شرط مبادله‌ی پیشرفت‌ها در قراردادهای مجوز بهره‌برداری از حق اختراع

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار حقوق مالکیت فکری دانشگاه قم

2 استادیار حقوق خصوصی دانشگاه شیراز

چکیده

شرط مبادله­ی پیشرفت­های انجام شده نسبت به اختراعی که مجوز بهره­برداری از آن اعطا شده، امروزه به یکی از مهم­ترین شروط قراردادهای مجوز بهره­برداری تبدیل شده است. این شرط هم آثار مفید برای رقابت و هم آثار ضدرقابتی دارد که توجه ویژه حقوق رقابت را می‌طلبد. در حقوق آمریکا، این شروط که قبلاً غیرقانونی تلقی می­شدند، اکنون به­صورت موردی بر طبق ضابطه­ی منطقی و به­عنوان جزیی از کل قرارداد مورد ارزیابی قرار می­گیرند و غیرقانونی بودن آن‌ها شاید به اعلام غیرقانونی بودن قرارداد منجر شود. در اتحادیه­ی اروپایی فقط شروط انحصاری مبادله به­طور موردی بررسی می­شوند و کل قرارداد تحت تأثیر آن­ها قرار نمی­گیرد و امکان دارد بقیه شروط قرارداد از ممنوعیت کلی ماده­ی 101 معاهده­ی عملکرد اتحادیه­ی اروپایی[1] معاف شوند. در حقوق ایران، این شروط موضوعی جدید محسوب می­شوند که بر طبق قواعد عمومی قراردادها و به­دلیل متعارف بودن صحیح محسوب می­شوند. این شرط در قانون اجرای سیاست­های کلی اصل 44 قانون اساسی به­طور خاص بیان نشده و فقط در صورتی مشمول این قانون و ممنوع خواهد بود که مصداق شرط غیرمنصفانه و سوء­استفاده از وضعیت مسلط اقتصادی باشد. البته مفهوم شرط غیرمنصفانه در قانون یادشده بیان نشده و باید به­صورت موردی بررسی شود.


 

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Grant-back Clauses in Patent Licensing Agreements

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mostafa Bakhtiarvand 1
  • Majid Sarbazian 2
چکیده [English]

Nowadays, grant-back clauses are one of the most important conditions in patent licensing agreements. These conditions have beneficial impact on competition and anti-competitive behaviour that require special attention by competition law. In America, the provisions that were previously considered illegal are now assessed in accordance with rational criteria and as a part of the contracts.The illegality of these provisions may lead to the illegality of the contract. In Europe, only exclusive grant-backs are subject to an individual assessment, and not as a part of more global contract.Other conditions of the contract areexempt from general prohibition considered in Article 101 of European Treaty. In Iranian law, these provisionsare new issues which can be justified by the concept of reasonableness and the general rules of contracts. This condition does not specifically mention in General Policies of Implementation of Article 44 of the Constitution.  It is forbidden if it is regarded as an unfair term oras an abusive of dominant economic conditions.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Patent
  • license
  • Grant-back clause- Competition law
-    خویی، سید ابوالقاسم، (1403 ه.ق)، مصباح الفقاهه، ج5، قم، موسسه نشر اسلامی.

-    صفایی، سید حسین، (1383)، قواعد عمومی قراردادها، چاپ 2، تهران، میزان.

-    کاتوزیان، عقود معین (1)،  (1384)، تهران، شرکت سهامی انتشار، چاپ هفتم.

-   Adam Hemlock & Jennifer Wu, U.S. Antitrust Implications of Patent Licensing, "Federal Law Review" 39 (2005)

-   Anderman, S. (1998), EC Competition Law and Intellectual Property Rights: The Regulation of Innovation. Oxford University Press.

-   Aranda, Maria Luisa, (2005),  Technology Licensing Agreements Comparative Study between the EU and the U.S.,  Master Thesis,  Faculty of Law, University of Lund, available at: http://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func= downloadFile&recordOId=1554934&fileOId=1563492.

-   Baumgartener, Anna Maria, (2013), Antitrust Issues in Technology Transfer: A Comparative Legal Analysis of Patent Licenses in the EU and the U.S, TFL Working Papers, No.18.

-   Black, Henry Campbell, (1990), Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed, West Publishing Co.   

-   Bowman Jr, Ward S.  (1957), Tying Arrangements and the Leverage Problem, Faculty Scholarship Series. Paper 4246, available at: http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/4246.

-   Chevigny, Paul G. (1966), The Validity of Grant-Back Agreements Under the Antitrust Laws, "Fordham Law Review", Volume 34, Issue 4, 569-592.

-   Choi, Jay Pil, (2002), A Dynamic Analysis of Licensing: The ‘‘Boomerang’’ Effect and Grant-back Clauses, "International Economic Review", Vol. 43, No. 3, 803-830

-   Chow, Daniel (2014), C.K, A Comparison of EU and China Competition Laws that Apply to Technology Transfer Agreements, "I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy", Vol.9:3, pp.497-530.

-   Cockburn, Iain M. (2007), Conference on Economics of Technology Policy Monte Verità, June 2007, Available at: https://faculty.fuqua.duke.edu

-   Commission Regulation (EC) No 240/96 of 31 January 1996 on the application of Article 85 (3) of the Treaty to certain categories of technology transfer agreements, Official Journal L 031 , 09/02/1996 P. 0002 - 0013. 

-   Commission Regulation (EC) No 772/2004 of 27 April 2004 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of technology transfer agreements.

-   Commission Regulation (EU) No 316/2014 of 21 March 2014 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of technology transfer agreements.

-   European Commission, Communication from the Commission, Guidelines on the application of Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to technology transfer agreements (2014/C 89/03).

-   Gilbert R.J., C. Shapiro (1997) “Antitrust Issues in the Licensing of Intellectual Property: The Nine No-Nos Meet the Nineties”, Brookings Papers: Microeconomics 1997, 283-349.

-   Jay Pil Choi, A Dynamic Analysis of Licensing: the "Boomerang" Effect and Grant-Back Clauses, International Economic Review, Vol.43, No.3, August 2002. 

-   Leaffer, Marshall, (2010), Patent Misuse and Innovation, "High Tech. law", Vol. X: No. 2, 2010, 142-167.

-   Linowitz, Sol M. (2014), Antitrust Aspects of Grant Back Clauses in License Agreements, "Cornell Law Review", Volume 43 Issue 2.

-   Moreira, Solon et al (2012), Cooperation or Competition: Grant-Back Clauses in Technology Licensing Contracts, University of Cambridge /The Moeller Centre, available at: http://druid8.sit.aau.dk/acc_papers/ain1su9m8x2tjii0rtlonyktvidl.pdf

-   Morris PS.)2008) Grant-backs and No Challenge Clauses in Europe: What Lessons from the MedImmune v Genentech Case? "World Competition"31(1): 113-126

-   Moynihan, Alistair Maughan, Andreas Grünwald, (2014), Technology Transfer Areements and EU Antitrust Law, 2014.

-   Moynihan, Deirdre, Maughan, Alistair, Grünwald, Andreas, (2014), Technology Transfer Agreements and EU Antitrust Law , Client Alert, Morrison & Foerster LLP. Available at: http://www.mofo.com/~/media/Files/ClientAlert/ 140331TechnologyTransferAgreements.pdf.

-   Nagaoka1, Sadao, Kwon,  Hyeog Ug, (2003), Unilateral vs. Cross Licensing : A theory and new evidence on the firm-level determinants, Research Associate, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, Tokyo, Japan, available at: http://www.academia.edu/4077343/Unilateral_vs._cross_ licensing_A_theory_and_new_evidence_on_the_firm-level_determinants.

-   Orbach, Barak, (2012), How Antitrust Lost Its Goal, "Fordham Law Review" (2012), Volume 81 | Issue 5 Article 6.

-   Perlegos, Pete, (2005), Cross-Licensing, available at: http://perlegos.com/ lawschool/crosslicensing.pdf

-   Pitofsky, Robert, (2001), Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Unresolved Issues at the Heart of the New Economy, "BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LAW JOURNAL", Vol. 16, 535-559.

-   Regibeau, Pierre, Rockett, Katharine, (2001), Assessment of Potential Anticompetitive Conduct in the Field of Intellectual Property Rights and Assessment of the Interplay Between Competition Policy and IPR Protection, COMP/2010/16, November 2011

-   Schmalbeck, Richard, (1975), The validity of grant back clauses in patent licensing agreements, "The University of Chicago Law Review", No. 42, 733-748

-   Sheila F. Anthony, Antitrust and Intellectual Property Law: From Adversaries to Partners, AIPLA Quarterly Journal, Winter 2000, Vol. 28, p.5. 

-   SOMNATH BHATTACHARYYA (2007), U.S. Philips Corp. v. International Trade Commission: Seeking a Better Tie Between Antitrust Law and Package Licensing, "Columbia Journal of Law and Social Problems", vol. 40.

-   Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union [2008] OJ C115/47.

-   U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, (1995), Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property Issued by the April 6, 1995, available at: https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/attachments/ competition-policy-guidance/0558.pdf.

-   U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, (2007), Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition, available at: www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/hearings/ip/ 222655. pdf.

-   U.S. Sherman Act of 1890.

-   WIPO, (2005), Exchanging value, negotiating technology license agreement, a training manual.