透過您的圖書館登入
IP:52.207.218.95
  • 學位論文

知識經濟時代競爭規範之挑戰--以美國微軟之反托拉斯訴訟為題材

The Challenge of Knowledge Economy on Competition Law and Policy -- A Study on the U.S. Microsoft Case

指導教授 : 黃銘傑
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


摘要 競爭法發生、成長於工業經濟時代,然「知識經濟時代」之產品主要價值,轉而取決於其智慧財產,諸如軟體、製藥、電影、錄音帶等,這些智慧財產已經使今日之經濟相較於過去之產業經濟,諸如汽車、鋼鐵及銀行保險等經濟產品之服務等,產生了許多重大且基本之改變,而這些基本之差異,已經破壞傳統反托拉斯法下之經濟概念了,市場競爭機制,透過網路效應之影響,已跳脫傳統競爭法制之藩籬,有人開始對於競爭法之施行,是幫助或阻礙高科技之發展?而提出質疑。 反對反托拉斯法繼續適用於「知識經濟時代」之人認為,相對於傳統市場,高科技產業較不具備實施反托拉斯法之必要性,其強調技術轉變的速度飛快,高科技市場之新競爭者,能夠以更新的技術迅速打破已經存在於競爭市場之廠商所建立起來之藩籬,其效率更勝於法院及行政機關,因此,既然高科技產業能夠自我調整及修護市場力量,就沒有必要甘冒執行反托拉斯法之負面效應,去實施反托拉斯法。 擁護反托拉斯法繼續適用於「知識經濟時代」之人卻認為,反托拉斯法能夠確保高科技產業之效率,卡特爾及濫用獨占力量所帶來之負面影響,在高科技產業與傳統產業並無不同,其所呈現之爭議問題中,反托拉斯理論極具適應性,其所具備之經濟合理性亦極為充足,因此,在高科技產業,反托拉斯法仍然扮演著維護競爭秩序所不可或缺之角色。 上述支持及反對在高科技產業適用反托拉斯法之立論,都各有其依據,卻也都莫衷一是,在智慧財產成為世界上最有價值資源的「知識經濟時代」,反托拉斯政策相較於從前將更形重要,這也意味著政府部門及法院在維護競爭秩序時,將面臨更大之挑戰。因此本論文擬針對「知識經濟時代」所產生之競爭法相關爭議問題,亦即,是否及如何在高科技產業市場,規範競爭秩序,作一研究分析,並以微軟在美國所引發之反托拉訴訟作為實務研究之題材,期能發揮拋磚引玉之效,引起相關部門之重視,進而做為我國執行公平交易法之參考,並使我國法制得以適應世界潮流,而賦予我國法律永恆之生命。

並列摘要


Abstract Competition happened, growth in the ear of industrial economy. However, the primary product value of “the Ear of Knowledge economy” had been transformed into intellectual properties, such as software, pharmacy, movies, record tapes, etc. These intellectual properties had made many significant differentiations in the industries of automobile, steel, bank and insurance. These basic differentiations had destroyed the traditional economic concepts under anti-trust laws. Market competition mechanism, through the effect of internet, had escaped from traditional competition fence. Some people started to question the effect of the implementation of competition law. “Does it help or obstacle the development of hi-technology?” Those objecting the implementation of anti-trust for “the Ear of Knowledge economy”, think that, relative to traditional market, the new competitors in hi-technology market can utilize new techniques to break the competition fence made by the existed firms. It is more efficient than courts and government. Since hi-technology industry can adjust itself and recover market power, it is not necessary to take the risk of negative effect causing by execute anti-trust law. Those supporting anti-trust think that anti-trust law do ensure the efficiency of hi-technology industry. Negative effects from cartel and abusing monopoly power have no differentiation between hi-technology industry and traditional industry. In these disputes, anti-trust theories are with high accommodation, it is also with sufficient economic reasons. Therefore, in hi-technology industry, anti-trust law still plays essential role of maintaining competitive order. The above supporting and objecting opinions of whether hi-technology industry should apply to anti-trust law have their own stands. As an essential resource in the ear of knowledge economy, intellectual property has become more and more important, same as the policy of anti-trust. That means the relevant government department and courts face acute challenge than ever did. This paper is trying to research the disputes on the competition-related laws in the ear of knowledge economy. Here cite Microsoft’s anti-trust case in the United States as a practical subject to attract further researches and the emphasis of relevant governmental departments. I also hope this paper can provide reference to our government for executing fair trade Act, and let our law system fit to the tide of the word and then give the immortal life to our law.

參考文獻


11、謝巧君,﹤美國司法部與微軟達成和解﹥,科技法務透析(2001)。
9、廖元豪,﹤美國聯邦貿易委員會法與其他反托拉斯法之關係-間論我國公平交易法第二十四條之適用範圍﹥,公平交易季刊,第八卷第四期,(2000)。
9、Joseph A. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (3d ed. 1950).
1、陳建妤,《從獨占事業濫用優勢地位論過高價格之管制—以歐盟為例》,中原大學財經法律研究所碩士論文(2003)。
4、David S. Evans , Antitrust and the New Economy, Microsoft: Antitrust and the New Economy:Selected Essays(David S. Evans eds, 2002).

被引用紀錄


黃文甄(2010)。我國事業結合申報制度之研究〔碩士論文,中原大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6840%2fcycu201000965

延伸閱讀