• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.93-112
• /
• 2004

A license under UCITA(Uniform Computer Information Transactions Act) which represents the first comprehensive uniform computer information licensing law is not fundamentally rooted in intellectual property law such as patent or copyright law. A license under UCITA is simply a commercial contract, dependent wholly on the parties' ability to enter into a normal, commercial contract, just as a contract of sale or lease is simply and wholly a commercial contract. However, intellectual property rights may be licensed in a contract subject to UCITA. UCITA may not be used to vary or extend informational rights that are intellectual property rights, and expressly recognizes preemption by copyright, patent, or other federal intellectual property law in Section 105(b). Like the law of sales and leases, in general, the right to contract is constrained by principles of unconscionability, good faith and fair dealing, UCITA has an additional restraint, an express power for a court to deny enforcement of a provision in a licensing contract that violates fundamental public policy. This public policy defense is unique in UCITA. An essential purpose of this defense is to give courts some latitude in reconciling commercial licensing law with the principles of intellectual property law. Most intellectual property law is federal, and UCITA expressly recognizes the preemptive effect of that federal law. But the public policy defense gives courts an additional power to consider intellectual property principles purely within the context commercial law.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.313-333
• /
• 2017

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.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.69-89
• /
• 2021

General lawsuits can be chosen as a method of resolving patent disputes. However, a significant amount of time and money is wasted on litigation until the dispute is resolved. The Intellectual Property Framework Act in Korea requires the government to simplify litigation procedures and improve litigation systems to resolve intellectual property disputes quickly and fairly. As a result, accurate and timely resolution of patent disputes is given importance by the Korean government. Interest in arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution is growing. Although dispute resolution through arbitration is effective, the issue of resolving patent disputes through arbitration can lead to the arbitrability of patent disputes. It is therefore necessary to examine arbitrability of patent contracts and validity disputes. Korea has made efforts to reflect the model arbitration law of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law for quick judicial resolution of patent disputes. Korea has also strengthened related systems for alternative resolutions. However, improving the arbitration system will necessitate a thorough examination of the systems and practices of the United States which is the country in the forefront of intellectual property. This paper examines the arbitrability of Korea's patent dispute and makes recommendations for more efficient dispute resolution system changes.

• 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 the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.17 no.12
• /
• pp.394-399
• /
• 2016

This study examines how the patent results of the University Academic-Industrial Cooperation influence technology transfer. Statistical analysis was performed by using 2013 panel data from the Ministry of Education and Science Technology(MEST) National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) and the results are as follows. The results show that the patent result factors that have a positive effect on the total number of technology transfers are domestic patent application numbers, foreign patent application numbers, future technology(6T) patent application numbers, science technology patent application numbers. The factors that have a positive effect on increasing royalty are the total number of technology transfers. Domestic patent application numbers, future technology(6T) patent application numbers and science technology patent application numbers have a positive effect on patent results. The results implicate that more research and development is needed for more patents to be applied, that the main focus should be on future technology(6T) and science technology fields, and that effort should be directed at planning negotiation strategies for the term of the contract. However, this study is the need to research, including primary research is so patent performance may be limited in having only been considered in future studies of human and material resources and operating system factors that may be presented to the essential elements of the Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation this raises.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.199-241
• /
• 2004

This paper discusses to what extent the party autonomy can be allowed in intellectual property dispute resolution agreements in determination of governing law, international jurisdiction, and ADR agreement for arbitration, etc. in considering of the territoriality principle of IP. The party autonomy in choice of governing law and jurisdiction can be fully enjoyed in IP contract disputes. However, the freedom of choice is limited to the disputes regarding IF infringement disputes. The party autonomy is denied in the issues of determination of validity of patent or other IP rights. The author seeks the possibility to allow as much freedom in making choice of applicable law or jurisdiction, or entering into arbitration agreement.

• Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management
• /
• v.43 no.3
• /
• pp.273-288
• /
• 2015

Purpose: In this study, we apply environmental stress screening (ESS) to battle management system (BMS) of a tank and use the ESS profile based on production process data, guided by MIL-HDBK-781/344/2164. Methods: To optimize ESS Profile of the BMS of a tank, we estimate ESS model parameters (e.g., defect density, screening strength) using primary production failure reporting and corrective action system (FRACAS) data of military supply contract firm. Results: First, we collect the Primary production FRACAS data of military supply contract firm. Second, we compute curve fitting approach to find patent defect density and latent defect density using FRACAS data. Third, we solve the equation of Defect Density(patent defect density + latent defect density)($D_{IN}$) and Screening Strength(SS) Using second step data. As a result of analysis according to the order, we calculate $D_{IN}$(Temperature stress case : 74.02, Vibration stress : 10.252) and : SS(Temperature stress case : 0.4632, Vibration stress : 0.4142) and confirm the Condition II-D based on MIL-HDBK-344. According to Condition II-D, it is necessary to modify existing ESS profile through decreasing the $D_{IN}$ and increasing the SS. Conclusion: Identification of defect causes through ESS approach reduce defect densities for production. It provides feedback to a lessons-learned data base to avoid similar problems on next generation tank BMS.

• Journal of Korean Society of Industrial and Systems Engineering
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.39-52
• /
• 2023

In this study, project information of government-funded research institute in the food field was collected and analyzed to systematically identify the factors affecting the process of transferring technological achievements of public research institute to the private sector. This study hypothesized that human resources, financial resources, and technological characteristics as input factors of R&D projects affect output factors, such as research papers or patents produced by R&D projects. Moreover, these outputs would serve as drivers of the technology transfer as one of the R&D outcomes. Linear Regression Analysis and Poisson Regression Analysis were conducted to empirically and sequentially investigate the relationship between input factors and output and outcome of R&D projects and the results are as follows: First, the principle investigator's career and participating researcher's size as human resource factors have an influence on both the number of SCI (science citation index) papers and patent registration. Second, the research duration and research expenses for the current year have an influence on the number of SCI papers and patent registrations, which are the main outputs of R&D projects. Third, the technology life cycle affects the number of SCI papers and patent registrations. Lastly, the higher the number of SCI papers and patent registrations, the more it affected the number of technology transfers and the amount of technology transfer contract.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.27-45
• /
• 2017

A new phenomenon in recent trade is the rising interest in the trade of product production and manufacturing methods themselves, unlike in the past, when the interest was focused on the trade of tangible goods. That is, technology is considered as the object of trade instead of a simple element of production as "technology itself is commercialized". The broad meaning of technology encompasses all the property of knowledge with economic value. Its narrow meaning refers to technology used to produce and manufacture goods. Technologies have features such as no forms, heterogeneity, accumulation of value and extinction of right. The trade of technology commands different styles and content from that of tangible goods due to their unique characteristics; and accordingly, has various risk factors. In other words, technology can be traded in various ways according to commercial objectives including licensing, technical partnership, and joint investment in addition to general trading. The specific forms of technology transfer strategies depend on the purposes and situations between corporations. In case of technical trade with any form, the parties should be cautious about the following practical aspects: First, the contract should clearly define the scope and transfer method of technology. It is a very important matter how the provider of technology will provide the user of technology with abstract technology with no substantiality. Second, a monopoly on technology recognized as intellectual property rights is granted to their inventors for some periods of time, but anyone can have access to that technology after the term of existence. Thus, it is important to check the terms of existence of a patent as well as the terms of contract. Third, the user of technology should fulfill his confidentiality obligation to prevent the technology of the provider from being leaked to a third party unjustly. Fourth, the provider of technology should make a contribution to the successful implementation of the technology by the user as well as provide the licensed technology. Finally, a model contract is recommended to minimizing the legal hiatus of complex technology transfer trade when concluding a contract.