职务发明的判定及其权利归属问题研究——兼论《专利法修改草案》第6条的修改和完善

发布时间：2018-05-13 22:03

本文选题：职务发明 + 专利申请权　；参考：《知识产权》2016年09期

【摘要】：从司法实践来看,我国大部分地方法院持比较宽松的态度解释"物质技术条件标准",由此可能不适当地扩大了职务发明的范围。考察其他国家专利制度中有关职务发明的法律规则,在判定职务发明时基本上都采纳了与我国类似的"任务标准";而对于发明人在研发过程中利用雇主提供的物质技术条件所完成的发明创造,其是否属于职务发明,各国立法并不统一。在职务发明的权利归属方面,存在着"雇主优先"与"发明人优先"两大模式。对于"主要利用本单位的物质技术条件所完成的发明创造",不应强制将其纳入职务发明的范围;对于"利用本单位的物质技术条件所完成的发明创造",在优先归属发明人的前提下可由双方约定其权利归属。
[Abstract]:Judging from judicial practice, most local courts in our country take a more relaxed attitude to interpret "material and technical conditions standard", which may inappropriately expand the scope of job invention. To examine the legal rules governing job inventions in the patent systems of other countries, In determining a job invention, the "task standard" similar to that of our country has been basically adopted; and whether the invention completed by the inventor in the course of research and development using the material and technical conditions provided by the employer is a job invention, National legislation is not uniform. There are two modes of "employer first" and "inventor priority" in the ownership of duty invention. For the "invention and creation which is accomplished mainly by using the material and technical conditions of the unit", it should not be forced to be included in the scope of the job invention; In the case of "invention and creation completed by the use of the material and technical conditions of the unit", the rights of the inventor may be assigned by both parties on the premise of giving priority to the inventor.
【作者单位】：南开大学法学院;
【基金】：作者主持的2013年天津市哲学社会科学规划项目(编号:TJFX13-003)阶段性成果南开大学亚洲研究中心资助
【分类号】：D923.42

【相似文献】