in preparation of disclosure in connection with an offering of securities. Intellectual property due diligence can also facilitate a company’s thorough internal assessment of its own assets. Such a self-audit can prepare the company for an externally conducted due diligence, such as audited by a buyer company involving in a M&A transaction, and can enhance the company’s own intellectual property planning and management. Intellectual property rights are the product of human thought, born of human needs and aspirations, and manifested by societal values. A thorough intellectual property due diligence also requires consideration of many nonlegal, nonmaterial aspects of the rights involved. The impact of an investment in a specific intellectual property right, and its role and value in a given M&A transaction, can be easily miscalculated if the private and public implications of those rights are not considered. Every intellectual property transaction embodies both individual and societal beliefs and values that can profoundly affect the parties’s strategies and success. The philosophical underpinnings of intellectual property rights are often discussed in academic and philosophical forums. However, these principles deserve reiteration here, in a transaction-specific context. Too often, they are forgotten amidst the binders, cabinets and files full of due diligence documents and analytical reports. In Chapter 4, Patent Due Diligence, it comprises detailed analyses of the key issues to be assessed in the patent investigation. This chapter presents the steps in the legal review that should be undertaken on patents, and reviews the pertinent law pertaining to patent right. This chapter identifies the relevant documents that should be requested, defines the subject right, and analyzes the following substantive questions: Whether Target Company owns the patent right(s); Whether the patent right(s) have been adequately protected; Whether Target Company’s use of the patent right(s) is dependent on third part rights; Whether the scope of patent right(s) is sufficient; Whether the patent right(s) have been properly exploited; and Whether the patent right(s) present a risk of litigation. An investigation of Target Company’s patent assets can require analysis of extensive documentation, as well as knowledge of the specific technical field in which Target Company conducts its business, and of patent law. The circumstances of each particular case will dictate whether specialized patent counsel will need to be retained to assist with the patent due diligence. Buyer Company should be aware that proper preparation of patentability opinions and validity / infringement opinions can require substantial lead time and budget, and should accordingly account for these contingencies. Similarly, a thorough investigation to confirm ownership and assess exploitation of Target Company’s patent portfolio can require discussions regarding contribution of inventive ideas, past and present consultant or employment status of inventors, proper use of assignments, close investigation of the technology, markets, improvement clauses, cross-licenses, and the like. In sum, if Buyer Company specifies Target Company’s patent portfolio as a high priority in the intellectual property due diligence investigation, Buyer Company is well-advised to assign the patent-related investigation tasks to team members and, as applicable, patent experts, early in the due diligence process.