由於全球貿易自由化，食品的流通也漸趨便利。各國為避免或減少因食品貿易流通而導致外來動植物疫病蟲害入侵、或蔓延之機會，及防範食品、飲料或飼料中之添加物、污染物等的潛在風險，以保護境內國民及動植物的生命或健康，及維護自然生態環境，會對進口食品採取相關規範與措施。當會員基於主權制定相關措施時，可能會因這些措施對於貿易活動之限制性效果，而損及其他會員在WTO下之貿易利益，因而會造成其他國家的關切，甚至訴諸WTO爭端解決機制。 本文將介紹國際間常受其他會員關切的食品管制措施類型，主要以在WTO SPS委員會之會議上受到關切，或當事國向WTO提出控告的個案，來進行探討。藉由個案研究，以從中了解WTO重要條文及所涉議題之內涵與重要原則，並作為我國對進口食品管制措施管理之借鏡。我國自2002年加入WTO後，進口食品的值與量明顯增加，我國食品輸入管理機制也越顯重要。自2011年3月11日福島核災發生，大量放射性物質外洩對整體環境、人類及生物健康造成危害，故各國紛紛對日本食品實施管制程度不等的進口管制措施，以防止遭到輻射汙染之食品輸入。我國自日本輸入食品種類與數量皆甚多，因此亦對日本食品採取特定管制措施。針對此我國此管制措施，本文將以國際經貿法的觀點，依據 WTO協定中與檢驗措施密切相關的SPS協定規範、過往案例之裁決及相關文獻，分析我國針對日本輸入食品輻射管制措施之適法性，並判斷該措施將來是否存在遭非難之可能，希冀能對於我國日後政策走向提供一實質性之參考及展望。 / Global trade in agricultural and food products has grown rapidly in recent decades, with countries becoming more engaged in cross-border trade, whether as exporters or importers. All countries maintain measures to ensure that imported food is safe for consumers, and to prevent the spread of pests or diseases among animals and plants. These sanitary and phytosanitary measures can take many forms, such as requiring products to come from a disease-free area, inspection of products, specific treatment or processing of products. Sanitary and phytosanitary measures, by their very nature, may result in restrictions on trade. After the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami damaged the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, radiation was released into the environment near the plant. Growing concerns over radiation cause several countries, such as Korea and China to impose restrictions on the import of Japanese products. Taiwan, one of Japan's key food export markets, also imposed regulations in order to secure the safety of people. However, in 2015 Japan has filed a dispute against Korea at the World Trade Organization (WTO) over import restrictions that Japan found the measures inappropriate and against the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS Agreement). It also demonstrats that countries which impose import restrictions could be facing international adjudication through the WTO. Therefore, this essay staying with the view of international trade law, in particular the SPS Agreement under WTO, tries to analyze the consistency of Taiwan’s import regulations on Japanese Food Products with the rules and norms of the WTO in order to assess the legitimaticy of Taiwan’s trade policy.

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.