標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題

中華人民共和國(guó)提案

(下文提案于2005年5月23日收到，應(yīng)中華人民共和國(guó)代表團(tuán)要求散發(fā))

背景

1、世界貿(mào)易組織《技術(shù)貿(mào)易壁壘協(xié)定》（TBT協(xié)定）在其序言中指出，“國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和合格評(píng)定體系通過(guò)提高生產(chǎn)效率和便利國(guó)際貿(mào)易的進(jìn)行”促進(jìn)GATT1994目標(biāo)的實(shí)現(xiàn)。該協(xié)定第2.4條規(guī)定“如需制定技術(shù)法規(guī)，而有關(guān)國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)已經(jīng)存在或即將擬就，則各成員應(yīng)使用這些國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)或其中的相關(guān)部分作為其技術(shù)法規(guī)的基礎(chǔ)。

2、在《TBT協(xié)定》實(shí)施過(guò)程中，特別是在協(xié)定要求成員盡可能地采用國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的情況下，國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定工作應(yīng)保證國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的效率和質(zhì)量，應(yīng)充分考慮成員在采用國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中遇到的困難，以便利成員采用國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和《TBT協(xié)定》的實(shí)施。

3、國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化組織（ISO）、國(guó)際電工委員會(huì)（IEC）、國(guó)際電信聯(lián)盟（ITU）等國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化組織已注意到，提高國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的效率和質(zhì)量，須解決標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與其中的受知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的技術(shù)之間的關(guān)系。為此，這些機(jī)構(gòu)已制定了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策。這些政策希望相關(guān)方能夠及時(shí)披露與擬議的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)相關(guān)的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)信息，并建議知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)所有人做出接受RAND原則的聲明，即在與標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的潛在實(shí)施者進(jìn)行許可談判時(shí)遵循合理、無(wú)歧視的原則。這些政策為我們提供了良好的技術(shù)基礎(chǔ)和可遵循的路線(xiàn)。

4、但是，由于標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化機(jī)構(gòu)的職能限制及該問(wèn)題本身的復(fù)雜性，有些問(wèn)題并不能通過(guò)上述標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策得到有效解決。例如，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化機(jī)構(gòu)聲稱(chēng)他們不對(duì)成為必要知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的技術(shù)的相關(guān)信息負(fù)責(zé)；應(yīng)有更多的具體措施鼓勵(lì)相關(guān)方公開(kāi)相關(guān)信息；如果相關(guān)方的利益不能得到有效協(xié)調(diào)，不僅可能影響標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化進(jìn)程，還可能損害標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的質(zhì)量；在國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定工作因知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題不能達(dá)成一致而不能順利進(jìn)行時(shí)，應(yīng)探討除取消或重新起草標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之外其他更為有效的解決方案；相關(guān)方對(duì)RAND原則的解釋不統(tǒng)一，不利于知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)所有人和申請(qǐng)者之間達(dá)成一致，增加了采標(biāo)效果的不確定性。

5、為保證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的質(zhì)量，國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定工作應(yīng)涵蓋體現(xiàn)當(dāng)時(shí)發(fā)展水平的技術(shù)；標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中受知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的技術(shù)應(yīng)被給予充分和合理的保護(hù)，以維護(hù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)所有人的利益。標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策應(yīng)實(shí)現(xiàn)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化需要和知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)之間的平衡。

建議

6、中國(guó)政府認(rèn)為，國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定和采用中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題，已對(duì)各成員根據(jù)TBT協(xié)定要求采用國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、便利國(guó)際貿(mào)易造成阻礙。WTO應(yīng)該考慮到該問(wèn)題對(duì)多邊貿(mào)易的消極影響，并就與該問(wèn)題相關(guān)的多邊貿(mào)易政策進(jìn)行探討。

7、我們并不認(rèn)為T(mén)BT委員會(huì)應(yīng)對(duì)上述所有的問(wèn)題負(fù)責(zé)。但因?yàn)椤禩BT協(xié)定》鼓勵(lì)成員采用國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，而上述問(wèn)題對(duì)國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)制定的效率和質(zhì)量以及成員采用國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的效果有重要意義，因此，“標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題”與TBT協(xié)定密切相關(guān)。

8、所以，中國(guó)政府建議，TBT委員會(huì)應(yīng)利用其三年審議的工作優(yōu)勢(shì)就該問(wèn)題進(jìn)行討論，尋求解決這一問(wèn)題的方法和政策，以便推動(dòng)國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的制定和實(shí)施，從而促進(jìn)《TBT協(xié)定》的實(shí)施。

9、“標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題”有重要的“發(fā)展”內(nèi)涵。TBT委員會(huì)應(yīng)當(dāng)徹底討論該問(wèn)題，這將有助于增強(qiáng)發(fā)展中成員參與國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化活動(dòng)和國(guó)際貿(mào)易。其間，發(fā)展中成員面臨的困難及他們?cè)诩夹g(shù)援助和能力建設(shè)方面的需要等，在委員會(huì)就該問(wèn)題的討論中應(yīng)被給予充分的關(guān)注。

標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化中的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)問(wèn)題（英文版）

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT (IPR) ISSUES IN STANDARDIZATION

Communication from the Peoples Republic of China

The following communication, dated 23 May 2005, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the People's Republic of China

I. BACKGROUND

1. WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) points out in its Preamble that international standards and conformity assessment systems can make important an contribution to further the objectives of GATT 1994 by improving efficiency of production and facilitating the conduct of international trade. Meanwhile, Article 2.4 of TBT Agreement stipulates that "Where technical regulations are required and relevant international standards exist or their completion is imminent, Members shall use them, or the relevant parts of them, as a basis for their technical regulations…".

2. In the context of the TBT Agreement implementation, especially the provision of the Agreement that Members shall adopt international standards as much as possible, it is necessary to ensure, in the process of international standards preparation, the efficiency and quality of international standards and also to take into account the difficulties Members may encounter in the application of international standards so as to facilitate Members adoption of international standards and implementation of the TBT Agreement.

3. International standardization bodies such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) and the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) have already noticed that, to enhance efficiency and quality of international standards, relations between standards and technologies covered by IPR ought to be treated properly. Therefore, these bodies have established policies concerning IPR in standardization which encourage concerned parties to disclose IPR information related to proposed standards in a timely manner. These organizations also recommended that IPR holders declare their acceptance of RAND principle, i.e., they would negotiate licensing terms with potential applicants in a reasonable and non-discriminatory manner. These have provided Members with a good technical base and a roadmap to follow for possible work of the WTO in this field.

4. However, limited by their functions and due to the complexity of the issue itself, there are still many issues which could not be solved efficiently with the above IPR policies in standardization. For example, standardization bodies declare that they shall not be responsible for concerned information about essential IPRs to be integrated into standards. There should be more concrete measures to encourage concerned parties to disclose related information. If the interests of concerned parties could not be effectively coordinated, not only the process of standardization will be impaired, but also the quality of standards will be negatively effected. More effective measures, aside from withdrawing or redrafting standards, should be explored once international standards preparation could not be carried forward due to divergence on IPR positions. Interpretations of related parties for RAND principles are inconsistent and therefore it is often difficult to achieve consensus among IPR holders and applicants, which increases uncertainty of international standard adoption.

5. International standard preparation should include technologies reflecting present technique development level in order to assure the quality of standards. Technologies protected by IPR in standards should be given sufficient and reasonable protection to safeguard IPR holders interests. IPR policies in standardization should help strike a balance between standardization needs and IPR protection.

II. PROPOSAL

6. China is of the view that, IPR issues in preparing and adopting international standards have become an obstacle for Members to adopt international standards and facilitate international trade. It is necessary for the WTO to consider negative impacts of this issue on multilateral trade and explore appropriate trade policies to resolve difficulties arising from this issue.

7. The TBT Committee is not supposed to be responsible for all of the above complex questions. However, the TBT Agreement encourages Members to adopt international standards, and those issues are significant not only for the efficiency and quality of international standards development, but also for Members standards adoption. The issue of IPR in standardization is of close relevance to the TBT Agreement.

8. Therefore, China proposes that TBT Committee should take advantage of the discussion nature of the Triennial Review and discuss this issue so as to develop proper approaches and policies to promote the development and implementation of international standards as well as more effective implementation of the TBT Agreement.

9. IPR issue in standardization has important development implications. The TBT Committee should fully discuss this issue. This will help enhance developing Members participation in the work of international standardization and in international trade. In this process, difficulties that developing Members may encounter and their needs for technical assistance and capacity building should be given sufficient consideration.