規制專利非實施主體的正當性判斷及檢驗

規制專利非實施主體的研究不在少數，但應予規制的理論正當性和現實必要性等問題一直沒有得到妥善解決。定性上講，專利非實施主體是一個偽命題，是低質量專利的替罪羊。非實施主體的身份與損害專利激勵機制和降低社會福利的客觀後果之間並不具備當然的因果關係，規制的正當性基礎實則建立在日趨嚴重的低質量專利問題以及通過主體身份規制低質量專利的高經濟效率之上。定量上講，專利非實施主體仍然是一個偽命題。與沉屙積弊的美國相比，我國司法實踐中的低質量專利問題較為溫和，尚無需以非實施主體作為切入點以求改善。然而，現行救濟規則呈現出明顯的補償過度傾向，極易導致非實施主體和低質量專利問題惡化，還會帶來鼓勵侵權、阻礙創新等一系列問題，故應予修正。

There has been a great amount of studies on NPEs, but the problems on how to justify their regulations, both theoretically and practically, have not been properly resolved. From a normative perspective, there is no causal relationship between the entity status of the NPEs and undermining patent incentives and reducing social welfare. Its justification is based on the increasingly serious problem of low-quality patents and the high economic efficiency of regulating low-quality patents through the NPEs. From an empirical perspective, low-quality patents in China are relatively rare. There is no need to improve patent quality through regulating the NPEs’behaviors. However, the current remedial rules show an obvious tendency of overcompensation, which are highly likely to lead to the explosion of the NPEs and low-quality patents and thus should be amended.