• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.61
• /
• pp.29-55
• /
• 2014

Subject matter of international trade are various. They contain not only tangible assets such as goods but also intangible assets including service, technology, and capital etc. Technology, a creation of the human intellect, is important as it is the main creative power to produce goods. It can be divided into Patent, Trademark, Know-how and so on. These Technologies are protected by the national and international laws on regulations for the Intellectual Property Rights(IPR), since technology development is needed a lot of time and effort, and the owner of the technology may have crucial benefits for creating and delivering better goods and services to users and customers. Therefore, any licensee who wants to use the technology which other person(licensor) owns, he(the licensee) and the original owner(the licensor) shall make Technology Transfer Contract. Differently from the International Sales Contract in which seller provides the proprietary rights of goods for buyer, in the case of International Transfer of Technology Contract, the licensor doesn't provide proprietary rights of technologies with the licensee, on the contrary the right of using is only allowed during the contract. The purpose of this paper is to examine the main issues in International Transfer of Technology Contract. This author focused on the main obligations of both parties, namely licensor's obligation to provide the technology and licensee's obligation to pay the royalty. As every country has different local mandatory laws about Intellectual Property Rights(IPR) and these mandatory rules and laws prevails over the contract, the related rules and laws should be examined carefully by both parties in advance. Especially the rules and laws about the competition limitation in the local country of licensee and the economic union(like the EU) should be checked before contracting. In addition, the contract has much more complicate and delicate aspects than other international business contracts, so both parties should review carefully before singing the contract.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.64
• /
• pp.39-64
• /
• 2014

The object of International License Contract is technology. Technology is means to produce visible goods, which are human's intellectual creations such as Intellectual Property Right - patent, design, trademark- and Know-how. Unlike visible goods which decrease as being used, these technologies are possible to be produced expansively and develop additionally. Therefore, the way to make a contract of goods is a sales contract which transfers ownership while technology follows license contract which gives approval of use for a certain period. International license contract means that licensor has right to possess, allows licensee to use licensed technology for a fixed period and takes royalty. So there are various matters such as selection of the duration of a contract, confirmation of technology range, competition limitation, technique guidance and support, calculation of royalty, withholding tax between parties. This study examines licensor's grant of license and competition limitation. Intellectual property rights fundamentally give exclusive rights to the creator so the licensor use or dispose of his or her intellectual property rights at will. Technology transfer is possible through license contract because of this right. But licensor must exercise his or her intellectual property rights within a reasonable limit. It means, when licensor makes an unreasonable demand abusing his or her position, it is regarded as competition limitation clause and the deal itself may become null. Therefore, restraint on competition needs to be examined in detail as it influences on contract validity. Each country has their own competition laws for establishing a fair market order and inspection guide and guideline for judging whether there is any unfair act related to intellectual property rights. Judgment on intellectual property rights is subject the technology-introduced country's domestic laws and thus, contracting parties each need to precede opposite nation's domestic laws system.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.227-245
• /
• 2004

Studies on compensation structures of international technology licensing show that the level of intellectual property protection in the host market and the favorableness of the host country's economic environment are positively related to the use of running royalty-based compensation structure. Lump-sum fee or fixed royalty compensation is more likely to be used in the introduction and decline stages of the technology life cycle, and running royalty compensation in the growth stage. The international experience and the size of the licensor company are positively related to the use of running royalty. In this theoretical context, this paper analyzes the choice of compensation structures in Korean technology imports. The paper uses the officially reported data to analyze the compensation structures. It analyzes the characteristics of the compensation structures in terms of fixed royalty and running royalty by licensor country, group of licensor countries and size of licensee companies.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 2004.06a
• /
• pp.151-169
• /
• 2004

Studies on compensation structures of international technology licensing show that the level of intellectual property protection in the host market and the favorableness of the host country's economic environment are positively related to the use of running royalty-based compensation structure. Lump-sum fee or fixed royalty compensation is more likely to be used in the introduction and decline stages of the technology life cycle, and running royalty compensation in the growth stage. The international experience and the size of the licensor company are positively related to the use of running royalty. In this theoretical context, this paper analyzes the compensation structures of technology import in Korea. The paper uses the officially reported data to analyze the compensation structures. It analyzes the characteristics of the compensation structures in terms of fixed royalty and running royalty by licensor country, group of licensor countries and size of licensee companies.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.507-531
• /
• 2004

This study examines the underlying properties of compensation structures and empirically test the difference in a various aspects of the compensation structures of Korean technology imports. In particular, this study looks into the trends of technology licensing from abroad in Korea and analyze the patterns of compensation structures in terms of compensation type, contract period and royalty rate by licensor country, group of licensor countries, size of licensee companies and area of licensed technologies. By doing so, this paper investigates how compensation structures in international technology transactions are determined in Korea and draw implications from the process of discussion.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.73
• /
• pp.1-20
• /
• 2017

There are many safeguards and measures available regulating the protection of a trademark and its registered holder, however, the protection of a licensee in a trademark license agreement is also important for protection of a intellectual property. Therefore, there are several measures in place for the protection of licensees' interests in Chinese trademark law. Article 43(3) of the Chinese Trademark Law rules a licensor who licenses others to use his registered trademark shall submit the trademark licensing to the trademark office for file, and the trademark office shall announce the trademark licensing to public. Without filing, the trademark licensing shall not be used against a bona fide third party. It means a licensee can not use an unrecorded license with the relevant trademark authority against third parties - essentially, this means that a licensee should insist on having their trademark license agreements recorded against the relevant trademark authority, so that a licensee's interests are protected as against the assignees, licensees and other types of third parties. Otherwise a third party in good faith can use the registered trademark legally against a licensee even though a trademark license agreement between a licensor and licensee is still valid.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.42-78
• /
• 1998

This paper proposes a semantics of the Korean NPI te isang 'anymore', which occurs in negative contexts. The NPI te isang is characterized, in Zwarts's(1990) term, as a strong NPI which requires an anti-additive function as its licensor. It is also noted that te isang is licensed by 'implied negative predicates' such as shilheha-'hate' and phokiha-'give up' only when it occurs within a clausal argument of the implied negative predicates. This fact is accounted for in terms of the function-argument structure and the scope relation between the NPI te isang and the implied negative predicates involved.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.11 no.4
• /
• pp.476-509
• /
• 2008

This research investigates the determinant factors of technology licensing contracts and the relative importance of each factor. To accomplish this objective we classify various factors affecting technology licenses into two categories, technology and environment, and conduct an Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) with a Korean expert survey. From the AHP results, we find that the possibility of commercial success, as well as the scope and levels of exclusive rights which are transferred together with technology to the licensee, are very important among technological factors in technology transfer. Moreover, we conclude that the technology utilization capacity and the learning capabilities of the licensee are also important environmental factors. Finally, we conclude that the factors which the licensor and licensee consider in technology transfer are different from each other. Based on this result, we discuss implications with regard to reducing this factor gap between the licensor and licensee as a means of promoting and improving technology transfer in the Republic of Korea.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.59
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this paper is to examine the several points at issue in international technology transfer contract from licensor's and licensee's perspectives, and to refer them when the licensor and the licensee draw up the contract. This author analyzed the critical points of the related provisions of ICC Model International Technology Transfer Contract(2009) by citing the explanations of the Introduction of the Model Contract. The provisions of the Model Contract are generally divided into two categolies; specific conditions and general conditions. This author selected four topics in the specific conditions; Contents of the Contract, Royalty, Modification and/or Improvements of Products, and Territory and Competition. Likewise this author selected three topics in the general conditions; Resolutions of Disputes, Applicable Law and Taxes. Both parties need to be mindful of the following points in the above topics, when they draw up the contract. First, both parties should make the definitions of special terminologies clear, which are included in the Contract. Second, before the parties sign the Contract, they should check any approvals to be necessary by the both countries' governments. Third, for the calculation of the royalty, they should clear the criteria, the scope, and the object. Fourth, as the local laws or regional laws regarding the territory limitation and taxation are mandatory, any provisions of the Contract should not be inconsistent with them. Therefore, both parties should check before-hand the local laws or rules related with the provisions of the Contract. Fifth, when the parties draw up the Contract, they should examine the Provisions of Dispute Resolution in consideration of the Governing Law. Thus both parties decide to make the technology transfer contract, the three aspects namely profitability, legal conflict with mandatory rules, and sustainability of the business resulting from the Contract should be examined in advance, and then proceed the business using the technology transfer.

• 한국신재생에너지학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2008.05a
• /
• pp.368-371
• /
• 2008

The optimal operation condition of gasifier is one of the most important parameters to increase efficiency and reliability in IGCC plant. Also the prediction of the syngas composition and quantity must be predicted to carry out process design of the gasification plant. However, the gasifier process licensor are protective with information on process design and optimal gasifier design conditions. So, the most of process studies in the engineering company for gasification plant have carried out to look for key parameters and optimal design conditions using several prediction methods. In this paper, we present the estimated preliminary optimal operation condition of the 300MW Demonstration Entrain Flow Gasifier using Aspen Plus. The gasifier operation temperature considering slag flow was predicted by FactSage software and Annen Model.