Browse > Article

A Study on the Protection for Original Technology and Improved Patent when Research Institutes or Universities Transfer their Research Outputs  

Kang, Sun Joon (한국과학기술연구원(KIST) 기술정책연구소 정책기획팀, 과학기술연합대학원대학교(UST), 한양대학교 과학기술정책학과)
Kim, Min Ji (한국기술벤처재단 정책사업실)
Won, Yoo Hyung (한국과학기술연구원(KIST) 기술정책연구소 정책실)
Oh, Keon Taek (한국과학기술연구원(KIST), 한국기술벤처재단)
Publication Information
Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society / v.20, no.2, 2017 , pp. 313-333 More about this Journal
Abstract
As science and technology advanced, specialized and massive, development through mutual cooperation or research based on patent licensing such as material transfer contract, technology transfer contract etc are actively taking place to minimize or separate the cost and risk of R&D. In R&D, such mutual work can enjoy the merit of division of labor by effectively allocating resources and manpower to accomplish its goal. Inevitably, however, there are also many possibilities of disputes regarding the ownership and use of intellectual property rights resulting from such mutual/post-studies, or inventions upgraded by using prior patents. The case reviewed by this paper is noticeable regarding the recent trend of upgraded inventions. In the case, a pharmaceutical company conducted tests/assessments on the complete technology of patent owned by a university on the premise of transferring the technology, and then terminated the technology transfer contract due to reasons of toxicity. The university then filed a damage claim suit against the company for infringing the contract. This is a dispute case betw een a university which developed a potential ingredient for new medicine and a pharmaceutical company which agreed to transfer and receive the technological later on. Regarding the upgraded inventions of source patents, this case has many implications on the protection of prior patents, research contract, and research security to protect the accomplishment of research. This paper reviews the subject ruling and the protection of upgraded patents and source technologies. As critical notes, the paper also summarizes the major issues of case ruling to observe the standard of ruling patent infringement related to the extortion of upgraded patents. Then, through the ruling of the case above, the paper suggests implications and future strategies.
Keywords
Upgraded Patent; Upgraded Invention; Source Technology; Technology Protection; Accomplishment Protection;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 사법연수원 (2008), 특허법, 사법연수원편집부.
2 송영식.이상정.황종환 (1999), 지적소유권법(상), 육법사.
3 윤선희 (2010), 특허법 (제4판), 법문사.
4 이경란.임병웅 (2013), 이지특허법 (제11판), 한빛지적소유권센터.
5 곽민섭 (2009), "특허법적 간접침해에 있어서 공용성의 인정범위", 특허판례연구, 박영사.
6 권태복 (2013), "선발명 실시자와 후발명 특허권자의 법적분쟁 해결방안에 관한 연구", 과학기술법연구, 19(3): 193-226.
7 김관식 (2014), "특허법상 우선권 주장이 있는 경우에 있어서 발명의 동일성 판단 기준", 과학기술법연구, 20(1): 3-42.
8 김경선 (2009), "공동연구개발계약에 관한 연구-개발성과물인 지적재산권의 귀속을 중심으로-", 경영법률, 19(3): 405-435.
9 김수진 (1993), "특허법의 제문제(상) - 균등론", 한빛지적소유권센터.
10 김재국.김장생 (2004), "특허권침해의 판단기준으로서 균등의 원칙", 민사법연구, 12(2): 231-261.
11 박영규 (2009), "개량발명 보호를 위한 우선권제도의 역할", 법조 제632호.
12 박영규 (2013), "기술혁신을 위한 우선권 제도의 역할", 한국특허법학회 2013년 8월 정기학회발표논문.
13 윤선희 (1993), "기술도입계약에 있어서 개량발명의 고찰(1)", 발명특허, 18(12): 35-42.
14 윤선희 (1994), "기술도입계약에 있어서 개량발명의 고찰(완)", 발명특허, 19(1): 22-25.
15 대법원 1965. 8.24. 선고 64후16 판결.
16 대법원 1993.10.26. 선고 93다3103 판결.
17 대법원 1995.12. 5. 선고 92후1660 판결.
18 대법원 2002.11. 8. 선고 2000다27602 판결.
19 대법원 2009. 5.14. 선고 2008다90095 90101 판결.
20 대법원 2009. 9.10. 선고 2007후3356 판결.
21 대법원 2015. 5.14. 선고 2014후2788 판결.