• STI Policy Review
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.62-86
• /
• 2017

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) system is one of the major institutions for incentivizing innovation. However, a strong IPR regime does not necessarily encourage innovation every time. This is because a variety of factors come into play in configuring the ways the IPR system interacts with the dynamics of innovation. In the present study, we examine whether different degrees of absorptive capacity at the industry level bring about heterogeneous effects of a strong IPR regime on the innovation capability of innovators across different industries in developing country. Using the case of the 1986 IPR reform in Korea, which permitted patenting pharmaceutical products and copyrighting computer programs, we analyze the quality of patents produced by Korean applicants between 1982 and 1991. Our analysis finds no evidence that the IPR reform improved the innovation capability of innovators in the two aforementioned sectors, but rather affected their patenting behavior differently.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• 제46권1호
• /
• pp.53-89
• /
• 2024

The effects of the betterment of enforced intellectual property rights (IPRs) provisions on services export diversification are investigated. The analysis used an unbalanced panel dataset of 76 developing countries over the period of 1970-2014. The empirical analysis is based on the feasible generalized least squares estimator. It suggests that the implementation of weaker IPR protection fosters services export diversification in less developed countries (i.e., those whose real per capita incomes are less than US$US$ 1458.60), including those with a low level of export product upgrading. Conversely, in relatively advanced developing countries (countries whose real per capita income exceeds US$ 3356.80), including those with high levels of export product upgrading, the implementation of stronger IPR laws induces greater services export diversification. Finally, the analysis revealed the existence of a non-linear relationship between IPR protection and services export diversification. The implementation of stronger intellectual property laws spurs services export diversification in countries with high degree of IPR protection, especially when IPR protection exceeds a certain level, recorded here as having a score of 1.197. In contrast, in countries with weaker IPR protection, in particular those with IPR protection levels that score less than 0.915, it is rather the implementation of weaker intellectual property laws that promotes services export diversification.

• 한국도서관정보학회지
• /
• 제20권
• /
• pp.455-470
• /
• 1993

In recent years, the intellectual property rights (IPR) are increasingly becoming trade goods and the subject of international trade negotiations. During the past decades, intellectual properties earned critical importance for economic development in both developed and developing countries. Developed countries, headed by the United States, that recognize the economic value of the IPR in the world market are aggressively seeking for universal protection of IPR throughout the world. Intellectual properties have unique qualities that distinguish them from other tangible goods. Most importantly, they are public goods created on the basis of knowledge and information accumulated throughout human history and shared by different cultures. However, there is a growing tendency that the quality of public goods are being etched away as the property concept in IPR expands. In this paper, I discuss how copyright and patent laws incorporated the concept of property right as natural right to one's intellectual creations in early formation of the laws in Europe. I argue that copyright law and patent law are the historical products resulting from political, economic, and ideological factors interacting in a certain society. A history of copyright and patent points to that the intellectual property rights as natural lights of authors and inventors as argued by developed countries in international disputes, are not universal, but unique historical products. Copyright and patent laws have been shaped and developed as regulatory measures by governments to promote and control industries by providing authors and inventors with monopoly incentives. Since property right was used as a regulatory device it was restricted. This is to enhance the distribution of knowledge and information rather than to ensure the property right as an absolute right.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제34권1호
• /
• pp.51-74
• /
• 2024

Korea continues to invest in the IT industry and is currently regarded as one of the five major powerhouses in the field of intellectual property. However, it is evaluated that this status is only limited, and the level of intellectual property protection and dispute resolution does not reach a level commensurate with the status of one of the five major intellectual property powers. To address these problems, the Korean government has enacted the Arbitration Industry Promotion Act in 2017, which aims to strengthen national competitiveness by fostering the arbitration system as an industry and provide systematic support so that the arbitration industry can become a future growth engine. In addition, in accordance with Article 3 of the 「Arbitration Industry Promotion Act」, the Minister of Justice must establish "the Basic Plan for Arbitration Industry Promotion" every 5 years. Great efforts must be put into establishing an Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) system at the KCAB for five years from 2024 to 2028, the Second Basic Plan for the Promotion of the Arbitration Industry period. Under these circumstances, this study presents implications and improvement measures for the development of the intellectual property-related arbitration system to protect Korea's intellectual property rights and contribute to more active intellectual property creation. In particular, this study proposes a plan to build an one-stop digital platform for KCAB to implement an efficient ODR system.

• Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.53-65
• /
• 2016

The authors in this paper aim to identify the growth of literature on Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). The research publications on IPRs were downloaded from the Scopus online citation database and the authors found that there were 1,513,138 records contributed globally over a period of 10 years from 2005 to 2014. The distribution of publications based on the year, country, and document type were studied. Relative growth rate (RGR) of the publications and doubling time (T_d) were calculated. Most productive organizations, source titles, and the productive authors on IPR research were studied. Most cited articles in the study area were identified. The results show that a number of publications under the subjects Medicine and Engineering were produced. The developed countries are very active in IPR research and producing publications. It is found that one institution which holds the sixth place among the top 10 most productive institutions belongs to Brazil, a developing country. Two developing countries such as China and India hold second and tenth positions respectively in the top 10 countries contributing literature on IPRs.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.165-188
• /
• 2008

Some developed countries have already long been adapted to these changes in the international economic environment would improve productivity rather than traditional technology based on more high value-added business and increased investment. IPR protection is not just a national interest in the creation and growth of dimensions beyond the country's national competitiveness and a driving force to decide whether to challenge the core of the matter. Therefore, the importance of IPR in the country to raise awareness of IPR protection, and for systematic and comprehensive policy that will continue to be prepared.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제16권4호
• /
• pp.79-102
• /
• 2014

병행수입은 진정상품을 제3자가 국내의 상표권자 또는 전용사용권자의 허락 없이 수입하는 행위를 말한다. 이는 국가 간 가격 차이에 의해서 발생하게 되고 일반적으로 국제무역과 지적재산권에 영향을 주게 된다. 본 논문은 한국과 중국의 병행수입제도에 대해 특허권, 상표권, 저작권 등 지적재산권법을 중심으로 살펴보고 양국의 병행수입 허용여부와 그 기준을 비교분석한다. 양국 모두 지적재산권법 상에서 병행수입제도를 규정하고 있지 않으나 법원의 판례를 통해 병행수입이 허용되고 있다. 중국은 특히 상표법과 저작권법과 달리 특허법상에 병행수입의 이론의 근거가 되는 권리소진에 대해 최초로 규정하고 있다. 한국은 권리소진에 대한 규정 또한 두고 있지 않지만 관세청고시를 통해 병행수입의 허용과 상표에 있어서 그 기준을 고시하고 있다. 그러나 양국의 이러한 규정은 병행수입의 지적재산권 침해 여부의 실체법적인 기준이 되지 못하는 한계가 있다. 향후 양국에 있어 병행수입이 더욱 확대될 것으로 예상될 때 무역마찰을 피하고 지적재산권을 보호하기 위해 이에 대한 대책이 필요하다. 즉 지적재산권법상 병행수입에 대한 정의, 절차, 책임문제와 상대방의 구제 등에 대한 규정이 마련되어야 할 것이며, 병행수입의 활성화를 위해 독점수입대리점의 권리남용을 억제할 수 있어야 하고 소비자 보호를 위한 사후서비스 관리 등의 조치가 필요하다. 나아가 병행수입에 대한 양국의 실무적인 논의의 장이 마련될 수 있도록 하여야 할 것이다.

• ETRI Journal
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.74-95
• /
• 1998

Both telecommunications standardization activities and an intellectual property rights (IPRs) system are regarded as effective mechanisms for improving social benefits. Because of inherent conflicts that exist between the two, however, serious problems are generated in the international arena where the competition for technology development and markets is becoming increasingly fierce. In this paper, ways of harmonizing the relationship between the two are explored and explained. For this purpose, telecommunications standardization and IPRs protection mechanisms are described, and their positive and negative effects as well as their inter-relationship are also analyzed. In addition, IPR case studies related to international standardization are explained and analyzed. The Current status and problems of IPRs policy of major international standardization organizations are analyzed as well. Finally, based on the results of the analyses, viable policy recommendations and research strategies for more comprehensive study of the above problems are proposed.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.139-154
• /
• 2012

This paper provides a theoretical setup for an analysis of strategic relationships inherent to activities of an innovative multinational enterprise (MNE) and a local company in a host country. Additionally, we explore the incentives of the host country's government to provide subsidies to attract foreign direct investment (FDI) and to protect outcomes of R&D activities conducted by the MNE. We show that the MNE's commercial interests may collide with local companies' over protection of IPRs. Therefore, the extent of knowledge spillovers from the MNE to the local company and the magnitude of incentives to the MNE perform a crucial function in determining the optimal policy mix of IPR protection and FDI subsidies of the host country's government.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제61권
• /
• 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.