專利權人在權利保護期間享有法律保障之排他性，而智慧財產權之制度設置，必須兼顧個人權利與社會公益，藉由保護權利人進而促進社會公益，但專利權制度中，專利權濫用之現象，對於專利發展中國家而言，尤其是外國專利強權企業利用專利奪取私益已達浮濫程度，造成私益與公益之間的矛盾與衝突，因此專利公益訴訟是平衡兩者之利益的一個手段。而因專利要件審查難以完善，造成許多具有無效事由的專利被授予專利權，這些專利權的存在侵害公眾利益甚鉅，中國大陸的對策為：提起專利公益訴訟使瑕疵專利無效，鼓勵任意第三人對專利之有效性提出挑戰，請求專利管理機關重新進行專利有效性的審查，維護公眾的合法利益；本文比較我國目前具有瑕疵之專利權，仍由民間企業基於非公共利益之商業利益考量而提出專利舉發，分析兩岸的制度及案例，檢視我國專利公益訴訟提出之可能，期使舉發專利無效之制度得以更臻健全。 / The purpose of the study was to analyze the public interest with regards to patent litigation cases in China. Public interest litigation is litigation for the protection of the public interest. Patentees have the exclusive right to prevent others from exploiting the invention without the patentees' consent during the legal protection. However, intellectual property rights are set up to protect not only rights of patentee but also that of social welfare. To reconcile the contradictions between private interest and public welfare, the study focuses on the phenomenon of abuse of patents discussed in the patent systems and the merits of public interest in patent litigation. Furthermore, the study examines China public interest patent litigation to invalidate defected patent system and encourage any third party to challenge the validity of the patent. Under the comparative legal study approach, the study can provide different perspective for our legal system to improve more beneficially our Patent law system.

專注於科技創新並將之轉化為智慧財產權的應用，可說是通訊產業競爭的關鍵因素；專利不但是通訊科技演變與進步的註腳，也相當程度地解釋了為什麼Ericsson與Nokia之所以屹立不搖，為何Qualcomm得以崛起，為何Ericsson與Sony要合資成立索尼愛立信，又為何NTT DoCoMo的i-mode得以成為今日全世界最成功的無線上網服務，而Lucent與Siemens又為什麼無奈地逐漸淡出市場？答案就是科技的創新與管理！ 本研究試圖在既有的競爭與策略的理論上，以專利為核心，來探討電信事業如何在飽和的行動通訊市場，透過專利的取得，獲致先進的技術，進入新市場，以強化自身競爭優勢；進而藉由授權及執行之策略運用，佈建專利保護網，排除競爭對手進入市場；同時利用專利創造公司財富、提高股東價值，並可作為併購、合資等談判籌碼，以達到產業控制等目的。 因此，本論文即在探討電信事業如何運用專利策略，以創造績效，項目如下： 一、探討電信事業的專利現況並做案例分析。 二、探討電信事業如何運用其專利，並結合運用國內、外專利策略的理論。 三、訪談電信事業經理人，探討專利如何從行銷、技術與法律面達成公司目標。 四、探討電信事業如何利用專利作為談判籌碼，以便在各種交易中取得優勢。 本文以圖表方式呈現台灣五個主要電信事業的專利現況，先依據各業者申請中華民國、美國以及中華人民共合國之專利項目與數量，比較何者擁有最多專利權；進而探討其是否也相對的具有最強的競爭優勢。並以實際案例呈現台灣主要電信事業發生之專利糾紛，及其如何研擬與執行專利策略，並與理論作如何之結合。 從本研究之實際案例與專利策略模型得之，企業應該在平時就體認專利不只是技術部門或法律部門的業務，公司高階主管更要認知專利策略與公司的行銷策略或財務目標是緊密結合的。尤其應該要求專業經理人將專利資產視為「企業家精神」的一環來重視與培養，如此一來，專利策略的成本效益就得以自然顯現，並與公司的行銷策略與營運目標相互結合。 關鍵字：電信、產業鏈、專利、策略、專利策略、專利分析 / Focusing on innovation and make it a strategy of IPR is one of the sustainable factors of telecom operation in such a fierce competition. Why Nokia and Ericsson keep their competitiveness ? Why NTT DoCoMo and its i-mode are so successful ? Why Lucent and Siemens both fall behind from their telecom competitors ? The same reason in common is technology innovation and management. Patent strategy primarily includes 3 parts,which are obtaining patent rights, creating patent value, and enforcing them. Patent strategy should run with Marketing strategy so as to apply patents as an isolating mechanism to deterrent other competitors, and to leverage patents to maximize income or using patents as bargaining chips to strengthen companys’ position in dealing with the third parties, as well as to defend themselves against patents owned by others. As a result, patent decisions become sources of dynamic capabilities in the never ended competition. In this paper, 2 qualitative analysis researches are presented. First, there are several patent award lists of Taiwan’s three major mobile companies breaking down by ROC, USA and PRC respectively. Secondly, 5 in-depth interviews with 4 high rank managers of Fareastone and it patent law firm were made to show how FET perform it patent strategy against a service product made by another mobile company and software company. This thesis is to provide telecom companies with a successful case study in formulating a patent strategy and expects to raise the suggestion for managers in telecom industries regarding the strategic importance of patents and patents management should be part of the “Entrepreneurship”. Keywords: Telecom, value chain, Patent, Strategy, Patent strategy, Patent analysis

中國近年來為因應經濟快速發展，除極力追求技術自主與維護中國本土企業利益外，更注重自有知識產權之研發與保護。尤其兩岸地區經貿活動交流之頻繁，臺灣對中國投資方面，2011年一年間，核准對大陸投資件數575件，核准投(增)資金額更高達131億美元，且臺灣企業申請大陸專利件數逾21,600件，在在可見臺灣科技產業大規模佈局中國市場，顯見中國已成為臺灣企業專利爭訟之戰場，深入探討中國現行專利法制自刻不容緩。 2008年中國針對專利法進行第三次修法，嗣於2009年10月1日實施，在新法施行前，原侵犯專利權的賠償數額係按照權利人所受的損失或者侵權人所獲得的利益確定為依據，權利人的損失或侵權人的利益難以確定時，參照該專利許可使用費的倍數合理確定。修正後《專利法》第65條規定賠償數額按照權利人因被侵權所受實際損失確定；實際損失難以確定的，可以按照侵權人因侵權所獲的利益。權利人之損失或侵權人之獲得的利益難以確定的，參照該專利許可使用費的倍數合理確定，並明定法定賠償，將最高人民法院司法解釋規定的法定賠償提高到專利法層次，法定額度從人民幣（下同）5,000元至50萬元提高到1萬元至100萬元，更明確化適用賠償數額之順序。 本文從探討中國新專利法中專利侵權損害賠償制度出發，再透過法學實證研究之方法，檢視修法後，中國人民法院就專利糾紛適用新法之情形，據以觀察不同屬性之專利侵權糾紛與法院判賠金額間之關聯性，探究中國人民法院現行審判實務上判定賠償額之現況，並提出相關修法建議。 / In response to the fast economic growth of recent decades, the Chinese government has begun to contemplate the protection of intellectual property rights and emphasize on pursuing independent technological development. In 2011, Taiwan’s Ministry of Economic Affairs has approved 575 investments in China by Taiwanese enterprises which the total amount has reached to US13.1 billions. The number of patent applications filed by Taiwanese firms reached to 2,100 in the same year. It is therefore foreseeable that China will become a major battlefield for patent disputes between companies from around the world, especially those from Taiwan. The third round of amendments to the patent law of the P.R.C came into effect. Before this change, the amount of compensation for damages was based on the losses suffered by the right holder or the profits earned through the infringement; if it was difficult to determine the right holder’s loss or the violator’s profit, the amount was assessed by referring to the appropriate multiple of the amount of royalties of that patent under contractual license. Article 65 of the new patent law codifies that the amount of compensation for the damage caused by the infringement of the patent right shall be assessed on the basis of the actual losses suffered by the right holder; if the actual losses are difficult to determine, it may be assessed on the basis of the profits earned through the infringement; if it is difficult to determine either, the amount is assessed by reference to the appropriate multiple of the amount of royalty of that patent under contractual license. In the event that none of these amounts can be fairly ascertained, the court has the discretion to award compensation in the range of RMB 5,000 to 50,000 provided by a Supreme People’s Court judicial interpretation. Article 65 also codifies the statutory damages to between RMB 10,000 and RMB 1,000,000. This article discusses damage compensation in China’s patent litigation and develops quantitative methodologies by means of empirical study, which includes examinations on 400judgments of patent infringement cases issued by Chinese courts and interviews with scholars and Chinese judges. The research results provide a reference for estimating litigation efficiency, as well as a proposal to corporations for framing patent enforcement strategies in China.