WTO上訴機構停擺背景下國際知識產權糾紛解決的出路──基於ISDS實踐的分析

The Way out of International Intellectual Property Dispute Resolution under the Background of the Suspension of the Appellate Body of WTO-Analysis Based on ISDS Practice

WTO爭端解決機構的停擺與TRIPS-Plus標準的興起使得國際投資仲裁在解決國際知識產權爭端方面越發重要。國際投資協定中寬泛的投資定義讓知識產權糾紛得以遁入國際投資仲裁機制。但知識產權的公共政策性使其有別於一般財產權，以投資仲裁解決知識產權糾紛面臨損害東道國知識產權公共政策自主性、減損《TRIPS協定》賦予的彈性空間的問題，部分現有投資協定所採取的限制措施也存在破壞DSB專屬管轄、證明責任分配不當的問題。為避免知識產權投資仲裁的負面影響，應改革仲裁員指派機制，縮減仲裁庭自由解釋、適用條約的空間，並重視替代性糾紛解決機制的建設。

The suspension of the WTO dispute settlement body (DSB) and the rise of the TRIPS-Plus standard have made international investment arbitration increasingly important in the resolution of international IP disputes. The broad definition of investment in investment agreements has allowed IPR disputes to escape into the international investment arbitration regime. However, the public policy nature of IPRs makes them different from general property rights, and the settlement of IPR disputes by investment arbitration faces the problems of undermining the autonomy of IPR public policy of host countries and diminishing the flexibility granted by TRIPs agreements, and the restrictive measures adopted by some existing investment agreements also have the problems of undermining the exclusive jurisdiction of DSB and improper allocation of the burden of proof. In order to avoid the negative impact of IPR investment arbitration, the mechanism for appointing arbitrators should be reformed; the scope for arbitral tribunals to freely interpret and apply treaties should be reduced; and the construction of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms should be emphasized.