植物品種保護與侵害判斷──以日本新修正種苗法之規範與政策考量為借鏡

Protection of Plant Varieties and Infringement Assessment: Lessons from Japan’s Amended Plant Variety Protection and Seed Act Regulations and Policy Considerations

我國植物品種及種苗法自2004年大幅全文修正至今，已有二十年未曾全盤檢視修訂2023年最新一次修法，僅增訂禁止輸出入條款、刑責入法，並提高限制輸出入之罰鍰，防範優良品種遭非法外流或回銷國內，侵害我國農業經濟安全及國家利益，但並未從全盤保護的政策與規劃著手，殊為可惜。由於近年來我國品種權案件增多，幾項衍生的議題，如證據保全、鑑定及侵權判斷等，讓我國目前品種權保護不足之困境，及與智慧財產法制中向來以專利為首之思考模式可能產生的齟齬，浮上檯面。因此本文借鏡日本新修正之種苗法，先說明日本本次修法之背景與政策考量，進一步分析修正重點，並特別整理出日本種苗法中與品種權侵害訴訟相關之重要規定。此外就日本本次修法中引起熱烈爭論之「特性表主義」與「現物主義」，也就是攸關植物品種侵權判斷之基準，究竟是應以主管機關核准品種權公告資料，還是以現存活體植物為準進行判斷之議題進行討論。最後本文將基於我國目前面臨之挑戰及可從日本規範中習得之借鏡，綜整論述，以期提供我國未來立法之依據與參考。

Taiwan’s Plant Variety and Plant Seed Act, which underwent substantial amendments in 2004, has not been comprehensively reviewed for two decades. The most recent amendment in 2023 merely introduced provisions prohibiting import and export, established criminal liability, and increased penalties for restricted import and export activities. While these changes aim to prevent the illegal outflow of superior varieties or their re-importation, which could compromise Taiwan’s agricultural economic security and national interests, they fall short of implementing comprehensive protective measures and policies.
In recent years, Taiwan has witnessed an increase in plant variety rights cases, highlighting several critical issues including evidence preservation, variety identification, and infringement determination. These cases have exposed the inadequacies in Taiwan’s current plant variety protection system and potential inconsistencies with the patent-centric approach traditionally adopted in intellectual property law.
This paper examines Japan’s recently amended Plant Variety Protection and Seed Act, analyzing its background, policy considerations, and key modifications. Particular attention is given to significant provisions concerning plant variety rights infringement litigation. Furthermore, this study explores the heated debate in Japan between the‘characteristic description-based approach’and the‘physical comparison approach’―a fundamental discussion about whether infringement determinations should be based on DUS (Distinctness, Uniformity, and Stability) characteristic descriptions in variety registration documentation approved by competent authorities or on examination of existing living plant specimens.
Drawing from Japan’s regulatory experience and considering Taiwan’s current challenges, this paper provides a comprehensive analysis to inform future legislative initiatives. The findings suggest the necessity for a more holistic approach to plant variety protection, one that addresses both procedural and substantive aspects of variety rights enforcement while maintaining consistency with broader intellectual property principles.