##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

ابراهیم رهبری محمود جعفری چالشتری

چکیده

«امتناع یک‌جانبه» از اعطای لیسانس اختراع خود به دیگری از مقولاتی است که در چارچوب آن موازین حقوق رقابت، امتیازات انحصاری دارنده اختراع را به نحوی جدی به چالش می‌کشد؛ چراکه گاه استنکاف از چنین اقدامی، سبب اخلال در رقابت می‌شود. یکی از ابعاد چالش‌برانگیز موضوع این است که چگونه چارچوب‌های حقوق رقابت می‌تواند حق مالکیت دارنده اختراع را محدود کند؟ این مقاله در روشی تحلیلی و در نگرشی تطبیقی، می‌کوشد ضمن ارائه تعریفی دقیق از این مفهوم، رویکرد رویه مراجع رقابتی و محاکم و دکترین حقوق آمریکا و اتحادیه اروپا را که در قالب نظریه‌های مختلفی سعی در توجیه مداخله حقوق رقابت و الزام دارنده به اعطای مجوز بهره‌برداری به بنگاه‌های نیازمند دارند، تحلیل نموده و موضع مبهم قواعد رقابت حقوق ایران را نسبت به این موضوع آشکار سازد. سؤال اصلی این است که امتناع از اعطای لیسانس در چه مواردی ممکن است ضدرقابتی باشد؟ چه معیارهایی برای این امر بیان شده است؟ دیدگاه حقوق ایران چیست و تا چه اندازه به رویه کشورهای پیشگام نزدیک است؟ دیدگاه قانون سیاست‌های کلی اصل ۴۴ در این مورد چیست؟ به همین جهت، این پژوهش با عنایت به فضای خاص رقابتی و فنّاورانه کشورمان و موازین تثبیت‌شده حقوق آمریکا و اتحادیه اروپا، در جهت برقراری موازنه میان مطالبات بنیادین حقوق رقابت در منع رویه‌های ضدرقابتی از یک‌سو و شناسایی اختیار و حق دارنده اختراع در اعطای لیسانس در جهت توسعه نوآوری‌ها از دیگر سو، راهکارهایی ارائه می‌دهد.

جزئیات مقاله

مراجع
[1] Gleklen, Jonathan. (2012). ANTITRUST LIABILITY FOR UNILATERAL REFUSALS TO LICENSE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: XEROX AND ITS CRITICS, Available at: www.ftc.gov/opp/intellect/020501gleklen.pdf.
[2] American Bar Association. (2010). The Federal Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property, USA: American Bar Association.
[3] Bagheri, Mahmood, Abbasi, simin. (2012). Competition policy and intellectual property rights, Privacy Policy Studies Journal, Volume 42, No. 3, Fall, pp. 59-74. (In Persian)
[4] Brown, A. E. L.(2013). Intellectual Property, Human Rights and Competition: Access to Essential Innovation and Technology, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[5] Carol,Nielsen M., Samardzij, Michael R. (2007). COMPULSORY PATENT LICENSING: IS IT A VIABLE SOLUTION IN THE UNITED STATES, Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review, Vol. 13, Available at: http://www.mttlr.org/volthirteen/nielsen&samardzija.pdf
[6] Cass, Ronald A., Hylton, Keith N. (2013). Laws of Creation: Property Rights in the World of Ideas, USA: Harvard University Press.
[7] Christophe, Humpe & Ritter, Cyril. (2005). Refusal to deal, Global Competition Law Center Research Paper, College of Europe.
[8] Colston, Catherine, Galloway, Jonathan. (2010). Modern Intellectual Property Law, UK: Routledge.
[9] Couter, Yves Van , Vanbrabant, Bernard. (2008). License Agreements, Competition and the Internal Market, Belgium: Larcier.
[10] Czapracka, Katarzyna. (2009). Intellectual Property and the Limits of Antitrust: A Comparative Study of US and EU Approaches, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[11] Denicolo, Vincenzo, Franzoni, Luigi Alberto. (2012). Weak Intellectual Property Rights, Research Spillovers, and the Incentive to Innovate, American Law and Economics Review, V. 14, N. 1. pp. 111- 140.
[12] Dinwoodie, Graeme B. (2008). Trademark Law and Theory: A Handbook of Contemporary Research, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[13] Ebrahimi, Seyed Nasrollah, Jafari Chaleshtori, Mahmood. (2015). LEGAL ANALYSIS OF MONOPOLY AND COMPETITION IN THE ENERGY MARKET, WITH EMPHASIS ON GAS AND ELECTRICITY INDUSTRIES: CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES, Privacy Policy Studies Journal, Volume 45, No. 3, Fall, pp. 361-378.(In Persian)
[14] Eleanor M., Fox. (2007). Monopolization, Abuse of Dominance, and Refusal to License Intellectual Property to Competitors, Do Antitrust Duties Help or Hurt Competition and Innovation? How Do We Know, European Competition Law Annual 2005, UK: Oxford PORTLAND OREGON.
[15] Ezrachi, Ariel, Mariateresa Maggiolino. (2012). EUROPEAN COMPETITION LAW, COMPULSORY LICENSING, AND INNOVATION, Journal of Competition Law & Economics, 8(3). pp. 595–614.
[16] Gleklen, Jonathan. (2002). Per se Legality for Unilateral Refusal to License is Correct as Matter of Law and Policy, Available at: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publishing/antitrust_source/gleklen.authcheckdam.pdf.
[17] Govaere, Inge., Ullrich, Hanns. (2007). Intellectual Property, Public Policy and International Trade, Belgium: Peter Lang.
[18] Hagenfeldt, Veronica. (2011). EC Competition Law - The Essential Facilities Doctrine, Germany: GRIN Verlag.
[19] Haracoglou, Irina. (2008). Competition Law and Patents, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[20] Hilty, Reto & Liu, Kung-Chung. (2014). Compulsory Licensing, Germany: Springer Berlin Heidelberg,
[21] Jafari Chaleshtori, Mahmood. (2015). Analysis of Legal Regime Governing Patents pool Agreement, Thesis for Master in International commercial and Economic law, Tehran University. (In Persian)
[22] Jafarzadeh, Mir Ghasem. , Soudeh, Nategh Nori. (2011). Competitive analysis refusal to license of rights of intellectual creations, Journal of Legal Studies, No. 60, pp. 41-91. (In Persian)
[23] Jafarzadeh, Mir Ghasem., Rahbari, Ebrahim. (2011). Competitive analysis of suspected limitations licensing, Journal of Legal Studies, No. 55, pp. 91-213. (In Persian)
[24] Kokkoris, Ioannis , Lianos, Ioannis . (2010). The Reform of EC Competition Law: New Challenges, Netherlands: Kluwer Law International.
[25] Kur, Annette. (2011). Intellectual Property Rights in a Fair World Trade System: Proposals for Reform of Trips, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[26] Kurt, M. Saunders. (2002). PATENT NONUSE AND THE ROLE OF PUBLIC INTEREST AS A DETERRENT TO TECHNOLOGY SUPPRESSION, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, Volume 15, N. 2. pp. 2-64.
[27] Lennon, Michael J. (2007). Drafting Technology Patent License Agreements, USA: Aspen Publishers Online.
[28] Marina, Lao. (2000). UNILATERAL REFUSALS TO SELL OR LICENSE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND THE ANTITRUST DUTY TO DEAL, CORNELL JOURNAL OF LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY, Vol. 9. pp. 193-223.
[29] Marsden, Philip. (2006). Handbook of Research in Trans Atlantic Antitrust, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[30] Max Planck Institute. (2009). Studies on Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law, Patents and Technological Progress in a Globalized World, Germany: Springer,
[31] Meléndez-Ortiz, Ricardo , Roffe, Pedro. (2009). Intellectual Property and Sustainable Development, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[32] Monti, Giorgio (2007). EC Competition Law, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[33] Motta, Massimo. (2004). Competition Policy: Theory and Practice, UK: Cambridge University Press
[34] Nguyen, Tu Thanh. (2010). Competition Law, Technology Transfer and the TRIPS Agreement, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.
[35] Osterud, Eirik. (2010). Identifying Exclusionary Abuses by Dominant Undertakings Under EU Competition Law, Netherland: Kluwer Law International.
[36] Pace, Lorenzo Federico. (2011). European Competition Law: The Impact of the Commission's Guidance on Article 102, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[37] Park, Jae Hun. (2010). Patents and Industry Standards, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.
[38] Petersen, Clement et al, The Unified Patent Court (UPC). Compulsory Licensing and Competition Law, 2014; Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2489006.
[39] Rahbari, Ebrahim. (2013). Technology transfer law, Samt, Tehran. (In Persian)
[40] Roffe, Pedro, Tansey, Geoff. (2012). Negotiating Health: Intellectual Property and Access to Medicines, UK: Earthscan.
[41] Sergio, Baches Opi. (2001). The Application of the Essential Facilities Doctrine to Intellectual Property Licensing in the European Union and the United States: Are Intellectual Property Rights Still Sacrosanct, Fordham Intell. Prop. Mediaand Ent. L. J., Vol. 11, pp. 412- 505.
[42] Slaugheter & May. (2012). The EU Competition Rules on Intellectual Property Licensing, Available at: www.slaughterandmay.com/.../the-eu-competition-rules-on- intellectual- property licensing.pdf.
[43] Sokol, D, Lianos,Ioannis. (2012). The Global Limits of Competition Law, USA: Stanford University Press.
[44] Stothers, Christopher. (2007). Parallel Trade in Europe: Intellectual Property and Competition Law, USA: Hart Publishing.
[45] Takag, Yoi, Allman, Larry, (2008). Teaching of Intellectual Property: Principles and Methods, UK: Cambridge University Press.
[46] Wilkof, Neil, Bashee, Shamnad. (2012). Overlapping Intellectual Property Rights, UK: Oxford University Press.
ارجاع به مقاله
رهبریا., & جعفری چالشتریم. (2016). امتناع یک‌جانبه از اعطای لیسانس اختراع؛ تأملی تطبیقی در رهیافت‌های حقوق رقابت آمریکا، اتحادیه اروپا و ایرانو ایران. دانشنامه حقوق اقتصادی, 22(7). https://doi.org/10.22067/le.v22i7.42287
نوع مقاله
علمی پژوهشی