Property rights on the knowledge revolution - Intellectual Property Rights in the "China miracle"

Keywords:: intellectual property, protection level; China's national conditions, institutional change

Summary: reform and opening up, China's Economic and technological Development in the context of an extremely backward, quickly established a level of international protection of intellectual property system, launched a knowledge of the property rights revolution. This revolution has a profound external pressure and intrinsic motivation. high standards legislation apply the knowledge to bring a high cost, mainly through government support, the Law relaxed to ease the implementation, but also the cost of paying a system not suited. the pattern of interests with the knowledge of great change, high the level of legislation is the internal needs of China's social support, showing a strong vitality.



One, of the problem
The scope and level of protection of property rights with a country or region's Economic growth and social Development has a positive correlation. In the history of intellectual property, from the Western developed countries have gone through a "selective protection" to "full protection" from " weak protection "to" strong protection, "the process. [1] In the United States, copyright Law enacted in 1790, only works to protect its citizens, exclusion of the protection of foreign citizens, this practice continued for nearly a century, while , "piracy" phenomenon of rampant States second to none. legislators logic is very simple, "American society than the protection of public access to cheap books, the few writers (or worse, is to protect the British author's income is more valuable. "[2] Other countries, such as Switzerland, the Netherlands, Japan, Korea and other countries in the Development of the IP system has undergone a strikingly similar process. [3]
Historical experience and the logic seems to tell us that the protection of knowledge and knowledge of the use of some tension between the Economic and social stages of Development should be taken to match the level of IPR protection. When the lower level of Economic Development , to adopt a strict intellectual property protection measures, although in theory can form the incentive to create knowledge, but knowledge dissemination and utilization of high cost, would prevent the spread of knowledge, promotion and use. If a country with high levels of IPR protection their local technical capacity, Economic capacity and the related public policy system support capabilities, then this system not only can not stimulate invention and innovation, stimulate investment in technology and the introduction, the purpose of absorbing foreign technology, [4] but also to increase knowledge learning and communication costs, inhibit local imitation and hinder innovation capabilities. [5] Therefore, the level of development of developing countries and intellectual property protection level inverse relationship exists between the strict and high standards of knowledge property protection system also means high cost, not necessarily a panacea for developing countries.

Modern intellectual property system established in China has gone through the course of nearly 30 years. [6] However, from the history of intellectual property legislation, our country seems to be out of a national development does not meet the general experience of the road: in the very short time to establish a complete, high levels of intellectual property legal system, through the developed countries several decades or even centuries to complete the legislative journey, [7] in the economic, scientific and technological level are very backward state, in the starting point of reform and opening hours, the establishment of the legislative system of the world advanced level. [8]
China's experience is undoubtedly one of the world's intellectual history of the development "miracle", the former WIPO Director General Arpad Xu for comments: "This is unique in the history of intellectual property." [9] how to look at this system in China change process? really worth considering. In recent years, around the famous "Needham Puzzle", intellectual property scholars were discussed with great interest. [10] If we say, "Needham Puzzle" in the "no property rights have knowledge" raised in the context of the times, along this logic, 30 years of modern Chinese intellectual property legislation requires us to answer a miracle: an extremely sleepy in a knowledge society, how will expand the protection of property rights and showing what kind of features, its How will the development path? expand awareness of this thinking on this issue.

Second, the "China miracle" of the time node
Modern intellectual property system in China, the Chinese can say, is a profound knowledge of the property rights revolution. Say it is a knowledge revolution in the field of property rights, is due to: (1) the concept of morphology. Reform and opening up first, science and technology behind the level of knowledge production and use of extreme low, yet the concept of property rights and legal awareness of the Enlightenment, in the planned economy under the control of social thought and policy, even according to modern physical objects is also difficult to define the property regime and maintenance, knowledge of products related to thought form, with the properties of public goods, which is the most sensitive topic in that era, the era of knowledge is extremely scarce, a clear intellectual property into the "private" aspects of protection, it is ideology on a fundamental leap. (2 in the way of protection of property rights. the intellectual property system based on China's reform and opening hours starting point, start early, rapid development, from 1979 to the twentieth century, the early 90s, only 10 years, China has initially established its own system of intellectual property Law, [11] and the <<Property Law "> marked by the promulgation of the final establishment of the modern property rights system is the 2007 thing. In the absence of excessive practical experience and theoretical preparation of the case, in such a short period of time to form such a complete legal protection system, prevalent in official documents, not yet completely free from centralized management of the society, this is an institutional revolution. (3 standards in the protection of property rights. intellectual property protection high starting point, standards and strict, in the early stage of opening up truly integrate with the international standards, or even that it is a real sense, the first area of ​​legislation to meet international standards . Back in 1994, China declared that: "China's IPR protection scope and level of protection gradually conformed with international practices, has implemented a high level of legal protection of intellectual property." [12] in our other areas of legislation, although there are also reference and transplant situation, in general, or in a forward step by step manner, and [13] compared to these areas, the level of IPR protection in China is a leap, mutation, and established an extraordinary way, The evolution of the curve shows an obvious starting point for the steep characteristic (see Figure 1).

Why intellectual property Law in a flurry of "revolution" means the rapid establishment?
Strong external pressure to establish the intellectual property system in China is an important factor. In a sense, it greatly influenced the decision of the intellectual property law as well as the growth mode and pattern of development, some scholars to believe that China is not so much the construction of intellectual property law the needs of their own intellectual property protection, rather, is a foreign political and economic pressure results, the establishment of intellectual property law is a passive, utilitarian. [14] reflects the external pressure, in the reform and opening up, international political, economic and legal dangerous environment, legislation at the helpless. In this, among them, two factors can not be ignored:
First, the Sino-US trade relations and intellectual property protection. Mr. Li Yufeng had mixed feelings: from the late Qing Dynasty, China's intellectual property legislation of the United States with a strong color. [15] This remark gave away the secret, or whether you are willing to face acknowledged that the establishment of the modern Chinese intellectual property lingering presence of the U.S. "shadow." The United States is the world's only superpower, China, in 1978, when the toddler to the world, the United States as to be insurmountable, "Xianfeng." Data shows that since 1972 China's resumption of trade and economic relations with the United States since the two countries import and export trade volume increased year by year, to 1987, the U.S. has become China's second largest export market. [16] However, to expand bilateral trade according to comparative advantage is to the disparity, China's exports to the United States, mostly raw materials and primary products, U.S. exports to China are mostly intellectual property. the United States, the lack of strict intellectual property protection, there can be a normal trade , there will be serious trade imbalance, the two sides can not really reverse the growing trade deficit. For this reason, protection of intellectual property to be the most sensitive issue, the primary factor is the trade of intellectual property protection, intellectual property became the core of communication . [17] In this way, the beginning of intellectual property rights "kidnapping" in the Sino-US trade relations, "chariot" on: In 1979, the two countries signed the Sino-US <<U.S. High Energy Physics agreement> "and" <United States Trade Agreement>> in the U.S. who are bent on requirements set a "protection of intellectual property clause", asked the Chinese side to provide patent, trademark and copyright protection and restrictions on unfair competition. perhaps the amazing coincidence of history, in both agreement, China is full open system of intellectual property legislation. [18] Since then, Sino-US trade friction seems every time the differences on intellectual property protection for the fuse, and each time they are all contradictory to intellectual property protection to resolve a consensus in the results.

Second, the GATT negotiations and join the World Trade Organization (WTO). China's formal application from the restored 1984 General Agreement on Tariffs (GATT's contracting party status and participated in the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations, in 2001, China joined the WTO. Period, November 1990, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations, reached an "Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights>> (TRIPs) draft, it marked the protection of intellectual property to form a new international standard. games the specific content of the rule never to develop and bargaining power with the participants closely related to Western countries doomed the leader of this rule. WTO TRIPs under the framework set designed for all members of the international minimum standards of intellectual property protection, it is clear developed under the guidance of a low standard as the high standards of developing countries. eager to integrate into the international community, China has no more bargaining opportunities and room for the status of poverty and backwardness is also destined to the lack of international bargaining position, the same powers in the modern interpretation of a "gunpoint" logic: take it or walk away. As a latecomer to the world trade system, China has always played a receiver (at best roles of the participants. [19]
Of course, if only to China's intellectual property legislation as submissive to external forces the product of oppression, but also lack convincing, it at least can not explain, Why in such intellectual property legislation when a particular node? In fact, Before reform and opening up, China is facing the same international situation even worse, why did not lead to the emergence of the intellectual property system? the rapid development of IP legislation in China also have a profound internal factors, there is a strong push within the power of this process : (1) the importance of knowledge is very urgent that the party and the country's agenda. the development of productive forces, invigorating the domestic economy, opening up, both through the "Cultural Revolution" in China after disaster urgent need to address the issue, but also the long-term development in China objectives. With the Third Plenary Session of the Party in 1978 decided to shift the focus of the party's work to socialist modernization, to significantly improve productivity, the first task is to develop science and technology, the status of intellectuals are certainly re- "respect knowledge, respect talent," a policy of the party theme of intellectuals, [20] began to be regarded as science and technology are primary productive forces. Clearly, the past, "eating the same big pot" approach is difficult to form an effective incentive, how to motivate people to join in knowledge creation, knowledge of how to efficiently produce and fair protection of knowledge, a system must be addressed. (2 in China's own intellectual creation is difficult to meet the needs of economic and social development situation, a feasible method is to vigorously the introduction of foreign advanced technology. In the reform and opening up, China's implementation of the technology capital of the earlier (Investor Shares) , the transfer of technology licensing, technology for the market, and so measures. However, whether cross-border investment, or the introduction of technology, or the purchase of equipment, it is definitely related to intellectual property issues, how to gain the trust of people? key depends on legislation. In In a sense, is not strong in the sense of property rights, lax enforcement of social reality, and Symbolic Significance of intellectual property legislation is far greater than its actual meaning, [21] it declared to the world, opening up China's position towards the knowledge of the property. This is just to the international community for China, it is very important. for foreign investors, compared with the red tape and administrative means, the law at least provides a predictable and transparent framework for cooperation. (3 waits for no man, only fight day and night of reform and opening movement, reflected in the legislative trend in the legislative process and in dealing with the relationship between reform and opening up, China catching up to the advanced type of legislation or legislative policy, legislative reform and opening boot. law is a product of social practice, This advanced course from the social reality of legislation. However, the experience of law as a rational, especially in this particular field of intellectual property rights, countries with a large convergence of practices, with may learn and portable features. reform is not a specific point in time efforts, but a great cause long-term struggle, even if the system at its launch point in time reveals the non-adaptive and real life, but, in time, the trend of social evolution will always be present countries in the world out of a total system consistency. the actual situation is indeed the case, from the viewpoint of today, intellectual property protection is seen as a high standard of "premature child", and today have become accustomed to, only right and proper thing.

The law is never a simple technical construction, but the social processes of different interest groups to promote and achieve. China's IPR system was established at the beginning of the political, economic and social background, the external pressure is an important factor, but the external factors must be placed in internal perspective to be understood and described below, can be true and comprehensive, the actual external forces internal problems is to provide an opportunity for the solution to speed up the process of resolving the existing problems, external forces if and only if the internal factors that have accepted the will of the use and timing side will play a role. historian Arnold Toynbee, "Challenges and fight, "the historical analysis is enlightening and explanatory power, in his view, the system of innovation is a special difficulties facing the country challenges for the response," sufficient to stimulate the ability to play the biggest challenge is in the middle of a point, and this is insufficient in strength and intensity over a place in between. "[22] in the reform and opening up this special time of the node, the external forces and internal forces work together, so that the system of intellectual property Change to a critical point, high standard of protection as a natural thing, this silent revolution also occurred in the property. From this perspective, intellectual property legislation is facing a new world economic order and China's future made toward a positive response.

Third, the double-edged sword: the high cost of the standard system of legislation
Changes in government-led approach under the urging of mandatory education legislation out of the high standards, is a "double-edged sword", no matter what manner of their implementation, are likely to face the costs of different systems: on the one hand, in the economic and social the early development of a country's priority is how low-cost access, dissemination and application of knowledge, and a certain degree of wide scope and standards, weak protection would help to meet this requirement. China is a developing country, in economic development early, if you really strict implementation of these high standards of legislation, the law society will pay a high cost of implementation, this may not really conform to the domestic reality of the economic and social development aspirations. On the other hand, China launched a high standard of intellectual property protection system is more than a written policy statement on, but really need to practice, law enforcement is too lenient, and even failed to observe the face of it can bring temporary benefits, but it will shake the foundation of the legal system to thwart the confidence of the international community, the community also will pay a huge cost, which is institutional economists have frequently pointed out the "international system integration costs." [23] Changes in Intellectual Property in China, a key question: are necessary to solve the high standards brought under the protection of the high system cost and ease of knowledge dissemination and utilization of cost, while also easing the strict implementation of the implementation and coordination between the achieve certain sound, reducing and adjusting to international standards to bring the cost of suppression Failure to abide with the potential drawbacks.

From the history of intellectual property protection in China, easing the cost of the system of high standards of legislative efforts, mainly in two aspects: First, government support, the second is the implementation of the law relaxed.

Look at government support. Almost all countries, especially developing countries, intellectual property rights are inseparable from the development of a range of government and the degree of support. In the reform and opening up, with the advantage of intellectual property rights to compete with foreign companies , growth in the power of a single potential Chinese enterprises become thin, there is no government support for intellectual property is difficult to participate in international competition. A very practical approach, in the case of deficiencies, cite a single country, the use of government resources to foster knowledge of all products. In this regard, the measures and practices in China can be described in various categories, full of tricks, such as: development of intellectual property Strategy arrangements, financial support, tax incentives, credit, financing support, facilitate government procurement, market access, brand selection, qualification, exemption system. In addition, simplification of administrative procedures, priority would be to run a higher level assessment, technology development, energy supply, transportation, and so give priority to ensuring, to give preferential support to form enterprise groups, priorities included in the "fake" and "protection of listed companies", giving priority to publicity and promotion, and so on.

Government measures to promote intellectual property rights have a certain degree of rationality: some knowledge of the products are "quasi-public goods," the property, easily lead to "free riders" in social psychology, must be resolved through public finance, knowledge has a positive externality, the government the need for effective incentives to promote its production, and some knowledge of the high cost, long cycle slow effect, there must be a reasonable burden and cost of risk mitigation mechanisms. the nature of state intervention is to reduce the cost of knowledge development expenditure in the private sector to provide knowledge creation The 30-year strong motivation proved reform and opening up, development of intellectual property rights inherent in the adverse environment poor, the Chinese enterprises to grow up so quickly in the fierce international competition to withstand challenges, the Government's support really contributed. In a sense, it does offset or mitigate the high protection of intellectual property to bring the system cost.

However, government intervention has always been the border, the Chinese government support for intellectual property use in offsetting the high cost of intellectual property, while revenue for the enterprise, nothing restraint, over-broad government support and interventions are the cost of bringing the new system, we must maintain adequate vigilance for this. The most typical example is: China's government led by the ubiquitous "appraised made card" activities. without restraint of the various concepts will be appraised, selected activities In fact, the government monopoly of the "reputation" market, which will induce a large extent unfair competition and "rent-seeking" behavior. In this process, the Government provided some support acts, but also brought many social problems, caused great social crisis, such as: "Chinese famous brand" of the selection methods and certification system, selection of over-emphasis on government departments objective quality of products the right to speak, resulting in a serious absence of consumers, ignoring the "reputation" of the subjective value, the result is the enterprise to find the "market" rather than looking for "mayor", not the consumer responsible. [24] "exemption system "The implementation, resulting in some enterprises ignore product quality, inducing a similar" Sanlu "toxic milk powder incident. [25] is also more far-reaching harm to the enterprise" intellectual property "deeply marked by the administrative birthmark, lost Private necessary independence and self-sufficiency, evolution under the domination of the executive power as a "concession" such as: in some places on the well-known trademarks, brand protection duration, geographical scope and transfer provisions of the very harsh conditions, which is actually carried out the reputation of the brand expansion time, space and the restrictions on alienation of property rights, contrary to the intention of the law of property rights and markets. [26]
History is strange, in the evolution of Western intellectual property rights, whether copyright or patent rights have gone through the transition from the privilege to private rights. [27] leaves into the 20th century China, the rise of intellectual property seems to still get rid of not this fate, but "privileged" content, form and purpose of the show in different ways, it is cause for regret and upset. The reason may be to ease the use of intellectual property costs leads to a transition government intervention, it is our as "premature" to pay the high standards of the social costs of legislation.

Look at law enforcement. Legislation is only the protection of intellectual property provides a "blueprint", the provisions of the development of a common international practices and experience of foreign countries as a useful reference, the level of protection on paper has the characteristics can be observed and measured to meet the international standards is not difficult. Law implementation is different, the extent and scope of the law within the practical implementation is essentially a best efforts obligation, its efforts are often difficult to pass the subjective indicators, standardized way to measure and detect. and then strictly legal, as long as spared, it is impossible to effectively impose costs on the offense, would be higher standards to protect the interests of rights holders. This is probably not difficult to understand, since 1994, Sino-US intellectual property rights negotiations, the United States will no longer negotiations focus on the legislation, and begin to turn their attention to China's law enforcement issues. [28]
This is a long been taboo, unspeakable topic: In China, the strict and high standards of intellectual property protection, in a period of time through the loose, low status of implementation to ease the cost of their system to run. China 20 years (1985-2004 strength of IPR protection results show that: the strength of intellectual property legislation and law enforcement strength exhibited large "gap", which, legislative strength is close to the western developed countries, but the lack of law enforcement strength, to 2004, strength of intellectual property protection legislation up to 3.857, however, the law enforcement strength over the same period is only 0.657, meaning that a high level of intensity of intellectual property legislation received only 2 / 3 implementation, equivalent to 1990 levels in Canada, far lower than the United States. [29]
Optimal level of law enforcement how to define? Depends on the probability of offenses investigated the strength of the rational allocation of accountability. In Posner's view, this mechanism should have a high probability of violations found and the characteristics of low-cost implementation, "a relief The basic objective is deterrence system that people can not break the law. Another objective is to compensate the victims of violations, but this is a secondary objective, as a reasonable deterrent system planning will reduce the probability of a law very low level. "[30] In general, if the investigation of intellectual property law with high probability, even if actual damages are low enough to effectively curb illegal acts, violations of the investigation when the probability is not sufficient, to adopt a more for the strict accountability, and even punitive damages was sufficient to overcome the "performance errors" due to lack of responsibility. The reason why our country is in a low-level law enforcement position, because: the probability of China's investigation of violations and penalties responsibilities are also low.

Violations discovered and dealt with from the situation. Is generally believed that intellectual property rights violations and the pace of development of intellectual property has some positive correlation, showing a growth of some kind of linkage. However, in China, intellectual property rights violations in the investigation number and rate of development of intellectual property shows great lack of coordination, the development did not match the curve. to the patent, for example, from 1998 to 2007, patents granted increased from 67, 889 jumped to 351,782 pieces, 10 years between turned over 5 times, patents rising curve showing a heavy volume of development. but with the rapid growth compared to the amount of patents granted, the number of patent enforcement is a smooth curve is almost straight, the lowest year of only 1,726 cases (2007, the highest and only then to 3,901 cases the year (2005 [31] (see Figure 2), each prefecture-level city administrative law enforcement agencies deal with an annual average of less than nine cases, the highest law enforcement is 13.6 cases of the year, while the lowest Only six cases of the year. [32] and the speed and scale of the development of intellectual property than the probability and investigate violations of the report significantly lower probability. Trademark law enforcement grant amount and the number of trademark cases showed the same lack of coordination situation ( see Figure 3). is not only law enforcement, civil cases of intellectual property as a whole showed less than normal phenomenon, from 1985 to the end of September 2008, the country and concluded the district court handled civil cases of first instance of intellectual property is only 135,475 pieces, respectively, and 124,851 pieces. [33] In which, from 2001 to 2007, the country and concluded the district court handled civil cases of first instance of intellectual property accounted for 77,463 cases and 74,200 cases, that is, from 1985 to 2000 16 years, the National Local courts accepted IP civil cases of first instance and concluded 58,012 cases and 50,651 pieces of only average annual cases accepted and concluded only 3, 625 and 3,165 pieces.

Responsibility for accountability from the see. When the investigation and prosecution of illegal low probability, it should take more stringent measures of accountability only enough to stem the illegal activities. But, overall, our accountability for violations of intellectual property rights seriously enough. Administrative enforcement of trademark of punishment as an example: the number of fines for violations is significantly lower, even to the years 1998-2007, China's average amount of individual cases the maximum administrative fine does not exceed 10,000 yuan, a fine in each case the minimum number of years an average of less than 3,000 Yuan, collected trademarks are amazing low, in some years the average number of each case, only a collection of 600 pieces, the collection of the tools of crime in most years, the average collection of tools in each case less than one (see page table 1). punishment too light means that the cost of the offender's offense is too low, when the offense profitable, in fact, provide an incentive for the offense.

(Table 1: Trademark enforcement penalties table Source: 1998-2007 <"China Intellectual Property Protection>> finishing.

Then the amount of civil liability, for example, for infringing intellectual property rights of punitive damages does not apply to adopt a comprehensive rule of damages, according to human rights violations during the actual damages or the offender's illegal earnings calculations, the two calculation methods in practice are related to the difficult issues of proof. China's current laws provide that the statutory compensation, the amount of compensation than the revised 2008 <<Patent Law "provides for 100 million to internal and external," <>>,<< Trademark Law Copyright Law>> are within the provisions of 50 million. In fact, China's fixed compensation in the past once justice lies in between 5000 to 300,000 yuan. [34] specific to the use of cases, our current lack of judicial authority in this area statistics According to statistics, Zhejiang Province Higher People's Court, the province concluded in 2008 a total of 1694 cases of first instance of intellectual property, the amount of the average Panpei also 18.36 million. [35] which has a higher compensation data. in accordance with international famous NERA (NERA Economic Consulting Announces a report entitled <"China Intellectual Property Protection: trends in litigation and financial compensation>> The investigation report, China's judicial penalty of the amount of U.S. intellectual property damages, or damages arising from infringement than the degree, are very low, although China increased the number of cases of intellectual property rights awarded, the average amount awarded did not increase ,2006-2007, the amount of all intellectual property damages, the median value of approximately USD 15,000 loss of the median amount of compensation is the intellectual property owners to apply for compensation of about 15% of the amount, patents, copyright and trademark infringement damages were 34,722,18,109, and the median 18,488 dollars, despite the increasing trend of intellectual property compensation has shown, however, the amount of damages is currently still low. [36]
30 years, China's law enforcement seems to have been in contradiction of the "cracks" in: The legislation must be more high standard by means of a low level of implementation of the system to ease the implementation of intellectual property costs, without which, we seem difficult to find more effective cost-sharing mechanisms; However, law enforcement is too lenient, and will make our return to the era of lawlessness and undermine the value of a society's legal system, affect the health of the market environment. This may be destined to the implementation of the law critical point is that both help offset by higher utilization of knowledge protection system cost, and would not waver in critical condition and legal basis. This may explain why the routine of intellectual property enforcement has not yet formed, "discipline" is the sport of law enforcement more than a "holiday law enforcement," "disastrous law enforcement," "surprise law enforcement", the law enforcement activities are often the "special action", "focus on governance" in the form of expansion. [37] These are states, selective enforcement, and profound social background is that it is on the one hand To fit the development of enterprises, the local government level on the practical needs of intellectual property protection, on the other hand, it must maintain the rule of law face a minimum.

Links to Research Papers Download http://www.hi138.com whether government support or legal problems arising from the implementation, it is actually not suited to pay the cost of the system, or integration costs. It is paradoxical that these high levels of protection systems are not suited to pay the cost, just easing the cost of business use of intellectual property rights, which may imply such a profound truth: any system changes are to pay the cost, of high intellectual property rights in China standard protection system, the same paid a heavy social cost, and not, as some people think that flat and smooth.

Fourth, the system can take root in China Why
The evolution of new institutional economics, the type of system is divided into mandatory induced institutional change and institutional change, induced changes in the system of internal system mainly refers to the spontaneous evolution of a decentralized process of trial and error, is found in aggressive and the mandatory change to the intervention by the government to implement and promote, by the authority of the agency to implement. [38] In China, the rise of the modern intellectual property in the late 20th century, in the fierce international competition among the domestic environment and complex intellectual property legislation can not be a spontaneous, and in line with the logic step by step, the evolution of idyllic, it is doomed to the government under the guidance of a strong passive, jump, and even the manner similar to gene mutation, completion of the baptism of the times, history is not enough time left to make any of us more choice.

If the intellectual property system can not be the internal needs of Chinese society, access to its survival and development of its own power, will not be possible in China, plump flesh and blood to survive. Regardless of the liberal government support or the implementation of the law, are only to a certain extent, ease the system running costs, which can not be resolved to maintain high standards of social foundations of legislative issues. a high level of protection of the miracle of the text is only one China, the real miracle, or the revolutionary progress also is that this began in the West intellectual property system will eventually tie in the Chinese soil depth, as Chinese society as a spontaneous self-selection and access to the independent development of the driving force.

One indisputable fact is that today, China is no longer passively accept the rules imposed by the international community, the state will no longer simply impose social rules, China won the system development and refinement of consciousness and ability to reflect, in a more active and aggressive approach to promote the evolution of the system silently. <"State Intellectual Property Strategy Outline>> The introduction of guidelines on intellectual property rights, strategic objectives, strategic priorities, different knowledge products, special tasks, strategic measures a detailed and systematic planning and design, [39] The active system, and improve and support, with a high level, high standards of intellectual property system to promote IPR creation, utilization, management and protection, rather than system on the passive stop-gap measures. In which, of course, including the improvement of legislation in 2008 to modify <<Patent Law ">, is promoting the <<Trademark>> the third change, and actively promote the <<Copyright Law "> Second Amendment and the <" Anti Unfair Competition Law "> amendments are responsive to their own needs to initiate the. [40] 30 years of efforts to explore and perfect the system of consciousness finally behavior and no longer see the face of others to act, we are finally able to precipitate their own system of rational experience, according to the needs of their own design and selection rules, and is no longer just the transplantation of foreign laws and imitators.

So, what forces led to a high standard protection system take root in China's soil? In my opinion, there are two aspects can not be ignored missing.

First, the reform and opening up, China's enormous economic and social progress, in large measure the progress of knowledge. Knowledge of earth-shaking development, a dramatic adjustment to the pattern of interests so deeply rooted among property rights, intellectual property rights protection as an endogenous demand high standards of the legal system is the foundation of survival.

In this regard, we can almost set out a long list of relevant advances in knowledge: in 1998, Chinese scientists published a total of about 20,000 scientific papers, in 2008, that figure soared to 112,000, the paper Published in second in the world. [41] in 1978 China produced a total of 46 feature films in 2007 grew to 402; national television program production in 1995 when there were only 383,513 hours in 2007, has been up to 2,553,283 hours. [42 ] the amount of patent applications filed in China the first 1 million after 15 years, while the second one million in just 4 years and 2 months, by 2007, the amount of patent applications filed in China exceeded 4 million, only took a half years to achieve from 3000000-4000000 breakthrough. [43] China has been the company board or even the world's top patent applications, first time in years to win the title. [44] Since 1983 <<Trademark>> Since the implementation of the first decade of valid registered trademarks in China is only 410,000, while in 1998 each year of effective registered trademarks are the 100,000 or more, only one year in 2006 effective registered trademarks as high as 276,000, as of 2008, the total amount of China's various trademark applications and trademark registration applications in the world for seven consecutive years has been the first .2008, Chinese enterprises amounted to 1,585 international applications for trademark registration documents, name listed eighth in the world, this is the first time to enter the international trademark applications in the top ten. [45]
Boring talking figures, which is the implicit change in the pattern of China's interests and needs of the system: (1) the relative prices of products to enhance the knowledge, to define property rights more important. As the North's Research shows, medieval Europe population growth and the relative scarcity of land led to increased relative prices of land, making the start by the European human rights to the land system of property rights change, science and technology industry, the development of cultural industries and trade the relative price of knowledge products will be improved因而人们对知识进行产权保护的需求也就相应地提升.[46]中国建立知识产权制度的诉求也正源自知识财产价值的提升,[47] 无形知识财产成为一种有价值的稀缺资源,其相对价格提升了,这就产生了对这一要素加强产权保护的制度需求.随着我国自有知识产权和民族品牌的大量出现,改变了知识的来源结构,也促使新兴的民族企业、中小企业从内部对知识产权提出更高的要求,随着产业的升级,产品的更新换代,使人们意识到,商品的价值不仅仅凝结在有形的物体上,而且更多地凝结在产品所蕴含的知识或者品牌之上.(2知识的创造导致了知识存量的不断增加,其结果是,身在市场经济中的企业和个人都成为无形资产的拥有者,都是知识的受益者.在改革开放初期,国内企业通过模仿、复制等方式完成了财富和知识的"原始积累",随着这一过程的完成,一些企业开始将战略重点转移到自主创新和品牌提升上来,曾经从模仿、仿制中尝到甜头的企业对待他人的此类行为却有着切肤之痛,自己不再是知识产权严格保护的"局外人",而是一个实实在在的利益攸关者.随着知识产权客体的增加,社会成员的每一分子都成为潜在的知识创造者,其智慧性成果同样都有受到法律保护的必要.当知识的创造不再遥不可及,产权的安排和保护不再是少数人的事情时,多元化的知识创造主体和多元化的知识利益,使知识产权的保护有了更为广泛而扎实的民意基础和社会根基,产权的保护就不再是一种被动的强加,而成为了主动的需求.(3)权利的本质是厘定人际关系的手段,当我们说一人就某一知识产品拥有权利时,它意味他人必须对其劳动所得保持容忍、尊重、认同和避让.当知识作为社会的一种基本财富形态和财产形式时,知识产品已经深刻地影响人们的交往关系和思想观念,相互竞争的企业在相互冲突的利益博弈中,自生自发地催生了更为强烈的知识产权意愿和要求,产权受保护的思想深入人心,从而对制度的协调规则提出了更为精细而严格的要求.

其二,知识产权制度一旦在中国落地生根,知识的创造也就获得了更为持久的动力,制度安排与知识创造之间相互依存、协同发展呈现出良性互动的局面.

经过30年的改革开放,知识产权的观念和制度已经深扎于中国,展现了其强大的生命力,反过来,具有强大生命力的制度安排又能成为推动中国经济发展和科学技术进步的动力,从而进一步夯实和巩固制度赖以存续的社会根基.在改革开放之初,知识产权保护的几乎全部含义就是防止知识产权侵权,就是查处违法和诉讼维权,今天,知识产权的制度安排获得更为广阔的视野,成为知识的开发、流通、治理、保护和救济的综合性制度安排.一个最为明显的例子,在当前的世界性金融危机下,我国有关部门不约而同将知识产权作为应对金融危机的主要举措,国务院<<关于进一步促进中小企业发展的若干意见>>专门规定了"加快中小企业技术进步和结构调整"的各项知识产权对策,国家知识产权局发布了<<关于促进企业运用知识产权应对金融危机的若干意见>>,"充分发挥知识产权在抵御金融危机、促进经济发展中的重要作用,引导帮助企业运用知识产权提升核心竞争力",最高人民法院发布了<<关于当前经济形势下知识产权审判服务大局若干问题的意见>>,"使知识产权审判更好地服务于有效应对国际金融危机冲击,促进经济平稳较快发展的大局".显然,30年的发展,我国已经驯熟地掌握了如何运用知识产权制度服务于本国经济建设和社会发展的能力,并成为处理危机的制胜法宝.

V. Conclusion
中国是个发展中国家,在改革开放之初,百废待举,百业待兴.这种低水平的生产力本来应该与宽松的知识产权制度相匹配.但由于内外因素的影响,中国最终选择了迅速建立高标准的知识产权法律体系,创造了一个"中国奇迹".在当时法制凋敝、产权缺失、知识极端困乏的环境下,它无疑是一场来势凶猛的"知识的产权革命".这在一定时期内带来了高昂的知识运用成本,这种制度成本主要是通过政府扶持、宽松的法律实施等方式得到缓解的.但是,在缓解知识的运用成本的同时也付出了制度的不适应成本,或者说接轨成本,出现了国家干预过多、不公平竞争、法律执行不严等社会问题,这是社会转型时期的阵痛.随着经济社会的持续发展,知识创造力的提升,知识产品的大力开发,知识产权逐渐成为企业提高竞争力的核心要素和实现可持续发展的重要战略资源,这时,高水平的知识产权立法获得了中国社会内在需求的支持,而不再是外部强求的结果,高标准的立法不再仅仅是象征符号,而是一种实实在在的现实需要.改革开放是一项长期的事业,迅速发展的经济社会需要国家在制度上做好长远的准备,在经济发展与知识产权立法的相互关系上,中国无疑是典型的"立法推动型",曾经"过高"的标准放在三十年后的今天、放在一个更长远的时间框架下,并不会显得突兀."中国的奇迹"发生在中国这一特殊的国度和土壤之中,是历史与现实,国际潮流与本国国情等因素因缘巧合的结果.中国的经验未必具有可复制的特征,同样的做法运用到其他发展中国家未必能走出一条相同的道路.





Notes:
[1]参见吴汉东:<<知识产权制度运作:他国经验分析与中国路径探索>>,载<<中国版权>>2007年第2期.

[2][美]冈茨、罗切斯特:<<数字时代,盗版无罪?>>,周晓琪译,法律出版社2008年版,第27页.美国对待专利也采取了大致相同的做法,1790年至1836年期间,美国作为当时的技术净进口国一直限制对其公民和居民的专利权授予,而对外国人收取的专利申请费则高出美国公民的9倍.

[3]这些国家知识产权立法的发展历程可参见英国知识产权委员会:<<知识产权与发展政策相结合:委员会关于知识产权的报告>>,http://www. iprcommission. org.

[4] 自1970年代以来的观察表明,由于发展中国家并不处在科技研究的前沿,因此由知识产权制度特别是专利制度所带来的对于其科研发展的投资刺激,几乎没有太大的意义.参见W. Lesser, "The Effects of TRIPs-Mandated Intellectual PropertyRights On Economic Activities In Developing Countries. WIPO. Available at:http://www. wipo. int/about-ip/en/ studi es/ pdf/ssa_lesser_tnps. pdf.

[5] 参见王林、顾江:<<技术差距、知识产权保护与经济增长—基于跨国数据的实证分析>>,载<<软科学>>2009年第5期,倪海清、张岩贵:<<知识产权保护、 FDI技术转移与自主创新>>,载<<世界经济研究>>2009年第8期,英国知识产权委员会:<<知识产权与发展政策相结合:委员会关于知识产权的报告>>,第 19-25页.

[6]1982年<<商标法>>的颁布实施是中国开始系统建立现代知识产权法律制度的一个重要标志,参见<<中国知识产权保护状况(1994)>>.

[7]<<中国知识产权保护状况>>(1994的评价是:"中国知识产权保护制度的建设,在初始阶段就显示了面向世界、面向国际保护水平的高起点.在改革开放的推动下,中国知识产权立法速度之快,也是史无前例的."参见http://www. people. com.cn/item/flfgk/gwy/qt/FZ940601 , html.

[8] 据专家的定量分析,单从立法上看,中国知识产权保护水平早在1993年就已经超过部分发达国家,至2001年,已超过绝大多数发达国家和发展中国家.参见韩玉雄、李怀祖:<<关于中国知识产权保护水平的定量分析>>,载<<科学学研究>>2005年第3期,许春明、陈敏:<<中国知识产权保护强度的测定及验证>>,载<<知识产权>>2008年第1期.

[9]国务院新闻办公室:<<中国知识产权保护状况(1994)>>,参见http://www. people. com. cn/item/flfgk/gwy/qt/FZ940601 ,html.

[10] 关于"李约瑟之迷"的解释非常之多,知识产权这方面的论述可参见:蔡宝刚:<<私有产权保护的意义追问>>,载<<法学评论>>2005年第3期,姚颉靖:<<李约瑟之谜对我国知识产权法制建设的启示>>,载<<华中科技大学学报(社会科学版>>2007年第5期,贺敏等:<<破解"李约瑟难题"的法学视角一论知识产权法制的功能及产生原因>>,载<<电子知识产权>>2005年第7期,李建华:<<知识生产论:知识生产的经济分析框架>>,中国社会科学出版社2008年版,第 285页以下.

[11]1979年颁布的<<中外合资经营企业法>>是中国对外开放的第一部重要法律,其中规定,合营企业各方可以工业产权等进行投资,这也是中国改革开放第一部提到知识产权的法律.1980年3月,中国政府向世界知识产权组织递交了加入书(从1980年6月起,中国成为该组织的成员国;1982年8月通过了<<商标法>>,1984年3月通过了<<专利法>>,1985年3月,中国正式加入<<保护工业产权巴黎公约>>,1990年9月通过了<<著作权法>>.

[12]国务院新闻办公室:<<中国知识产权保护状况(1994)>>,参见http://www. people. com. cn/item/flfgk/gwy/qt/FZ940601,html.

[13] 就民法而言,有论者称其发展"命途多舛",私法自治基石地位的奠定以及私权保障体系的建立,经历了从1986年<<民法通则>>到1999年<<合同法>>再到 2007年<<物权法>>逐步确立的过程.1999年<<合同法>>本身也由<<经济合同法>>、<<涉外经济合同法>>和<<技术合同法>>三部法律根据当时的经济发展需要逐渐调试发展而来(参见王利明、易军:<<改革开放以来的中国民法>>,载<<中国社会科学>>2008年第6期.同样,从公司法的演进过程来看:在80年代初以"企业法"的形式进行,一开始是为了吸引外资的需要,回应经济改革的要求,该时期的企业法并没有改变"所有制"的权威话语.后来的立法逐渐从对国有企业改革的政策指导转变为更为一般的、适用范围更广的、真正的公司法.然而1993年<<公司法>>所规范的公司类型依然十分有限,仅仅有有限责任公司和股份有限公司两种.在进行现代企业制度改革的过程中,政府还采取遴选试点单位的方式进行改制的尝试.总之,整个立法的过程显现出缓慢推进的特点(参见方流芳:<<试解薛福成和柯比的中国公司之谜—解读1946年和1993年公司法的国企情结>>,载梁治平主编:<<法治在中国:制度、话语与实践>>,中国政法大学出版社 2002年版.证券法历程亦然,1991年以前中央政府基本上只出政策,甚至仅仅是"默许",而由地方政府从事执行政策、制定可操作的制度、管理等具体工作.后经历从1996年到1999年中央政府的逐步介入,才逐步确立了证券市场的中央集权管理模式,于1999年通过并实施<<证券法>>.这个过程也是在尝试调整中逐步推进的(参见毛国权:<<证券法律制度变迁:中央地方的竞争与合作(1980-2000) >>,载<<中外法学>>2004年第1期.

[14] 参见曲三强:<<被动立法的百年轮迥—谈中国知识产权保护的发展历程>>,载<<中外法学>>1999年第2期.还有学者甚至认为中国的知识产权立法过程是法律文化帝国主义在知识产权方面的体现,是西方强势法律文化对弱势法律文化的征服过程(魏森:<<法律文化帝国主义研究—以中国知识产权立法为中心>>,载<<法商研究>>2009年第3期.

[15]参见李雨峰:<<枪口下的法律:中国版权史研究>>,知识产权出版社2006年版,第176页.

[16]2002 年到2006年,美国是中国的第一位出口市场, 2002年占21.5%,2003年占21.1%,2004年占21.1%,2005年占21.4%,2006年占21 % . 2007年和2008年美国是中国的第二大出口市场,分别占19. 1％和17.7%.数据来源:商务部统计数据http://zhs. mofcom. gov. cn/tongji. shtrnl.最后访问日期:2009年11月22日.

[17]参见凌金铸:<<知识产权因素与中美关系:1989-1996>>,上海世纪出版集团2007年版,第264页.

[18] 当然,能否将1982年<<商标法>>、1984年<<专利法>>、1990年<<著作权法>>的颁布视为兑现对美国的承诺,有待进一步的思考.但是,有些问题似乎还不能完全用历史的巧合来解释:1991年,美国根据"特别301条款"将中国列为"重点外国".在这样的背景下,中美双方于1992年达成了<<关于保护知识产权的谅解备忘录>>.此后,中国认真地履行了备忘录中的承诺.按照美国的要求,1992年修订的<<专利法>>对药品等化学产品提供方法和产品的保护,发明专利的保护期限从15年延长至20年,专利授权增加进口权,重新规定实施强制许可的条件,限制强制许可的范围,1993年通过<<反不正当竞争法>>,首次将商业秘密列为保护对象,<<商标法>>开始保护服务商标,加重对商标侵权行为的惩罚,1992到1993年先后加入了<<伯尔尼公约>>、<<世界版权公约>>和<<日内瓦公约>>,并将计算机软件作为文字作品加以保护.此后,美国又于1995年、1996年与中国达成两项谅解备忘录,进一步推动了中国提高知识产权执法水平.

[19]参见吴汉东:<<中国知识产权法制建设的评价与反思>>,载<<中国法学>>2009年第1期.

[20]参见邓小平:<<尊重知识,尊重人才>>,载<<邓小平文选>>(第二卷,人民出版社1994年版,第40-41页,江泽民:<<论科学技术>>,中央文献出版社2001年版,第35页.

[21] 在徐听教授看来,国家对法律规则的规定总有过度性的特点,"有些法律制定出来原本就不是为了得到执行……而可能只是传递一种法律鼓励或者反对某种行为的信号.虽然行动重于语言,但无可质疑,语言—不论是响亮的语言、平淡的语言、还是引申的语言—也影响着行动"(参见徐听:<<论私力救济>>,中国政法大学出版社2005年版,第246-251页.

[24]详细的分析可参见谢晓尧:<<"中国名牌":一个商誉文本的契约反思>>,载<<洪范评论>>第4卷第1辑,中国政法大学出版社2007年版,第174-201页.

[25] 国务院1999年发布<<关于进一步加强产品质量工作若干问题的决定>>实行免检制度,国家质检总局2001年先后发布<<中国名牌产品评价管理办法(试行>>、<<中国名牌产品管理办法>>对中国名牌产品实行免于检查.2008年,三鹿集团公司生产的婴幼儿配方乳粉发生重大食品安全事故,这次震惊中外的"三鹿"事件成为国家废除食品领域中国名牌产品制度和免检制度的导火索:国家质量监督检验检疫总局先后发布了<<关于停止实行食品类生产企业国家免检的公告>>、<<关于不再直接办理与企业和产品有关的名牌评选活动的公告>>、<<关于废止＜产品免于质量监督检查管理办法＞的决定>>、<<关于做好停止实行食品类生产企业国家免检工作的通知>>,国务院办公厅也发布了<<关于废止食品质量免检制度的通知>>,国家工商行政管理总局<<关于禁止在广告中使用"免检"内容的通知>>.实际上,免检制度只不过是大量行政扶持政策中的一种.

[26]如<<北海知名商标认定和保护暂行办法>>即规定:"北海知名商标注册人依法转让其注册商标,导致商标所有人住所不在北海市内的,资格自行丧失."<<广西壮族自治区著名商标认定和保护办法>>规定:"广西著名商标注册人依法转让其注册商标的,该商标的广西著名商标资格自行丧失."
[27]参见金海军:<<16-18世纪英国知识产权的历史与功能:一种社会结构整体观>>,载刘春田主编:<<中国知识产权评论(第一卷>>,商务印书馆2002年版,李雨峰:<<从特权到私权:近代版权制度的产生>>,载<<重庆大学学报>>2008年第2期,袁晓东、孟奇勋:<<知识产权制度变迁中的公私权结构之演进>>,载<<知识产权>>2008年第1期.

[28]1994年中美知识产权谈判中,美国主要提出了三方面的内容:第一,美国要求中国建立执法队伍,以打击主要的侵权者,没收和销毁侵权产品,并起诉侵权者,第二,美国要求中国加强知识产权的执法体制,建立一个真正起作用的法院系统,第三,美国要求中国对其知识产权产品开放市场.

[22][英]汤因比:<<历史研究>>(上,上海人民出版社1997年版,第174页.

[23]德国学者柯武钢等人指出:不同的习俗、常规、法律会造成特有的"国际性制度接轨成本",在极端的情况下,可能出现国际执行失灵问题(参见[德]柯武钢、史漫飞:<<制度经济学:社会秩序与公共政策>>,韩朝华译,商务印书馆2004年版,第431
[29]详细分析可参见许春明:<<知识产权制度与经济增长关系的实证研究>>,知识产权出版社2009年版,第42-69页.

[30] [美]理查德·A·波斯纳:<<反托拉斯法>>,中国政法大学2003年版,第313页.波斯纳在分析初民社会中的侵权制度时指出,在私人执法并且发现和惩罚违法的概率都很高的社会中,实施很严厉的惩罚结合不是最佳的,它会导致惩罚过度.惩罚的高概率与不很严厉的惩罚相结合,这从经济学上看,很有道理,—经济学的分析显示,低概率的惩罚与非常严厉的惩罚结合最佳,因为,只要是收取罚金或赔偿金的费用很低,惩罚的概率降低(这可以节省用于调查和起诉的费用就可以以很低的费用通过对被抓获的(少数违法者加大惩罚的严厉性来补偿([美]理查德·A·波斯纳:<<正义／司法经济学>>,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第205页.

[31]按照<<专利统计年报>>的做法,专利行政执法案件包括专利纠纷(包括专利侵权纠纷、其他纠纷两类、冒充专利、假冒他人专利三类.1998 -2000年的数据是根据<<中国知识产权保护状况>>整理的.2001年开始的数据根据<<专利统计年报>>整理,其数据与<<中国知识产权保护状况>>有出入,通常前者较后者高.

[32]根据2008年<<中国统计年鉴>>,2007年我国共有地级市287个.http://www. stats. gov. cn/tjsj/ndsj/2008/indexch. htm.专利侵权执法数量则来自1998年到2007年<<中国知识产权保护状况>>和<<专利统计年报>>.由于未能查到2000年行政机关查处冒充专利立案数量,为保证分析的准确性,本文在分析时不采用该年执法数据.

[33]其中,受理专利案件31,005件,商标案件19,985件,著作权案件 42,072件,技术合同案件23,755件,不正当竞争案件8,727件,其他知识产权民事案件9,931件.最高人民法院:<<30年来人民法院知识产权司法保护的基本成就>>(2008年11月,http://www. chinaiprlaw. cn/file/2008110713818. html.

[34]参见最高人民法院:<<关于全国部分法院知识产权审判工作座谈会纪要>>(1998年7月20日.

[35]<<浙江知产审判工作会首邀境内外媒体列席>>,载<<人民法院报>>2009年4月16日.

[36]NERA:Intellectual Property Rights Protection in China; Trends in Litigation and Economic Damages,http;//www. nera. co-mimagePUB_IPR_Protection_China 0109_final. pdf.

[37]许多知识产权执法活动多是因外交需要而展开,比如1995年1月1日起开展的为期半年的打击侵权活动的专项执法,1996年关闭现有光盘工厂的一半并对剩下的15家工厂进行积极调查的执法行动,都是在与美国谈判期间向美方表现我国的积极姿态.一个非常有趣的现象是,某国总统,或国务卿,或商贸部部长来华前,或者某些主要的协议要谈判或签订,中国的知识产权管理部门、海关、工商部门通常都会进行大规模的整治活动,在电视中,我们经常能看到这些会出动推土机将盗版光碟销毁的过程.

[38]参见林毅夫:<<诱致性制度变迁与强制性制度变迁>>,载盛洪主编:<<现代制度经济学(下卷>>,北京大学出版社2007年版.

[39] <<国家知识产权战略纲要>>丝毫不掩饰我国存在的问题,相反,一系列的战略计划和措施,恰好是基于现存的问题而作出,这些问题诚如纲要指出的:"从总体上看,我国知识产权制度仍不完善,自主知识产权水平和拥有量尚不能满足经济社会发展需要,社会公众知识产权意识仍较薄弱,市场主体运用知识产权能力不强,侵犯知识产权现象还比较突出,知识产权滥用行为时有发生,知识产权服务支撑体系和人才队伍建设滞后,知识产权制度对经济社会发展的促进作用尚未得到充分发挥."
[40]权威人士在全国人大常委会新闻发布会就<<专利法>>第三次修改发表谈话时指出:如果说前两次专利法的修改主要是更注重引进国外的先进技术,对外资加强知识产权保护的话,那么这次专利法的第三次修改,重点就是在我们全国科技大会提出"增强自主创新能力、建设创新型国家"这样一个发展战略的背景下,与我们转变经济发展方式的要求相吻合.在修改的内容方面,前两次的修改更多的是注重履行国际承诺和与国际规则接轨这方面,主要借鉴引进国际上比较成熟的经验.这次专利法的修改,是在认真总结我们国家专利工作和专利法制建设20多年实践的基础上,根据我们自身的发展需要,从解决我国经济社会发展面临的实际问题出发(参见<<全国人大常委会办公厅举行新闻发布会解答专利法修改有关问题>>,http : //www. sipo. gov. cn/sipo2008/yw/2008/200812/t20081228-435535.html).曹新明教授在谈到我国<<专利法>>第三次修改的时候认为,专利法的制定以及前两次的修订有一个共同特点:需求中的被动.这里所说的"需求",是指我国改革开放和经济建设对专利法和专利制度的需求,这里所说的"被动",主要是指我们在制定和修改专利法的过程中,有形或无形地受到了某些国家或地区的干扰或干涉,难以充分地根据我国的实际,按自己的需求办事.而这次的修订则是需求中的主动,这体现了专利法修订的三大特殊背景:第一,为实施国家知识产权战略而修订专利法,第二,改革开放30年来,我国在科学技术方面已经具有了更加强劲的实力,在许多方面已经走到了世界前列,现行专利法已经不能完全适应了,需要进行修订,第三,我国专利法在20多年的实施过程中,我们已经准确地掌握了现行专利法的优点和缺点,而且能够在符合我国承担了的知识产权保护的国际义务的前提下,突显我国的特色.参见黄燃:<<从需求主动到需求被动专利法修改三大内容>>,载<<<<21世纪经济报道>>2008年8月16日.

[41]参见汤姆森-路透集团:<<新科学地理—研究和合作在中国>>.转引自清华大学新闻网:http://news. tsinghua. edu.en/new/news. php? id =21530.

[42]数据来源:<<2008年中国统计年鉴>> , http://www. stats. gov. cn/tjsj/ndsj/2008/indexch. htm.

[43]1977年到1987年中国在美国的专利数量是35件.数据来源:美国联邦专利与商标办公室网站:http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/cst_all. pdf.

[44]根据2008年世界知识产权组织公布的数据,中国华为公司在全球专利申请公司(人排名榜上首次占据榜首.

[45]国家知识产权局:<<08年国际商标注册申请再创新高中国企业首入前十>>, http://www. sipo. gov. cn/sipo2008/yw/2009/200903/t20090312-444535.html.

[46] 参见[美]道格拉斯·诺思、罗伯特·托马斯:<<西方世界的兴起>>,蔡磊译,华夏出版社1999年版,第18-20 页,[美]道格拉斯·诺斯:<<经济史上的结构和变革>>,厉以平译,商务印书馆2007年版,第151页.

[47]美国的经验也支持了同样的论点:"在20世纪50年代,美国的对外出口仅有10％依赖于知识产权保护,而到了90年代末期,则有近50％的美国对外出口额依赖于某种形式的知识产权保护"ATOLL R. Policy and Property in the Development ofKnowledge-Based Economy [R] //WIPO International Symposium On IP and Knowledge-Based Economy. Beijing, October] 3-15,1999．转引自李雨峰:<<枪口下的法律:中国版权史研究>>,知识产权出版社2006年版,第172页. 转贴于 免费论文下载中心 http://www.hi138.com