金融創新之法律保護方式分析

The analysis of legal protective means for financeial innovateion

賴馨寧(Hsing-Ning Lai)

指導教授 ： 李存修

共同指導教授 ： 蔡明誠

國立臺灣大學/管理學院/財務金融學研究所/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2009.00040

摘要

本論文第一章是緒論，介紹研究動機、研究目的及研究方法。研究動機即是基於實務之兩個爭議，而引發金融創新在法律上保護方式之討論。
第二章則針對保護對象：金融創新做介紹，分別介紹何謂金融創新、金融創新之類型及內容、金融創新之功能及發生原因，金融創新之從事者為何，金融創新對社會福利之影響；並得到金融創新能增加社會福利，而值得我國追求之結論。
第三章則分別探討「群益安家基金」取得行政保護期及德意志銀行分割結構債方法之事件背景、發展及金管會在兩事件中處置之法律性質。
第四章則分別介紹著作權法、營業祕密法、專利法之規範目的、保護客體、保護要件及金融創新適用之可能性，並對金融創新在此三個法律之適用上加以比較，雖然金融業過去皆以營業祕密作保護，但若論及保護金融商品或流程創新之概念，仍以專利法之效果較佳。而此則牽涉商業方法電腦軟體專利問題。
第五章則介紹與金融創新之專利保護密切相關之商業方法軟體專利。從商業方法專利、電腦軟體專利及金融專利之概念開始介紹，而後並討論美國關於法定可專利客體之一般規定及一連串的案例演進，包含號稱打開商業方法專利大門之1998年State St. Bank& Trust案之「一實用、具體、有形結果」標準，及2008年In re Bilski案之最新發展：「機器或轉換法」。並述及State St. Bank& Trust案對金融業之影響；關於商業方法電腦軟體專利之批評；美國專利商標局及國會對其批評之回應。最後並論及我國關於商業方法電腦軟體專利之審查基準。而從第五章介紹美國及我國關於商業方法電腦軟體相關發明之法定可專利客體規定，可知兩國間之規定有異，而其規定之寬嚴則涉及是否應以專利權促進創新之政策議題。
第六章則探討此政策議題。先介紹討論專利權可否促進一般產業創新及金融創新之理論、實證文獻。再從法律經濟分析之觀點介紹專利權創設之效益及成本、其經濟模型、專利法保護程度之決定因素、專利法降低權利創設之社會成本之方式，及專利法於鼓勵創新外之功能。最後再從專利對具有網絡效果、標準設定等特性之金融業有何影響。
第七章則是對上述研究作總結，並提出建議。

關鍵字

金融創新 ； 行政保護期 ； 商業方法專利 ； 電腦軟體專利

並列摘要

The first chapter of my thesis is introduction，which introduces the motive、objective and method of the thesis. And my research motive was based on two issues in practice，which induces the further discussion of the proper legal means to protect financial innovation.
The second chapter focuses on financial innovation. I discuss respectively what financial innovation is, its functions and causes, the identities of financial innovators, and its impacts on social welfare , and reach the conclusion that it is beneficial to our society and is a deserving cause for our country to pursue.
The third chapter discusses the background and further development of the 「administrative protective period of Capital Strategic Balance Fund」and the「Deutsche Bank’s stripping structured notes」 issues respectively. I also discuss the legal nature of the treatment by FSC（Financial Supervisory Commission） in the two issues.
The fourth chapter discusses the legislative purpose、statutory objects and statutory requirements of copyright law、trade secret law and patent law respectively. I further discuss the applicability of the aforementioned laws to financial innovation and compare the protective effectiveness of the three legal means. Although historically financial innovation has been protected by trade secret law, patent law provides better protection regarding the ideas of innovative products and process. And it involves the issue of business-method software patents.
The fifth chapter discusses the business-method software patents,which is closely related to financial patents. I begin with the concepts of business-method patens、software patents and financial patents. Then I discuss American patent law and a series of cases governing the statutory subjective matter, including the State St. Bank& Trust case, which is most often cited for opening the door to business-method patents and uses「a useful, concrete and tangible result」as the calibration of statutory subjective matter, and the new development of In re Bilski case in 2008：「machine or transformation test」.I further discuss the impacts of State St. Bank& Trust case on financial industry、the criticisms about business-method software patents, and the response of Patent and Trademark Office and congress of the United States. Finally, I discuss the 「Substantive examination guidelines for invention patent-- Section II. Chapter 9 Computer Software」in Taiwan. From the discussion of the fifth chapter we can know that Taiwan and the United States have different rules regarding the statutory subjective matter in patent law, and the scope of it is certain a political issue ,which involves whether it is appropriate to use patent as a mean to promote innovation.
The sixth chapter discusses the aforementioned political issue. I begin with the theoretical and empirical papers discussing whether patent can promote innovation in general and in financial Industry. I further discuss the benefit and cost of the creation of patent right、its economic model、the decisive factors of patent’s protective degree、the means employed by patent law to reduce the social cost incurred from the creation of it and its functions beyond promoting innovation. Finally, I discuss patent’s impact on the financial industry which is characteristic of network effects and standard-setting.
The last chapter concludes all the discussion in earlier ones and I present my proposal about the topic.

並列關鍵字

financial innovation ； administrative protective period ； business method patent ； software patent

參考文獻

24. 張靜，〈營業秘密法及相關智權問題〉，經濟部智慧財產局出版，2007年2月二版

30. 劉國讚，〈專利實務論〉，元照出版，2009年4月初版

32. 蔡明誠，〈專利法〉，經濟部智慧財產局出版，2006年4月初版

4. 林恆輝，債券型基金結構債之處理與台灣金融資產證券化之發展，國立臺灣大學財務金融組EMBA碩士論文，民國96年

5. 施光訓，蔡明春，陸仲華，〈IPO議價因素之探討─承銷商觀點〉，會計與公司治理，第二卷第二期，2005年 12月