- [ 2024-07-25 ] 2024년도 하반기 기관생명윤리위원회 평가·인증 계획 추가 공고
- [ 2024-07-25 ] [ISSCR 가이드라인 한국어 번역본] 발행 안내
- [ 2024-07-15 ] 『생명, 윤리와 정책』제8권 제2호 원고 모집 안내(~9/20)
- [ 2024-07-12 ] 정책원 대표 홈페이지 이용자 만족도 및 사용편의성 조사 연장(20...
- [ 2024-06-28 ] 2024년 하반기(7월) 유전자검사기관 종사자 교육 안내
미국에서의 특허적격(Patent Eligibility) 판단에 대한 연구 - 인간배아줄기세포와 컴퓨터 프로그램을 중심으로 - / 이창화
18 인체실험 조회 수 419 추천 수 0 2016.09.30 11:02:49| 발행년 : | 2014 |
|---|---|
| 구분 : | 국내학술지 |
| 학술지명 : | 산업재산권 |
| 관련링크 : | http://www.riss.kr/link?id=A101888386 |
미국에서의 특허적격(Patent Eligibility) 판단에 대한 연구 - 인간배아줄기세포와 컴퓨터 프로그램을 중심으로 -
제어번호 101888386
저자명 김창화
학술지명 産業財産權
권호사항 Vol.45 No.- [2014]
발행처 韓國産業財産權法學會
발행처URL http://www.kipla.or.kr
자료유형 학술저널
수록면 87-132(46쪽)
언어 Korean
발행년도 2014년
등재정보 KCI등재
판매처 학술교육원
초록
Even though the U.S. Supreme Court has acknowledged the subject matter very widely, it has rejected the patentability against the law of nature, physical phenomenon, and abstract idea. The decision whether an invention can be patentable is based on the preemption concept and inventiveness concept. Thus, the judgment of patentability is made by preemption and inventiveness test. In addition, these tests are made not respectively but complementary. In other words, the judgment is composed of two step test: first step is judging whether an invention is not patentable; second step is judging whether an invention is addicted to the inventiveness. However, this two step test has some problems. One of the problems is what is unpatentable subject matter, and another is what degree of inventiveness is required for passing patentability. Due to the features of the problems, the standard for this judgment cannot be decided uniformly. But, it is necessary to set out the direction of the boundary and the degree because new forms of invention is developed continuously. The main direction should be the balance between the incentive of patent owner and public interests, that is, the purpose of patent law, and the judgment has to be examined as a whole. Moreover, considering the statute, the history of legislation, the protection for the existing patent, and the features of patentability, the scope of subject matter has not to be interpreted too broadly. Next, with regard to what degree of the inventiveness is needed, human inventive faculty makes sufficient difference from the unpatentable matter and the difference should not trivial, routine, well-understood, conventional in order to be meaningful limitations. In addition, since the judgment for the inventiveness test can be considered in other patent requirements, it has not to be interpreted strictly. The recent lawsuits concerning human embryonic stem cells and computer program should be handled by two step test which is composed of preemption and inventiveness concept like all others. Since the two matters may be included in the unpatentable matters, the judgements would be focused on the inventiveness. Of course, although there are many needs to limit the patentable scope, the judgment of the patentability of them must follow the above principle, and this is the best way to solve the social imbalance.
목차
I. 서언
II. 특허적격의 판단
1. 미국 특허법상 불특허 대상
2. 특허적격의 판단 방법
Ⅲ. 구체적 판단의 검토
1. 인간배아줄기세포의 특허적격 판단
2. 컴퓨터 프로그램의 특허적격 판단
Ⅳ. 결어
주제어
특허적격 , 특허대상 , 선점 테스트 , 독창성 테스트 , 배아줄기세포 , 컴퓨터 프로그램 , patentability , subject matter , preemption , inventiveness test , embryonic stem cell , computer program.
Copyright (c)KONIBP All Right Reserved.
2sisstore
