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.

隨著知識經濟時代的來臨，許多企業、機構開始投入龐大的資源在智慧財產的發展，並規劃所謂智慧財產策略，標榜智慧財產是其最大價值及獲利所在，然而，這些為取得智慧財產所付出的鉅額代價，是否真的為企業和機構創造出高價值的智慧財產並帶來豐厚的利潤？以台灣為例，2005年台灣的專利申請數量，在美國排名外國申請人第四名，在日本排名第三，在歐洲也僅次於日本和韓國排名亞洲第三；而專利獲准件數方面，在美國排名第三，在日本也高居第二。但是，台灣每年花費超過新台幣100億元在專利申請上的結果，卻係每年仍需支付高達新台幣1500億元之多的權利金，以及每年新台幣500至600億元之律師費以應付美國專利侵權訴訟，而造成此結果的原因就在於整個智慧財產從研發、保護、經營、管理到行銷，都欠缺規劃、理論、方法和商業模式，而全球現今亦尚未有針對智慧財產發展出來之行銷學或行銷理論。 　　以有形產品和服務為基礎形成之行銷學理論發展迄今已有五十餘年的歷史，不但帶動了相關產業的發達，滿足了市場的需求，也為企業創造了獲利，而各種行銷學理論更是不斷形成和發展，包括運用市場區隔（segmentation）、選定目標市場（targeting）及定位（positioning）的STP程序，以及有形產品的4P、4C、6P、3V，和服務行銷的7P、8P等等，該等行銷理論雖然成熟，惟因智慧財產性質特殊，使得有形產品和服務之行銷理論無法直接套用於智慧財產行銷上，因此，實有必要針對各種智慧財產態樣，分別建構智慧財產之行銷理論及商業模式。 　　基此，本文試圖建立一套完整的專利行銷理論和商業模式，建構流程和步驟如下：(一)發展專利行銷之環境條件；(二)專利行銷應考量之因素；(三)專利行銷流程之組合要素；(四)專利行銷執行規劃；(五)專利行銷商業模式。本文並融合前述專利行銷理論，架構出發展專利行銷所需之平台系統，以及專利行銷執行中所需之配套措施，包括代理及經銷機制、會計財務制度和稅務規劃。此外，本文亦就全球包括台灣在內的一些較著名之智慧財產交易平台深入分析、檢視，並探討渠等可能面臨之問題和困境。本文在架構智慧財產行銷理論時，著重於涵蓋並融合整個組織內部和外部的研發創新、經營管理和市場行銷之作業流程，祈有助企業建立以市場為導向之商業發展策略和創新研發計劃，有助政府的產業政策得以使整個國家產業鏈規劃更完整、資源配置更具效益，有助研發機構之研發計畫更貼近產業和市場需求。 / With the emerging of knowledge-economy era, lots of enterprises and institutions begin to invest huge amount of resources in the development of Intellectual Property (“IP”), and to develop so called “Intellectual Property Strategy.” Some of them will try to boost its reputation by highlighting that intellectual property is their most valuable assets and the source of profits. However, it is questionable whether those IP related significant investments really create high value IPs and bring in high margin profits for these enterprises and institutions. Take Taiwan as an example, Taiwan has been ranked as the top fourth foreign applicant in the US in comparison of the total quantity of patent applications in year 2005. The same ranking for Taiwanese patent application in Japan is top 3 and Taiwan is also ranked as top 3 among Asia countries in Europe (only fewer than Japan and Korea.) As for the total amount of patents granted, Taiwan is top 3 in the US and top 2 in Japan. Nevertheless, even though Taiwan has made an annual investment for more than NT$10 billion in patent applications, it is estimated that annually Taiwan still needs to pay more than NT$150 billion for patent royalty fees, as well as 50 to 60 billion of legal fees in responding to US patents infringement litigations. The reason is the lack of strategic planning, theory, methodology and business model in the overall IP areas, including from Research & Development to IP protections, business operation, management and marketing. In addition, currently there is no marketing research or marketing theory specifically developed for IP in the world. 　　There are more than 50 years of history and development in the marketing study or theory that based on tangible goods and services, such study not only promoted the vibrant development of related industries, fulfilled the market needs, but also generated profits for enterprises. In the meantime, all kinds of marketing theories continue to emerge and develop, including the STP procedure for leveraging market segmentation, market targeting and market positioning, and the 4P, 4C, 6P, 3V theories focused on tangible products, and the 7P, 8P theories applied to service marketing. Although these theories are quite mature, due to the special nature of IP, these theories focused on tangible goods and services still cannot directly apply to the IP marketing. Therefore, it is really necessary to separately build up unique marketing theories and business models specially focused on different kinds of IP. 　　Based on the above, this thesis is trying to establish a set of complete patent marketing theory and business model. The flow and process are: (1) the environment conditions for developing patent marketing; (2) the factors that need to be considered when conducting patent marketing; (3) the necessary components in the process of patent marketing; (4) the implementation planning for patent marketing; (5) the business model for patent marketing. This thesis also combines the above patent marketing theories to establish the platform system which is necessary for developing patent marketing, and also a complete set of supporting measures which is necessary for implementing patent marketing, including agent and distribution mechanisms, accounting and finance system, as well as tax planning. In addition, this thesis also conducted in-depth analysis and review on some of the well-known global (including Taiwan) IP transaction platforms, and also study potential issues and challenges these platforms may encounter. During the structuring of IP marketing theory, this thesis focuses on covering and integrating all the internal and external 　　organizational operation processes related to R&D, innovation, business management and segment marketing. The author wishes to assist enterprises by building up market-driven business development strategy and R&D/innovation plan; to assist the government by improving the industry development policy to establish a more complete country wide industry value-chain planning and a more efficient resources allocation plan; and to assist the research institutes by creating a research and development plan which is more close to industry and market needs.