「知識經濟」時代裡，知識透過流通而生成更多文化資產帶給人類價值。知識，向來就是共有共享的。但起自智慧財產權出現後，開始出現知識私有、知識買賣的情形出現。難道，是著作權(copyright)戰勝了著作義(Copyleft)？近年來全球掀起一片「告！告！告！」的熱潮，無論是美國的Napster訴訟案，還是台灣的「成大MP3」事件；還是微軟在美國的反托拉斯訴訟，或是在台灣面臨合理議價調查，都顯示「著作權」引發的相關問題蔓延全世界。 本研究將知識/文化商品視為資訊資本主義社會的生產工具，並且探討當「智慧」變成「財產」時，資本主義、國家機器爭權奪利的過程中出現的問題與爭議。研究者先就著作權的政治經濟脈絡耙梳出「著作權」不是「道德問題」，而是「經濟問題」，更是國際關係中藉以制衡弱勢小國的利器。 實證部分以1960-2002年間台灣著作權發展過程中三個衝突事件為例，包括1960年代的《大英百科全書》翻印風波、1980年代的「蘋果電腦侵權事件」，及1990年代跨國公司進入後的台灣流行音樂產業作為個案，具體驗證台灣著作權發展過程中，的確受到資本主義與國家機器及國際依賴關係的影響。最終以近年來網際網路發展蓬勃，連帶引出的著作權爭議作結，本研究除了對台灣著作權的政治經濟發展提出看法外，亦在結論中對知識/文化產業，及著作權規範的未來發展提出意見。 / Under knowledge-based economy, knowledge brings more value to human beings by spreading and then generating cultural properties. Although sharing is the essential characteristic of knowledge, there have been some arguments that knowledge is private and knowledge can be traded after the idea of intellectual property rights emerged. Does it mean Copyrights overtops “Copyleft”? In recent years, there have been more and more lawsuits related to copyrights such as Napster vs. RIAA in 1999 in the US, and IFPI vs. NCKU MP3 lawsuit in 2001 in Taiwan. Moreover, Microsoft, the worldwide leading software company, also faced US federal government’s antitrust violations prosecution, and rational price investigation by Taiwan government. All these cases indicate that copyright has caused problems all over the world. This thesis regards both the knowledge and cultural products as the producing tools of information capitalism society. It also discussed the conflicts between Capitalism and state apparatuses when “knowledge” became “property.” By examining the context of political economy in intellectual property, the author achieved two conclusions. First of all, the copyright is not a moral issue but an economic one. Secondly, in international society, copyrights have been the weapon for powerful nations to control the powerless ones. We cited three copyright conflicts in Taiwan from 1960-2002, including the reprint issue of Encyclopaedia Britannica in the 1960s, copyright violation case of Apple Computer in the 1980s, and the international pop music piracy disputes in the 1990s, the author made an empirical research to conclude that the development of copyright in Taiwan indeed was affected by the capitalism, the state apparatuses, and the international interdependency. This thesis ended with the prospective copyright issues originated from the burgeoning Internet industry. Not only did the research indicate some suggestions regard to the development of political economy in copyright, also made comments about the future development of knowledge/culture industry’s copyright regulation.

政府辦理區段徵收希望帶動新社區的繁榮，達成都市整體發展，取得公共設施用地及節省龐大建設經費支出等之目標，而地主希望藉由政府的開發行為，享有土地利用價值提高、公共設施完善等好處，然而所謂的公私互蒙其利，共創政府與民眾雙贏的開發方式，卻仍常產生地主為了財產權保障抗爭之情形而導致區段徵收作業延宕，因此，本研究以高鐵新竹車站特定區區段徵收案為例，針對地主選擇行為進行探討，透過群落分析歸類地主選配抵價地的型態，經由因子分析找出影響選配抵價地行為之因子，最後藉由羅吉特建立地主選配抵價地模型，希望可以提供政府部門及地主在選配抵價地之參考。研究結果如下： 一、 透過群落分析，予以歸類分析，劃分易於解釋的分配類型，可獲得二個群組四個方案，由此可瞭解地主選配抵價地型態。 二、 參與抵價地配地作業以男性地主居多，以年齡層多集中於中年左右，受訪地主多為已婚；受訪地主針對各項選配抵價地之影響因素均表示影響程度上都是以影響很大為居多，其中受訪地主多數認為使用分區類別、面前街道寬度、鄰近嫌惡設施程度、坵塊形狀、街廓評議地價高低等因素對於選配抵價地影響很大，又以鄰近嫌惡設施程度為居高。 三、 經由研究得知目前政府提供予地主之資訊管道不足或宣傳不周，對於整體區段徵收作業仍需加強與地主資訊的傳遞，以及充分公開整體計畫內容。 四、 部份地主不太滿意先抽籤再選配街廓的抵價地配地作業方式，其原因有主要為因籤號先後導致無法選配期望街廓佔多數，其次為權利價值較小者可能無法選配街廓，而需再與他人合併分配。 五、 建構八種類型之二項羅吉特模式，並透過AIC及SC值找出能力較佳的群組方案，由方案中得知地主多數還是以居住適宜性及小規模開發為主要。 六、 由二項羅吉特模式實證結果顯示，模型共通變數為土地變數的使用分區類別、基地最小開發規模訂定、鄰近嫌惡設施程度、緊臨遊憩設施狀況、坵塊座向，以及地主行為變數面前街道寬度影響程度、鄰近嫌惡設施影響程度、區段徵收前土地座落位置影響程度、性別、學歷、職業等等，均顯著影響地主選配抵價地之行為。 / Zone-expropriation by government hopes to achieve these targets like exciting new community's prosperity, achieving the overall development of the new city, accessing the public facilities and saving huge expenditures. By the government's development activities, the landlords enjoy the benefits of increased value of land and good public facilities. Handling Zone expropriation creates a win-win situation between the Government and the landlords. However, in the process of Zone-expropriation often generate opposition of landowners to protect their property rights which led to delays in Zone-expropriation operations. Therefore, this study of THSR (Taiwan High Speed Rail) Hsinchu Station Zone- expropriation as an example and discuss the landowner’s choice behavior. Through cluster analysis classified the landowner’s choice behavior. And by factor analysis to identify the major factors of landlord’s choice behavior. Finally by Logit modeling the landlord model hopes to provide some valuable suggestions for government. The study results are as follows: 1. Through cluster analysis, the study classified and divided into two groups that are easy to explain. The two groups contain four plans each and they can explain the landlord’s choice behavior. 2. Landlords of participation of Zone-expropriation are mostly male with age around 40 to 60 years old. These mostly married landlords think these are the major factors, the use of zoning category, the street width, the neighboring facilities, the shape of street block, the value of street blocks. The neighboring facilities rank the top 1 factor. 3. Through the research shows that government lacks of information or promotional channels. Government should improve the communication with landlords and fully disclosed the contents of the overall Zone-expropriation plan. 4. Landowners are not satisfied by the flow of ballot at first and then land choosing. The major reason is landlords can not choose the expected lands after ballot. And the second reason is the land loads with smaller land value can not choose street blocks unless they combine with other landlords’ land value and choose the expected land. 5. In the study, construction of eight types of models from two of Logit modeling, through the AIC and SC values come out the better group and plan. It shows the better plan is the small-scale residential development and good environment for the most landlords. 6. By the empirical results from Logit model show that model common variables are the land use zoning category, the base size of the minimum development, near the level of aversion facilities, recreational facilities close to the zone, street block location, the width of the street, the impact of land location before zone expropriation, gender, education, occupation, etc. They are significantly affected the selection behavior of land choice.

本研究以文獻分析法及實地訪談法等方式，以剖析台灣原住民族土地財產權制度從共同所有到個別所有的演變關係。研究主題包括：一、明析原住民族土地財產權制度演變歷程的要因與結果；二、明析日治時期迄今，不同統治者標舉「理蕃」政策或山地政策所隱含的決策目的，及統治者實現其決策目的採取的行為措施，暨這些決策目的與行為措施如何影響原住民族土地財產權制度演變；三、明析原住民族土地財產權制度演變的結果，對於原住民族的發展造成何種影響。 透過上述研究主題，希望達成三點目的：一、分析日治時期迄今，原住民族土地財產權制度從共同所有演變為個別所有的過程、原因與結果，俾能連貫相關文獻的成果；二、分析日治時期迄今，統治政權賦予原住民族土地權利所隱含的決策目的、採取的行為措施，及其影響原住民族土地財產權制度演變之進程，以檢討「理蕃」政策或山地政策是否達成為原住民族謀求福祉的目標；三、分析原住民族土地財產權制度演變對於原住民族發展的影響，以供未來重新建構原住民族土地財產權制度的參考。 研究進行期間，除蒐集並整理研析關於原住民族土地財產權制度之相關文獻，作為建立研究架構及佐證研究內容之基礎外，更深入山地鄉瞭解原住民族對土地財產權問題之意見，俾使論證內容更為周延有據。茲摘述研究發現如次： 一、日治初期原住民族社會慣行的土地財產權制度方面 （一）部落為領域內土地財產權最大的共同所有團體。 （二）部落內耕地、獵地或漁區歸屬組成部落之社經團體共同所有。 （三）組成社經團體之家族（家庭）享有其範圍內土地之使用、收益權。 （四）共同所有之土地財產權，無繼受問題；惟土地之支配、管理者隨部落或社經團體之領導者更迭而變更。 （五）土地之使用、收益權，依各族群之家產法則繼受。 二、土地財產權制度演變對於原住民族發展之影響方面 （一）原住民族產權領域急遽限縮，個別原住民使用保留地的權利範圍亦趨於微小，平均每人不超過3甲土地。 （二）原住民族土地利用型態，由日治初期之「半耕、半獵」變成目前的定耕農業。 （三）原住民族與平地人民的所得差距，益趨擴大，且所得來源以非農業收入為主。另者，山地原住民仰賴保留地為生甚深，但其土地生產力仍屬偏低。顯示賦予原住民族土地財產權個別所有，仍無法提昇其經濟能力。 三、不同時期政府政策影響原住民族土地財產權制度演變之比較方面 （一）日治時期統治者之「理蕃」政策以攫取山地資源，回饋其宗主國經濟需求為要；光復時期統治者之山地政策在於維持原住民族社會安定，以鞏固政權為要。 （二）日治時期統治者之決策措施為「理蕃」措施；光復時期統治者之決策措施為山地政策措施。 （三）日治時期統治者之執行機制，以武力裝備的山地警察為主；光復時期統治者以不具武力裝備的一般行政機關為之。 四、詮釋分析觀點之事實方面 （一）制度的建立與發展具有累積性的「相互依存」特性，因此日治時期形成高砂族保留地制度授予保留地個別使用權，或光復時期形成原住民保留地制度賦予保留地個別產權，不同時期政府均事先實施相關「理蕃」措施或山地政策措施配合之。 （二）「資源攫取」為影響殖民政府是否實踐、落實「給予一定土地，使其耕種就業」之「理蕃」政策理想的重要因素。 （三）「政權鞏固」為影響政府實踐、落實「改善原住民族生計能力，提高其地位」之山地政策理想，及積極進行增劃編保留地的重要因素。 （四）殖民政府或我政府在面對各種主客觀條件時，均會權衡利弊得失而採取不同方法、手段、措施來趨利避禍、自求多福，以謀求自身最大的福祉與利益。 （五）在原住民族土地財產權演變過程中，因統治者界定高砂族保留地時缺乏考量原住民族傳統土地財產權觀念，且這些觀念仍發揮指導原住民族使用土地的作用，因此殖民政府根本未能有效監督、管理高砂族越界開墾之情事。 綜合本研究之論證與分析，歸納下列幾點結論： 一、日治初期原住民族社會以部落及部落內各種社經組織共同所有土地財產權，而組織成員則享有土地之使用、收益權能，並透過這套原住民族社會公認的土地財產權制度約束其內部的行為規範，達到維持社會秩序，減低護衛土地財產權的交易成本功效。 二、從討論分析瞭解，不同時期政府實施「理蕃」政策及山地政策的結果，未能達成為原住民族謀福祉的政策理想。其因在於，「理蕃」政策以掠奪山地利源為要；而山地政策以鞏固政權為考量，均在謀求統治者自身最大的利益，造成原住民族權益的損失。 三、日治時期迄今，原住民族土地財產權制度從共同所有演變為個別所有的結果，造成原住民族土地財產權不斷流失，且未能有效提昇其經濟能力，使得原住民族之地位日趨沒落。因此，保留地制度及保留地財產權型態允宜適度調整，未來可考量留設一定面積保留地，土地財產權改賦原住民族共同所有，以確保原住民族賴以生存的機盤，並維護其文化存續發展。 四、原住民族土地財產權制度變遷的過程，衍生原住民族與平地人民對於保留地財產權之爭議，政府宜妥適圓滿解決，創造族群共榮的多元社會。 五、本研究以「資源攫取」、「政權鞏固」及「制度相依」等因素分析原住民族土地財產權制度演變的觀點，均能從相關事實獲得合理詮釋。 / This dissertation conducted extensive literature research and field interviews in an attempt to explore the changes from the tribe ownership to the private ownership system of Taiwan aborigines’ land ownership right. The themes and the expected accomplishments of this research include the following: 1. To study the history and current status of Taiwan aboriginal land ownership right, to analyze the causes and consequences of the changes in the past, and to verify the findings with other scholars’ arguments in the literature. 2. To study the ruling mentality, rationale, policies and regulations towards Taiwan aborigines from the Japanese occupants to the ROC government, to analyze the impacts of these policies on Taiwan aboriginal land ownership right, and to explore whether Taiwan aborigines have benefited from such policies and regulations. 3. To study the overall impacts on Taiwan aborigines’ economical and cultural development, which was resulted from the changes to their land ownership right through the execution of different policies. The findings of this research could serve as recommendations to the government in setting up revised aboriginal land reservation policies for Taiwan aborigines. Through extensive literature research and field interviews with a few senior Taiwan aborigines about their memories, comments, and expectations with respect to aboriginal land ownership right, the following facts can be summarized: 1. The Land Ownership Right Before Japanese Occupancy a. The tribe leaders rule the land within a tribe’s territory. b. Each piece of farmland, hunting field, and fishing field belongs to a societal/economical group within a tribe. c. The societal/economical group has the right to farm or hunt on their assigned lands and owns the produce from the lands. d. Because the land is owned by a societal/economical group, there is no inheritance issue. The managing of the land is by the leader of the group. e. Traditionally members in a societal/economical group have the right to farm/hunt on a piece of land as well as to own the produce from the land. 2. The Impact of Land Ownership Right Changes on the Development of Taiwan Aborigines a. The land ownership right policies have limited the accessibility of Taiwan aborigines to land resources. Each aborigine has access to less than three aches of reserved land. b. The land reservation policy limited the aborigines to farm within their reserved land have changed the aborigines’ life style from half time farming and half time hunting to full time farming. c. Because productivity of each aborigine farm on his own reserved land is very low, the gap between the average income of aborigines and nonaborigines has been widening. Besides, the majority of aborigines’ income should come from non-agricultural sources. This reflects the fact that giving aborigines a piece of reserved land did not benefit them economically. 3. The Comparison of Different Land Ownership Right Policies by Different Governments a. The Japanese occupants’ aboriginal policy focused on seizing Taiwan’s mineral, forestry, and agricultural resources. While the ROC government’s aboriginal policy was only reactively trying to keep the stability of the aborigines. b. The Japanese occupant’s aboriginal policy was to “manage” Taiwan aborigines. While the ROC government’s aboriginal policy was a land reservation policy. c. The Japanese occupants ordered armed policemen to implement its aboriginal policy. While the ROC government’s aboriginal policy was executed by civilian officials in local governments. 4. Some Observations a. The Taiwan aboriginal policies by the ROC government and the Japanese occupants have its relationship. The Japanese occupants adopted land reservation policy for the aborigines, which led to private use of reserved lands. The ROC government has consequently adopted a more extensive land reservation policy for aborigines, which led to private ownership of reserved land by all aborigines. The policy of awarding private use privilege of land to aborigines by both governments had always been accompanied by the intention to manage the aborigines. b. Seizing Taiwan’s natural resources was the real agenda by the Japanese occupants behind their slogan of “awarding aborigines land to farm”. c. Maintaining the ROC government’s ruling power was the main interest behind her aboriginal policy of “improving aborigines’ quality of life and social status”. d. Even though the Japanese occupants and the ROC government chose different means and regulations to implement different aboriginal policies, avoiding pressures and satisfying their own agenda was what’s driving their aboriginal policies. e. The Japanese occupants did not appreciate Taiwan aborigines’ perception of land while awarding reserved lands to the aborigines. However the Taiwan aborigines disrespected the boundary of their reserved land, and the issue became unmanageable. Conclusions 1. Before the Japanese occupancy, Taiwan aboriginal tribes and the social/economical groups within the tribes rule the land they use. Members in a social/economical group have usage rights over a piece of land, and own the produce from that land. Because this system was well respected by all aborigines, there was little conflict or social cost with respect to land ownership right. 2. The past aboriginal policies failed to improve the aborigines’ quality of life. The interests of the two governments were either to seize Taiwan’s resources or to secure the ruling government’s political power. Taiwan aborigines’ welfare was sacrificed. 3. Taiwan aborigines’ perception about land ownership right changed from commonly owned by everybody to pieces of privately owned land. This reservation land policy for aborigines not only against the aborigines’ philosophy and lifestyle, but also violated economic principles of efficiency and productivity. Another conflict of interests arose due to competing over the reserved land to the aborigines by the nonaborigines. The land resources reserved for the aborigines have long been diminishing. Consequently, most Taiwan aborigines suffer from economic hardship and social disadvantage. 4. This research has explored the problems in the disputes land reservation policy for the aborigines. The following two recommendations are suggested: a. The government should actively resolve all over the reserved land for the aborigines. This can give back to the aborigines such land they deserve for generations. Resolving land disputes can also improve the relationship between all residence in Taiwan. b. Knowing the disadvantages of privately owning reserved land by aborigines, this research recommends that the government allocates additional portion from the total reserved land to the aborigines, which can be managed by aboriginal tribes and shared by all aborigines. Increasing the accessibility to more natural resources by aborigines will be a direct measure to improve Taiwan aborigines’ economic income, while in the same time, preserve their pride and cultural heritage. 5. This research has based on theories of “seizure of natural resources”, “securing governing power”, and “institutional dependence” to analyze the changes in Taiwan’s aboriginal land ownership right, and its negative impact to Taiwan aborigines’ life. Recommendations to government with respect to modifying the current aboriginal land policy were suggested.

在二十世紀七十年代開始，以Richard A. Posner為首，以寇斯定理為主的財產權理論，開展出「法律經濟分析」這一學術思潮，以經濟學觀點，來審視法律制度之良窳。而在九十年代，寇斯獲得諾貝爾獎後，更奠定了經濟學與法學間科際整合之相容性及必要性。然而，在台灣，由於深受德國法律文化之影響，以及近來政治社會的影響，經濟效率永遠無法與公平正義相提並論，而犧牲了法律經濟分析在台灣成長的契機，實為可惜，故本文嘗試以法律經濟分析之核心——寇斯定理來闡述法律制度，希望能多少引導有志之士踏入此門學術領域。 以交易成本為中心之寇斯定理所衍生之財產權理論，乃以人是理性自利為假設前提，而追求整體社會的最大產出，也就是以整體社會產值極大化的角度來看產權界定、保障，故本文乃以此種概念，對民法地上權章相關問題作以下之法律經濟分析：（1）以寇斯定理分析地上權之所以形成、其必要性及產權界定之問題，探討其制度形成之背景及經濟目的，並以交易成本來分析民法地上權章之規定所能達到的效率層面為何；（2）探討地上權法律設計如何保障財產權，研究焦點放在民法第八百三十九、八百四十條以及修正草案對於地上權消滅後地上物處理之規定，應用Calabresi與Melamed所提出之三個基本的財產權保障法則，分析地上權消滅後，地上物之處理，所採取之保障法則為何，及所導致之經濟效果來判斷法律制度設計之良窳。 本研究認為，地上權制度由於因物權法定主義之特性，使得該制度之設立得以省下搜尋及資訊成本，而突顯其必要性，但仍必須與因物權態樣之僵化程度相衡量；而對於地上權消滅後地上物之處理，本文認為設計上忽略了工作物及竹木經濟特性之不同，而予以分別討論。在分析中，發現當工作物具公共財性質時，不管以財產法則或責任法則，都無法解決效率及財產權保障問題，此乃當初財產權界定有誤，必須以特別法或特別規定排除；而關於建築物於消滅後之處理，法律設計上形成了二回合的責任法則，依Ayres及Balkin之觀點，此將會誘導雙方透露出私人訊息，而為法院判斷其真實價格而作為補償額之有效依據，並在第二回合責任法則結束時，以財產法則遏止無效率的相互侵奪繼續下去，因此，民法第八百四十條第一項及第二項之規定，符合了此種觀點，而能達到效率，並符合立法意旨。

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。

本文將以Quanta v. LG電子案判決中尚留解釋空間及適用疑義的「契約自由」與「專利權耗盡理論」的關係為探討標的，從公法角度（我國憲法與經濟公法角度）探求專利制度中『追求公私利益衡平』的本質著手，探討專利權耗盡理論的理論基礎及其存在的合理性，然後分析美國專利權耗盡理論及Quanta v. LG電子案判決建構出的「契約自由」與「專利權耗盡理論」的關係之妥適性，並在「在知識專用權和知識共用權之間進行利益平衡，確保專用權的授予能換來知識共用的最大利益，並最大限度地增進社會的整體福利」精神下，重新省思Quanta v. LG電子案判決的未決爭點，分析契約約定與專利權耗盡理論應有的界限，看專利行使應如何受契約的限制（或者契約自由應受到限制），以對我國專利權耗盡理論提出解釋與適用上之建議。

「智慧財產權」係指人類精神活動之成果而產生財產上之價值者，由法律所創設之一種權利。然而著作權是智慧財產權之一種，著作權法是為了保障著作人應有之權利而制定之法律，但並非所有著作均受到著作權法的保護，立法者於制定著作權法時，考量重點有三：著作人之權益、社會公共利益與國家社會發展三方面，然而著作人在創作時，往往會涉及先人文化之遺產，所以立法時仍顧及公共利益予以限制，再者著作權制度終極目標乃是促進國家文化發展，當面臨公共利益與著作權人權益保護衝突時，應特別注意兩者之平衡，考量使社會大眾能在合理程度範圍內，自由利用著作權人之文化創作，以促進國家社會發展。 隨著科技時代的來臨，過去人類所創造的文化資產與各類的知識，可以藉由科技來加以保存、整理、傳播及利用，一方面使得知識能永久保存下來，一方面使得知識與文化資源得以共享，繼而加速文明的進步。有鑑於此，各國也紛紛著手進行數位典藏計劃，我國擁有悠久的歷史背景、累積豐富的文化資產以及珍貴的文獻與歷史文物，現也正積極進行相關的數位典藏計劃，而圖書館的典藏受到資訊科技的影響，逐漸開始著手進行自動化的工作，並引進許多電子資源，這些資源建立了數位館藏，內容包含電子書、電子期刊、電子資料庫，也進一步參與了許多數位典藏計劃，但數位資源與數位典藏當中仍然有許多著作權相關的問題瀰漫著，而資源建立進而引發著作權的問題。 美國著作權法是全世界發展最為完善的國家之一，其使用各種方式來協助一些侵權問題嚴重的國家，而我國對於著作權法的修訂，與美國方面的淵源頗深，並由圖書館數位典藏管理的角度來進行分析，針對中美兩國圖書館數位典藏管理與著作權法之關係，擬就研究問題逐一進行分析與探討之。在兩國數位典藏管理與著作權法的議題之中，時常有相關性的議題產生，進而牽動整體修法的方向，需要相互比對。本研究藉由比較研究法的方式，瞭解兩國之間的差異性，並且透過描述、解釋、併排、比較的過程，最後進行分析之，將比較之結果做一結論，以驗證研究假設，得出具體性的建議。 / Intellectual property right is a priority protection based upon a compromise as an aspect of human spirit activities achievement. With respect of it creates a statutory and potential property right for writers of which does not cover for all of writings, the cardinal principle of establishing copying is writer’s rights and interests, public interest, and society development three factors. In respect of the writer as in creating to which may involved with culture inheritance affiliated rights that need to take both of upon factors into account on copyright system establishment. Particularly, how to negotiate the conflict rights to make balance for the public interest and writer’s copyright protection in terms of promoting society development by adopting the creations of writers’ copyright freely which under a legitimate range. Benefited from the help of high technique of science adoption for those cultural properties and correlative knowledge preservation, organization, broadcasting, and utilization of which make a possibility of sharing cultural resources by each other and to keep progressing for human culture constantly. Consequently, adopt a digital collection plan for national heritage become a current for the global nations. In concern of the long-standing historical background of Republic of China, have an abundant cultural heritage and plentiful valuable document and historical relics that engaged in a necessary planning project for processing correlative digital collection recently. However, a solemn concern emerged by the subject of copyrights as integrating the electronic book, electronic periodical, and electronic information bank into the respective sub-subject planning. United States as the world top faultless copyright law featured country, which providing assistance to help those countries that seriously infringed by copyright tort and implementing different methods to improve copyright revision. Especially, according to the reality of Republic of China has a long good relationship with United States that is necessary to make a comparison study for respective library digital collection management and copyright between two countries. Regarding the two study subjects of which interact debate revelation frequently that is necessary to make a comparative analysis and probe into the core of two correlative digital collection managements on the direction of integral law revision. In this study, implement comparative analysis to understand the differences between two countries and through the process of description, interpretation, juxtaposition, and comparison to analyze the comparison result. At last, a specific proposal provided by the analysis conclusion and testify assumes in this paper.

隨知識經濟發展，有關智慧財產權之管理與對因智慧財產權所衍生之訴訟紛爭因應之道，對企業越來越重要。因大企業多利用我國民事訴訟保全程序中假處分程序較提起本案訴訟所需支出之程序費用較低，取得定暫時狀態假處分之時間較本案訴訟耗費冗長之審理時間迅速，加上我國法律准許原告得提供擔保金代替聲請假處分需提出之事實與理由，導致大企業可挾雄厚財力於提請侵權訴訟之前，提供高額擔保金向法院聲請對競爭對手核發定暫時狀態假處分之裁定，故我國現行智財訴訟定暫時狀態假處分制度遭批評成為大企業用來對付新興中小企業競爭對手之手段。 有鑒於智慧財產案件與一般訴訟案件性質不同，著重承審法官須具備法律以外專門知識與技術知識，且因我國司法採取公私法二元化審判權區分，始同一智慧財產權紛爭案件可提起民事、刑事及行政訴訟程序，產生訴訟程序遲滯、裁判矛盾等問題，加上現行假處分制度有上述缺失。我國研擬智慧財產法院組織法、智慧財產案件審理法，並決定明年3月成立智慧財產專責法院，統一審理智慧財產案件，因此新制實行後能否徹底解決現行諸多缺失，亦係企業十分關心之議題。 隨台灣企業於國際間代工獲利增長、面板產業、資訊科技產業快速成長發展，外國擁有相關技術智慧財產權之大廠，紛紛對台灣企業於美國涉嫌侵權行為提起訴訟，獲取洽談授權金或和解金、賠償金之利益。因國外大廠於提起智慧財產侵權訴訟之際，均會依假處分規定，聲請法院下裁定禁止涉嫌侵權之企業繼續為生產、銷售及進口等行為，使台灣企業無法繼續生產商品銷售至美國，受有商機、商譽等重大損失。且台灣企業於美國侵權訴訟程序需耗費巨額訴訟費用及冗長之訴訟程序進行，台灣現行並無訴訟保險制度，無法將面臨智慧財產侵權訴訟須支出之費用藉由保險制度分散風險，故台灣企業面臨智慧財產權利人提起假處分或侵權訴訟時，應採取何種因應措施與訴訟策略，平時對其所有之智慧財產權應為如何管理，均係相當重要之議題。 ＊關鍵字：定暫時狀態假處分、擔保金、智慧財產法院、訴訟保險、智慧財產權管理、訴訟策略 / In today's knowledge-based economy, management of intellectual property rights is more important and litigation arising out of disputes about intellectual property rights is more than ever among transnational companies. In light of the lengthy procedure of litigation, companies often take advantage of the preliminary injunction system in Taiwan before filing a lawsuit, especially in cases of disputes about intellectual property rights. An applicant of a preliminary injunction is allowed to provide a security bond in lieu of explaining in detail the merit of its lawsuit and can obtain a preliminary injunction issued by the court within a relatively short period of time before the final judgment has been rendered. Consequently, the preliminary-injunction system has been criticized for its shortage in protecting the counterparty's legitimate interest. Because the current preliminary-injunction system has the above-mentioned disadvantages, and the litigation in connection with intellectual property rights differs from the ordinary litigation, i.e. the judges must have certain engineering or scientific knowledge in addition to the understanding of the legal system. Furthermore, our country adopts the "dual system" in terms of jurisdiction, i.e. there might be criminal, administrative, and civil litigations simultaneously arising out of the same intellectual-property disputes, which results in delay and contradictions among the judgments in relation to the same disputes. In view of the above, the Judicial Yuan drafts the "The Act for Establishing the Specialized Intellectual Property Court" and "The Code for Hearing Procedures Concerning Intellectual Property Disputes", and plans to launch the Specialized Intellectual Property Court by March 2007 to be in sole charge of the hearing of intellectual-property cases. Therefore, whether the new system adopted by the Judicial Yuan can resolve the aforementioned shortcoming is the major source of concern for the industries. Owing to the increase in the profits sustained by Taiwan companies when performing their OEM services, and the rapid growth of Taiwan's TFT-LCD and IT industries, foreign companies owning the intellectual property rights in relevant technologies in droves file lawsuits against Taiwan companies in the United States, in order to gain advantages when negotiating royalties or compensation with Taiwan companies. When foreign companies file lawsuits, it is a trend to also apply for preliminary injunction with the court to forbid the infringing companies continuing manufacturing, selling, or importing the products. Thus Taiwan companies cannot proceed to sell the products to the United States and incur huge losses in commercial opportunities and reputation. In addition, litigation in the United States will cost Taiwan companies notable expenditure, and make Taiwan companies endure lengthy procedures. Nonetheless, as currently there is no litigation insurance in Taiwan, Taiwan companies cannot shift the risks in disbursing the litigation expenditure by means of insurance. Accordingly, the management of intellectual property rights in "peacetime", and the measures and litigation strategy for the lawsuits or preliminary injunction filed/applied by the owner of the intellectual property rights, are crucial to Taiwan companies. ＊Keywords：Preliminary injunction、Security Bond、The Specialized Intellectual Property Court、Litigation insurance、the management of intellectual property、the strategy of litigation

新經濟體系的來臨，以技術為基礎的新創科技公司如雨後春筍般的出現，這些新創科技公司的價值已非過去龐大的有形資產，取而代之的是無形資產，如專利權、商標權、著作權、授權契約或公司的研發團隊等，然而傳統的財務報表係儘反映公司過去的財務狀況和經營成果，對於自行研發而非外購的智慧財產權，卻無法認列在財務報表上，使得公司的價值被嚴重低估，有潛力的公司無法獲得所需資金而功敗垂成，十分可惜。 本研究係以實際經營管理的觀點切入，探討以智慧財產權做為融資擔保標的時所會遭遇到的困難為何？再經由所得知的實際困難找出智慧財產權融資所需營運機制和可行之營運模式。 由於智慧財產權融資大部份的風險都處於資金供給方，因此融資可行與否大致上都決定於資金供給者必須在那些條件具備的情況下才願意接受以智慧財產權做擔保的融資模式，因此本研究主要探討的問題從資金供給者的角度出發，主要研究的資金供給對象為國內銀行和創業投資公司。 透過次級文獻蒐集、集體焦點訪談、個別訪談和郵寄問卷等方法得到主要發現如下： 一、國外智慧財產權融資尚在起步階段，且西方國家與東方國家有關智慧財產權的營運模式皆不盡相同。 二、國內缺乏智慧財產權融資實際個案，雖然有關智慧財產權融資擔保有其基本法源可茲適用，但相關配套法規欠缺。 三、國內創業投資公司多以整體性評估新創科技公司，除少數新創科技公司（如生物科技公司）外，智慧財產並非單一關鍵性考量因素。 四、智慧財產權融資模式對創業投資公司有其間接性影響，其中有關鑑價機制和技術交易市場為創業投資公司所關切重點。 五、國內傳統銀行以利差為主要獲利來源之營運特性使智慧財產權融資高風險之融資形式不易為銀行所接受。 六、銀行本身缺乏智慧財產權鑑價能力和管理能力，此為銀行承做智慧財產權融資首要解決之務。 七、銀行傾向以政府保證的方式來進行智慧財產權融資，以降低本身所承擔風險。 八、以目前整體的環境而言，智慧財產權融資在智慧財產權觀念上、鑑價機制、管理能力、交易市場和法令規範等方面有著許多實行上的困難有待解決。 由以上可知智慧財產權融資以目前各方面的環境而言具有高風險性，其可行性的營運模式建議分為短期和長期來看： 一、初期營運模式： 1、初期政府可用保證基金的形式來分散資金供給者的風險。 2、初期可先透過國外的鑑價機制和交易市場來進行。 二、遠期營運模式： 建立具有國際化的鑑價機構和交易市場，根據「契約自由化」原則，只要交易雙方對於契約內容達成一致性的決議，則交易即可完成，以促進自由市場高流動性的運作。 關鍵字：智慧財產權融資、新創科技公司、創業投資公司、銀行、鑑價機制、技術交易市場、信用保證基金、關鍵要素。 / By the coming of the new economy, high-tech start-ups are mushrooming like bamboo shoots after a spring rain. The value of high-tech start-ups does not base on hard assets, but of their principal assets. The principal assets contain both the intangible assets and intellectual property right (IPR), such as patent, trademark, copyright, license contract as well as R&D team. However, traditional financial statements record only the past financial profile and operating results of companies. They've invested large amount of money on R&D, and therefore, to obtain the IPR. But the right obtained can not be shown on the financial statements. As a result, a large number of high-tech start-ups are underestimated, and unfortunately, most of the potential high-tech start-ups were not able to survive due to the inability to find the fund needed. From the view of the practical operating management, this study discusses problems that should be confronted when operating the financing IPR. Moreover, according to the problems found, the study anticipates by offering the operating mechanism and feasible business models for financing IPR. As we know, the majority of risk lies in the fund suppliers when financing IPR, so mostly the feasibility of financing IPR depends on fund suppliers that will receive IPR as collateral under a certain number requirements possessed. Thus, the study will then offer suggestions mainly in terms of fund suppliers, and the focus will be on domestic banks and venture capitalists. Based on the literature review, group focus interview, individuall interview, posted survey and so on are conducted for the study. Some of insights are derived as bellow: 1. For overseas countries, the financing IPR is just at the beginning period. There are differences in the business models of financing IPR between western countries and eastern countries. 2. There are few real cases about financing IPR in Taiwan although there are some basic laws to apply for financing IPR. Nevertheless, more related regulations are needed. 3. Most of the venture capitalists evaluate high-tech start-ups in an overall way. Hence, excluding a small numbers of high-tech start-ups such as bio-tech companies, IPR is not the only key evaluation factor. 4. The model of financing IPR has an indirect influence to venture capitalists. They emphasize more on the valuation mechanism and the technology marketplace. 5. The profit of traditional banks in Taiwan comes from the interest. From the conservative operating system, these banks are hard to accept the financing IPR that is with high risk. 6. The domestic banks are in short of the IPR valuation and IPR management capabilities. Thus, these problems should first be solved, and then the financing IPR will be able to be taken into action. 7. The domestic banks are in favor of reducing risk by getting guarantee from the government. 8. In terms of the whole financial environment in Taiwan, there are lots of difficulties in the concepts of IPR, valuation mechanism, management capability, technology marketplace, laws and decrees and so forth to be confronted. Above all, financing IPR has high risk in Taiwan at the moment. Therefore, this paper recommends that feasible business models of financing IPR should be divided as follow: 1. Short-run business model: (1) Diversify the risk of the fund suppliers from the guarantee fund offered by the government. (2) Finance IPR by foreign valuation mechanism and technology marketplace. 2. Long-run business model: First, more efforts should be put to set up our own international valuation institutions and technology marketplace. Second, the financing IPR should be taken by contract liberalization principle in compliance with the mechanism of the free market. When both sides agree to the contract, then the deal will be done. By doing so,the IPR financing will be highly promoted at the same time. Key words: Financing IPR, High-tech Start-ups, Venture Capitalists, Domestic Banks, Valuation Mechanism, Technology Marketplace, Credit Guarantee Fund, Key factors.