智慧財產權法發展專題回顧

Recent Trends and Developments in Intellectual Property Law in Taiwan

2008年智慧財產及商業法院成立及相關審理法令施行後，為我國智慧財產法制發展開啟新頁。本文觀察2016年至2024年7月以來之審判實務，嘗試從宏觀面及個別智慧財產領域提出觀察，礙於篇幅限制及筆者過往研究重心，部分議題或有疏漏或遺珠之憾。觀察智慧財產領域八年多之審判實務發展，在特定產業議題有相當多進展，部分內容及方向符合各界期待與同於美歐日國家。惟不可否認的，仍有諸多法律概念與條文適用有待學者撰文與司法機關深化，除此之外，客觀上依然存在各界期待已久及亟待解決之訴訟困境。司法機關對於智慧財產侵害事件之態度，於一定程度會影響後續及其他產業活動之運作，此乃智慧財產爭議與自然人私權爭議之最大差異。期待智商法院能成為我國形塑智慧財產「生態系統」（ecosystem）之推手。

After the establishment of the Intellectual Property and Commercial Court (IPCC) in 2008 and the implementation of related laws and rules, a new chapter has been opened for the development of the intellectual property field in Taiwan. This article studies the decisions adjudicated by the IPCC, Supreme Court and Supreme Administrative Court, and observes the development of judicial practices from 2016 to July 2024. This article attempts to present observations from both a macro perspective and on the individual areas of the IP law, including cases related to pharmaceutical industry, entertainment industry and agriculture field. Due to the space limitations and the author's research focus, some important issues might not be included.
Regarding the IP fields, there has been considerable development in specific industrial sectors and legal interpretation over the past eight years, including the determination of inventive step of patent law, protection on famous trademark and trade secret. Some trial practices align with the expectations of various sectors and are in line with those of the U.S., Europe, and Japan. However, it is undeniable that there are still some legal concepts and the application of provisions in IP laws that need to be further elaborated by scholars and the courts. For example, it is questionable whether the industrial design should be protected by patent right. In addition, there are still long-standing litigation challenges. Evidence collections and the calculation of damages are two major issues. Due to the nature of intangible property right, it is barely possible to enforce the IP rights, if the IPCC is reluctant to grand the preservation of evidence and the amount of compensatory damages is small.
The courts’ attitude towards the protection of IPR will, to some extent, have an influence on the industrial activities. This is the most significant difference between IP disputes and disputes involving natural persons. It is hoped that the IPCC can become a driving force in shaping Taiwan's IP ''ecosystem''.