特許實體法條約(案) 主要爭點에 관한 硏究 = (A) study on the main issues of the draft substantive patent law treaty

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

With the accelaration of borderlessness in technology and economy, inventors of all nations long for a global level of patent system whose provisions are uniformly set not only procedurally but also substantively, which enables the acquisition of patent right worldwide by a single patent application. Triggered by the U.S. proposal on international uniformization of grace period rules in the early 1980s, efforts for international harmonization of substantive patent requirements seemed to be completed with 「diplomatic conference for the conclusion of a treaty supplimenting. the Paris Convention as far as patents are concerned」 in 1991. However, it was suspended by the U.S. adhering to its first-to-invent system, and after that Patent Law Treaty(PLT) was adopted in June 2000, which harmonized only aspects of procedural patent requirements. At the fourth session in November 2000, Standing Committee on the Law of Patents(SCP) proposed items related to further substantive harmonization of international patent law during its future sessions: prior art, novelty, inventive-step, industrial applicability, sufficiency of disclosure and drafting and interpretation of claims.
Possible issues on patentable subject matter are biotechnology inventions, computer software related inventions and business methods. Questions on sufficiency of technical character of these inventions are raised, and it is another controversial matter whether defining patentable inventions with technical character is necessary or not. In regard of patentability, it is necessary to discuss different standards for determination of patentability in each country. The U.S. has grace period provisions under first-to-invent system: however, the EU has limited non-prejudicial disclosure rules under absolute novelty concept. For this reason, there are some arguments about whether grace period provisions should be included, and if so, which level they would be. The U.S strongly proposes enlarging patentable subject matters and lowering patentability requirements. The EU desires stricter criterion for grace period and wants the U.S. to accept first-to-file system. Developing countries want provisions allowing exceptions to patentability, and wish genetic resources and traditional knowledge to be included in patentable subject matter. Whether SPLT comes to a settlement or not depends on that these different attitudes is well-harmonized with each other.
This dissertation studies on the solution for unifying the Korean patent system by examining the main regulations of draft Substantive Patent Law Treaty(SPLT) and comparing these regulations with patent-related laws in Korea.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• -目次- = ⅰ
• 제1장 서론 = 1
• 제1절 연구의 목적 = 1
• 제2절 연구의 범위와 방법 = 3
• 제2장 특허제도의 국제적 통일화 = 5
• 제1절 특허제도의 국제적 통일화의 필요성 = 5
• 1. 특허의 의의 = 5
• 2. 특허제도의 국제적 통일화의 필요성 = 6
• 제2절 특허제도 통일화에 대한 국제적 동향 = 9
• 1. 파리협약 = 9
• 2. 특허협력조약(PCT) = 12
• 3. 무역관련 지적재산권에 관한 협정 = 14
• 4. 특허법조약(PLT) = 18
• 제3절 특허제도 통일화와 관련된 국제적 인식의 차이 = 20
• 제3장 특허실체법조약(안) 고찰 = 24
• 제1절 특허실체법조약(안)의 논의 경과 및 개관 = 24
• 1. 특허실체법조약(안)의 논의 경과 = 24
• 2. 특허실체법조약(안)의 개관 = 26
• 제2절 선행기술 = 29
• 1. 의의 = 29
• 2. 논의 경과 = 31
• 3. 조약안 검토 = 35
• 4. 특허법상 대비검토 = 45
• 제3절 유예기간 = 49
• 1. 의의 = 49
• 2. 논의 경과 = 55
• 3. 조약안 검토 = 58
• 4. 특허법상 대비검토 = 63
• 제4절 특허요건 = 66
• 1. 의의 = 66
• 2. 논의 경과 = 76
• 3. 조약안 검토 = 78
• 4. 특허법상 대비검토 = 90
• 제4장 결론 = 93
• 참고문헌 = 99
• ABSTRACT = 102