• Refine Query
  • Source
  • Publication year
  • to
  • Language
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • Tagged with
  • 2
  • 2
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • 1
  • About
  • The Global ETD Search service is a free service for researchers to find electronic theses and dissertations. This service is provided by the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations.
    Our metadata is collected from universities around the world. If you manage a university/consortium/country archive and want to be added, details can be found on the NDLTD website.
1

A study of agency cost effects on insurance company involvement in litigation

Kerr, Dana Andrew. January 1900 (has links)
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 2002. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 103-105). Also available on the Internet.
2

我國智財訴訟假處分制度及企業因應策略

謝采薇, Hsieh, Kelly Unknown Date (has links)
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

Page generated in 0.0972 seconds