• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.57-72
• /
• 2011

According to Japanese Patent Act, the Japanese Patent Office, administrative organization, was authorized to decide validation of patent. However, Supreme Court of Japan held that a court is able to decide the invalidation of patent in 11th April, 2000, which caused the reform of Japanese Patent Act in June 2004. Reformed Patent Act established the article 104-3 and makes it for a court to decide the patentability where there are grounds for a patent invalidation. Through this amendment to the Patent Act, the legislative system to decide the patent validation has been reorganized and furthermore alleged infringer is allowed to argue against the patent validation by making use of infringement litigation procedure through defenses against patent invalidation as well as invalidation trial procedure for to file a request for a trial for patent invalidation to the Japanese Patent Office. That is to say, the article 104-3 was established in the Japanese Patent Act in the wake of Kilby, and thus a court, which is judicial authority, not administrative disposition agency is also able to decide the patent validation. Thus this article discuss how a court, the authority of which only patent infringement cases fell under, has been authorized to arbitrate cases about the patent validation and the decision of the patent validation in a court.

• Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.190-206
• /
• 2018

This article focuses on the legal systems and practice of intellectual property protection in Japan and China, including the relating civil litigation and administrative litigation procedures. The challenge of balancing the relationship between an invalidation trial and an invalid defense during the process of civil patent infringement litigation is a common issue to be solved in both Japan and China. In addition, it is quite usual that the IP products are being imported and exported across the borders due to the expansion of international trade. Accordingly, one of the most symbolic and difficult issues is how to balance the development of international trade and IP protection in each country. In other words, there is a practical issue regarding whether a parallel import of patented products is acceptable to a country or not. The key to determining this issue depends on the judgment of international exhaustion.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.127-152
• /
• 2017

China's utility model as a supplement to the invention patent, has short application duration, fast authorized speed, and has the same exclusive rights with patents, so companies can quickly dominate the market. But the utility model does not need to carry out substantive examination, so has lower stability, high frequency of invalid to accepted, so compare with the invention patent, difficult to be protected. In order to actively encourage the small and medium-sized enterprises to promote their inventions, and protect domestic patents, China established a protection policy of patent evaluation report for the utility model rights, especially the patent evaluation report can be used as evidence in a patent infringement trial, to provide judicial remedies for utility model patentee and the party of patent disputes. Many experts believe that the establishment of patent evaluation report system can improve the stability of the utility model patent right, and when the defendant request for invalidation of the patent right in the defense period, if there is no novelty, creativity lost or no other reason has not led to the stability of patent right given in a patent evaluation report of the utility model patents, the court may not suspend the trial, without having to wait for the Patent Reexamination Board makes the patent invalid declaration decisions, can improve the efficiency of the judicial process, accelerate the patentee's time. However, in practical patent infringement, the patent evaluation report system and invalidation system are in conflict. In this paper, through the analysis of the current China utility model system and compared with the South Korean utility model system, review the role and character of the patent evaluation report system, and through the actual cases of the utility model patent infringement litigation, analysis possible variates from the decision of patent evaluation report, to find out the reason of the patent evaluation report system being in conflict with the invalidation system, and research on the effectiveness for protecting Utility Model with China's Patent Evaluation Report.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.107-132
• /
• 2019

The arbitration procedure, which is a private trial, does not have a separate enforcement agency. Therefore, unless a party consents to the arbitration award and voluntarily fulfills the award, its execution is accomplished through the implementation of the national court. In particular, the decision in the foreign arbitration procedure will be refused or rejected for the arbitration award in case the proceedings of the law and procedure on which the judgment is based are caused by inconsistency with the domestic law or procedural defect. However, all foreign arbitration awards generally do not have to go through the approval process, and it will come into force with the arbitration award. In the case of Germany in the revision of the German Civil Procedure Act of 1996, the main provisions of the New York Convention concerning the ratification and enforcement of arbitration proceedings are reflected. Germany provides for the arbitration procedures in the arbitration proceedings of Book 10 of the Civil Procedure Act. Particularly, with Article 1061 in Book 10 Section 8 below, the approval and enforcement of foreign arbitrators shall be governed. Article 1061 has been referred to as "The New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Jurisdictions," Article 5 (1). The main reasons for approval and enforcement rejection are: (1) Reason for the acceptance or refusal of enforcement by request of the parties: Reason for failure of subjective arbitration ability, invalidation of arbitration agreement, collapse of attack or defense method, dispute not included in arbitration agreement, (2) Reasons for the approval and enforcement of arbitration considered by the competent authority of the arbitrator: violation of objective arbitration ability, violation of public order, but not based on the default of German statute.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.15 no.10
• /
• pp.447-456
• /
• 2015

In this paper a new model of storytelling related to patent in the field of business as a sort of Intellectual Property(IP) was proposed. The patent related storytelling is investigated in the view points of variety of customers, purposes and applications which is different from the conventional OSMU, transmedia or crossmedia storytelling. In business there are several stages related to patent such as the initial conceptualization and development of technology, apply for and registration of patent, legal conflict like patent invalidation trial and action for infringement of patent and damages, and the commercialization stage like development of product based on patent, advertisement and marketing. Multiple sources optimized to the purpose in each stage of patent related business as well as to multiple convergence application of a patent. Similarly, multi-use refers to the fact that storytelling can be applied in each stage of patent oriented business. The effectiveness and usefulness of proposed MSMU model is also investigated.