TRIPS协定中的诉前禁令制度及其在中国的实践

广西师范大学硕士学位论文TRIPS协定中的诉前禁令制度及其在中国的实践姓名：蒋顺申请学位级别：硕士专业：国际法指导教师：莫凌侠20080401IITRIPS2005,,TRIPSTRIPSTRIPS50TRIPSIIIThesystemofTemporaryRestrainingOrderinTRIPSAgreementandItsPracticeinChinaAbstractTemporaryRestrainingOrderitisreferstothePeople'scourttostoptheviolationobligeeintellectualpropertyrightswhichpromptlyimplementseithersoonimplementsortohavetheviolationriskbehavior,appliesfortheissuebeforetheprosecutionaccordingtothelitigantonekindtoforbidortolimittheauthortobeengagedinsomebehaviorthecompulsionorder.Itspurposeistoprotectintellectualpropertyrightsfrompeoplecontinuetoabuse,preventirreparabledamageoccurred.Itisthemodernworldinintellectualpropertylitigationtakeninacommoneffectiveprotectionofhumanrightsprotectionactmeans.Statesinalong-termdevelopmentandpractice,manydevelopedcountriestheeconomicembargoagainsttheformerregimehasbecomeverymature.However,inChinabecauseofthebanagainsttheformerregimeestablishednotlonginthesystemdesignofalotoflackofjudicialpracticeoflawenforcementhasnouniformstandards,whichgreatlyreduceditsfunction.Totakefulladvantageofthebanagainsttheformerregimeinintellectualpropertyprotectiontotheimportantrole,IbelievethatitisnecessaryforTemporaryRestrainingOrderinChina'spracticeoftheinadequacyoftheexistingandhowtoimprovetheirconductin-depthstudy.Thispaperisdividedintofourcomponents.Thefirstpartofthebanonthehistoricaldevelopmentofthissystemandnationalsystemoftheban.WhichfocusesonthefewdevelopedcountriesTemporaryRestrainingOrdertodoabriefintroductionandassessment.AndtoelaboratedtheTemporaryRestrainingOrderlegalcharacteristicandthenature.ThesecondpartelaboratedontheTRIPSAgreementintheTemporaryRestrainingOrder.Inthispart,theauthormainlyfromthethreeareasdiscussed.Firstofall,ElaboratedtheTRIPSagreementtotheTemporaryRestrainingOrderstipulation.AsArticle50oftheTRIPSAgreementexplicitlyrequireWTOmemberstotheprotectionofintellectualpropertyrightsintheintroductionoftemporarymeasures,introducedinthispartofitsspecificprovisionsareverynecessary.Secondly,intellectualpropertyrightsTemporaryRestrainingOrderinthedispute'ssuitableprinciple.TemporaryRestrainingOrderisadouble-edgedsword,usedproperlywillimprovetheprotectionofintellectualproperty,butwillbenoreasontriggeredadispute.ThereforegraspsprocessinginternationalintellectualpropertyrightsTemporaryRestrainingOrderdispute'sprincipleisalsoveryimportant.Finally,elaboratedtheinternationalintellectualpropertyrightsTemporaryRestrainingOrderappliedcode,wasright“thepossibilitywhichwon”and“theirretrievableloss”hascarriedoncertaindiscussion.ThethirdparthascarriedontheelaborationtoourcountryintellectualpropertyrightsTemporaryRestrainingOrderlegislativepresentsituationandtheexistencequestion.Inthispart,theauthorintroducedTemporaryRestrainingOrderfromourcountryintellectualpropertyprotectionthereasontoobtain,tointroduceinourcountrycurrentlawsystemrelatedTemporaryRestrainingOrderlegalrule,andothersafeguardmechanismhascarriedonTemporaryIVRestrainingOrderandinourcountrycivilprocedurelawthebriefcomparison,thenelaboratedTemporaryRestrainingOrdertoimplementthesituationaswellastheexistencequestioninourcountryjudicaturepractice.Thefourthpart,inthepreviouspartofmultianalysisourcountryTemporaryRestrainingOrderdeficiency'sfoundation,theauthorunifiedourcountrynationalconditionandtheaboveseveralpartsofelaboration,howtoconsummateourcountryTemporaryRestrainingOrderexistenceseveralquestionstocarryontheelaboration,andproposedfurtherconsummatesourcountryTemporaryRestrainingOrdersometentativeplans.KeyWords:InjunctionTemporaryRestrainingOrderTRIPS441TRIPSTRIPSWTOTRIPS502injunctionprimafacie[1][2](Interdicere)[3][4]12[5]31415[6];(Specificperformance)131970(1)[7](935)(940)(940)12434()(2)123(3)[8]1482488:53(486)(4)15(Interlocutoryinjunction)[9][10]1975(Marevainjunction)[11]2090(5)(temporaryrestrainingorder)(preliminaryinjunction)(permanentinjunction)612MadisonvDucktownSulphur,Copper&IronC.[12]1,0002003KrebiozenresearchFoundationvBeaconPress[13]Krebiozen7123[14][15]812394510prohibitoryinjunctionmandatoryinjunction[16][17]onthemerit1,112,12TRIPSTRIPSPreliminaryInjunctionInterlocutoryInjunctionorInterimInjunction),TRIPS50ProvisionalMeasures,TRIPSTRIPSWTO()TRIPS41TRIPS44501(a)(b)234135642031()1278TRIPS445044501[18]19981999[19][20]214TRIPS[21]3TRIPSTRIPS631TRIPS502315165.[22]?[23][24]16[25]2TRIPS,,,[26]1217PHAEXIGXIG3,[27]1812010()192200220061043042583.17%6422060792.67%21820896.07%483WTOWTOWTOWTOWTOWTOWTO(((TRIPS)50TRIPS41TRIPSWTOTRIPS1984199221362001121150200082561574920016520011225120008256193969920016123224567891011749293257939699200112233499396992002103012492487225;;200110,[28].[29]126():[30][31]20021227([2002]365):20034121();2()3[32]27:;45()3[33]2002712:()[34]28TRIPS112482923()103031TRIPSWTO1Injunction2323TRIPS616161[35]33ELILILLYandCompany[36]2670468[37][38]48[39]3448[40]48;5TRIPS5024TRIPS3592:36TRIPSWTOTRIPS37[1].[M].:,1988.453.[2]DavidStockwoodQC.Injunctions[M].London:TheCarswellcompanyLimited.1985.16.[3]:[M].:,1992:238.[4].[M].:,1993:548.[5].[M].:1993:549.[6].[J].,2003,3:52.[7].[M].:,2001:254.[8]