This thesis argues that the existing laws of competition and human rights can be combined to limit the rights of owners of intellectual property (IP). The need for this thesis arises from concerns about the impact of enforcement of IP rights, say on patients needing essential medicines or students seeking to obtain important material from the internet. Some steps have been taken to address these concerns, with the World Trade Organization Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health and the One Lap Top Per Child project. Yet the owner of a national IP right can still object to a valuable project if it comes within the scope of that IP right, say the supply of providers of emergency services with the only communications technology which will work in extreme conditions in air ambulances. IP law should not be viewed in legal isolation, however, and concerns about the impact of enforcement of IP can also be framed in terms of human rights and competition. This work argues, with a focus on the jurisdictions of the United Kingdom (UK) and on patents, that courts considering patent actions can and must, without the need for any legislative or policy change, combine the UK Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the UK Patents Act 1977 (PA) and article 82 EC Treaty such that in some limited cases there will be no finding of patent infringement. A Human Rights Emphasis is proposed as a means of evaluating what is meant in a particular case by compatible or incompatible with Convention rights in sections 3 and 6 HRA, given that the potentially conflicting rights to property, life and expression could be engaged in a patent action. The Human Rights Emphasis is then applied to the results of a creative yet legitimate approach to interpretation of the infringement provisions of the PA, to determine whether there should be a finding of infringement. It is also argued, combining the Human Rights Emphasis and a broad approach to abuse of a dominant position and its relationship with IP, that it can be a prohibited abuse of a dominant position to raise an infringement action when the technology the subject of the patent is a market in itself. Finally, the arguments of this work are considered to be consistent with the existing obligations of the UK, and other countries, under the ECHR and the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights, and as such of potential application outside the UK.

LED(Light Emitting Diode，發光二極體)的應用已由最早的數字顯示器和指示器發展出一些新的應用，與生活息息相關，四處可見，包括出口指示燈、裝飾燈、交通號誌、舞台燈、室外照明和投射燈等。LED提供的好處包括體積小、使用壽命長、低熱量輸出、節約能源和耐用性，它也擁有設計的靈活性，譬如由將小單體封裝成不同的形狀、顏色、大小及亮度可以達到顯色及調光的各種不同變化。但是LED技術發展限制使得它在整體光源輸出、演色性及可靠性仍不如規格宣稱可以達到的境界，因此在某些應用上還不普及，尤以取代傳統照明的應用市場目前較難達成。然而其餘LED在包括零售展示，彩色燈光，需要較暗光線的狹小空間照明，外部照明和應用一體化的光源的建築、娛樂與劇場照明等應用領域已經漸漸形成市場。由於台灣基於半導體產業的興盛，讓LED產業也隨之蓬勃發展起舞。 Philips公司進入LED照明產業後，積極地展開規劃佈署，主以併購的方式，於2005至2009年共併購了9間LED照明相關公司。從上游研發與製造LED晶片與元件公司Lumileds，到中游LED照明控制廠商Color Kinetics、TIR system、Bodine與Dynalite，以及下游LED燈具製造商PLI、Genlyte與Selecon，將LED照明產業鏈上的的關鍵公司納入旗下，對本身LED照明產品線進行垂直整合以及組織重整，Philips公司藉此以大規模的併購動作向全球宣告自身於LED照明產業的龍頭地位。 本研究針對LED照明產業作一系列的探討與分析，先從目前LED照明發展概況、主要廠商LED照明產品技術結構分析開始作初步探討，最後以Philips公司為個案探討該公司在LED照明的商業模式，如在LED照明產業的組織設計、投資、併購、合資、研發、授權與專利佈局…等。透過上述分析資料及結果，本研究歸納出Philips公司於LED照明產業的經營模式與發展策略，並對應到台灣企業目前的發展狀況。對台灣企業發展LED照明而言，當務之急除致力技術研發，累積自身專利之保護傘，以及對國外廠商的大規模授權動作亦必須要進行充分的研究與了解外，仍需借鏡Philips公司經營LED照明產業的方法與經驗，重新規劃自身的商業模式與競爭策略，避免重蹈過往台灣廠商在LED晶粒與封裝段遭遇的困境，逃脫不了向國外大廠取得授權或是被告的命運。 / The application of LED (Light Emitting Diode) evolved from digital display and indicators to more utility devices close to daily life, such as indicator lamps, decorative lamps, traffic lights, stage lights, outdoor lights, and projection lights. The limit of current technology restricts LED from so-claimed full performance concerning global illumination, color rendering, and reliability so that it is less available in certain applications, especially in the market of traditional lightings. However, LED becomes popular in retail display, color lighting, illumination of a small space, exterior lighting, illumination of integrated building, entertainment lighting and stage lighting. In addition, the prosperity of Taiwan semi-conductor industry encourages the development of LED industry in Taiwan. The LED companies have developed into a complete industry chain in Taiwan and will play an important role in the global LED industry. Philips aggressively merged 9 LED companies between 2005 and 2009. These companies ranges from upstream to downstream of the LED industry chain, including LED chips manufacturer Lumileds, LED controller companies Color Kinetics, TIR System, Bodine, Dynalite, and LED module and system manufacturer PLI, Genlyte, Selecon. The strategy of Philips is to complete its LED product line through vertical merger and reorganization of these important LED companies, proclaiming its leading position in global LED industry. This thesis begins with an introduction about the latest development of LED lighting and the technology analysis on LED products of the main companies. Further, the thesis will take Philips as the case study to elaborate its business model in LED lighting, such as organization, investment, merger and acquisitions, joint venture, R&D, licensing and patent strategy. Through the analysis on Philips’ business model and strategy in LED industry, the research will propose some suggestions for Taiwan LED companies. Taiwan LED companies should increase their own R&D energy, strengthen their intellectual property and keep up with the updated status of international licensing events. They should also take Philips as an example to examine their own business strategy in case that they may be trapped between high Royalties or lawsuits to international enterprises, a dilemma which Taiwan LED die and package companies encountered.