English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 112879/143845 (78%)
Visitors : 49982493      Online Users : 415
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/77251


    Title: 論營業秘密法之不可避免揭露原則
    Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine in Trade Secret Law
    Authors: 陳詩帆
    Chen, Shih Fan
    Contributors: 李治安
    Lee, Jyh An
    陳詩帆
    Chen, Shih Fan
    Keywords: 營業秘密
    不可避免揭露原則
    競業禁止條款
    保密協議
    違反誠信
    競爭
    價值衡平
    政策考量
    trade secrets
    inevitable disclosure doctrine
    covenant not to compete
    non-disclosure agreement
    dishonest
    competition
    balance of interests
    policy consideration
    Date: 2015
    Issue Date: 2015-08-03 13:32:24 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 近年來頻傳科技業高階主管跳槽到競爭對手,而我國於二〇一三年增訂營業秘密的刑事責任,營業秘密的保護與人才流動兩者之間的關係,越來越受到關注,特別是台積電與梁孟松案,智慧財產法院於二〇一二年三月台積電訴梁孟松案假處分裁定採納不可避免揭露原則,在後續的判決中亦論及不可避免揭露原則,使此一原則開始受到國內智慧財產權法實務及學術界之相當關注。
    不可避免揭露原則係源自美國法上之司法實踐,本文首先介紹美國法上不可避免揭露原則的理論基礎,透過五個重要判決(Allis-Chalmers v. Continental案、PepsiCo v. Redmond案、Bimbo v. Botticella案、Whyte v. Schlage案和EarthWeb v. Schlack案)介紹不可避免揭露原則的發展,分析不可避免揭露原則的要素,包括兩間公司的競爭程度、營業秘密之認定、員工職務的近似程度、違反誠信的行為和與保密協議、競業禁止條款的關係,並且整理出四種不同的適用類型即完全適用、擴張適用、限縮適用和拒絕適用,繼而以之分析美國各州的適用情形。最後,回歸到我國台積電訴梁孟松案,分析該案是否適合導入或參考美國法之不可避免揭露原則之各項考量因素,並評析法院對於不可避免揭露原則的見解包括採納不可避免揭露原則的適用類型,輔以我國目前實務發展,探討不可避免揭露原則是否應該引入我國,包括是否違反我國法律規定、與美國法制的差異是否影響不可避免揭露原則的適用和價值衡平與政策考量。
    In recent years, hi-tech companies in Taiwan occasionally need to cope with crisis where their executives decide to join competitors’ firms. Along with the 2013 amendment in Trade Secrets Law, which crminizlized trade secrets infringemenet, the relationship between the trade secret protection and job mobility has drew wide attention from IP practitioers and academia. In the case of TSMC v. Liang, the Intellectual Property Court first applied the inevitable disclosure doctrine in an injunction relief. Since the inevitable disclosure doctrine originates from the judicial development of the United States (U.S) trade secret law, the thesis first introduces the basic idea of the inevitable disclosure doctrine in the U.S., and then through five representative cases, including Allis-Calmers v. Continental, PepsiCo v. Redmond, Bimbo v. Botticella, Whyte v. Schlage, and EarthWeb v. Schlack. It then investigates the overall development of the inevitable disclosure doctrine in the U.S.. Based on the case-law development, the thesis further analyzes the essential factors of the inevitable disclosure doctrine incluing the competition between rivals, indentification of trade secrets, job similarity, dishonest act and the relationship with non-disclosure agreement and covenant not to compete. It also catalgorizes four types of judicial application of the inevitable disclosure doctrine, including the original, extended, limited and rejected type. Furthermore, the thesis analyzes the type of application of the inevitable disclosure doctrine in each state in the U.S.. Last but not least, back to TSMC v. Liang, the thesis analyzes if the above-mentioned factors of the inevitable disclosure doctrine fit in the case, and reviews the court ruling about the inevitable disclosure doctrine. In conclusion, based on the current development of judicial practice, the thesis assesses the application of inevitable disclosure doctrine in Trade Secrets Law in Taiwan with the polict goal to balance various interests.
    Reference: 中文文獻
    專書
    王偉霖,營業秘密法理論與實務,2015年4月。
    林洲富,智慧財產權法-案例式,8版,2014年8月。
    林洲富,智慧財產權法專題研究(一),2006年5月。
    林洲富,營業秘密與競業禁止-案例式,2版,2014年9月。
    徐振雄,智慧財產權概論,2版,2014年2月。
    張靜,我國營業秘密法學的建構與開展第一冊:營業秘密的基礎理論,2007年4月。
    張靜,營業秘密法及相關智慧財產問題,3版,2009年1月。
    曾勝珍,智慧財產權法專論-科技時代新思維,2011年8月。
    馮震宇,了解營業秘密法-營業秘密法的理論與實務,2版,1998年6月。
    馮震宇,鳥瞰21世紀智慧財產─從創新研發到保護運用,2011年5月。
    馮震宇,智慧財產權發展趨勢與重要問題研究,2版,2011年1月。
    黃三榮、林發立、郭雨嵐、張韶文,營業秘密-企業權益之保護,2002年3月。
    詹森林,競業禁止與保密條款契約實務,3版,2009年1月。
    劉孔中,解構智財法及其與競爭法的衝突與調和,2015年6月。
    劉江彬,智慧財產法律與管理案例評析(一),2003年10月。
    劉江彬,智慧財產法律與管理案例評析(二),2004年11月。
    劉江彬,智慧財產法律與管理案例評析(三),2004年11月。
    劉博文,智慧財產權之保護與管理, 2002年7月。
    劉瀚宇,智慧財產權法,3版,2010年8月。
    鄭中人,智慧財產法導讀,2版,2002年8月。
    賴文智、顏雅倫,營業秘密法二十講,2004年4月。
    戴學文,營業秘密保護大趨勢,1993年4月。
    謝銘洋,智慧財產法導論,2版,2007年2月。
    謝銘洋,智慧財產權之制度與實務,2版,2004年10月。
    謝銘洋,智慧財產權法,5版,2014年8月。
    謝銘洋、古清華、丁中原、張凱娜,營業秘密法解讀,1996年11月。
    專書論文
    周天,企業強化營業秘密管理的法律須知,載:營業秘密管理高手,2000年3月。
    徐盛國,客戶資訊與營業秘密之芻議,載:著作權及營業秘密法制與實務論文集,2006年6月。
    張凱娜,營業秘密,載:智慧財產權入門,10版,2014年9月。
    賴文智,營業秘密法制之研究,載:著作權及營業秘密法制與實務論文集,2006年6月。
    期刊
    王偉霖,營業秘密與離職後競業禁止約款─評臺灣台北地方法院九十七年勞訴字第十四號判決,月旦法學雜誌,186期,頁193-219,2010年11月。
    吳淑莉,企業併購對離職後競業禁止約定效力之影響,臺灣本土法學雜誌,84期,頁13-24,2006年7月。
    李治安,失衡的承諾:著作權法責任避風港規範之立法政策評析(Policy Implications of the ISP Safe Harbor in Copyright Law),國立臺灣大學法學論叢,43 卷 1 期 ,頁143-207,2014年3月。
    李治安,合理保密措施與客戶資訊之營業秘密保護/最高院102台上235民事判決,台灣法學雜誌,238期,頁199-207,2013年12月。
    李治安、馮震宇,臺灣營業秘密侵害訴訟之實證研究,月旦法學雜誌,216期,頁151-173,2013年5月。
    陳良榕,捍衛商業秘密-台灣兩兆產業的迫切危機,天下雜誌,565期,頁118-123,2015年1月。
    陳良榕,獵殺叛降-揭祕梁孟松投效三星始末,天下雜誌,565期,頁108-117,2015年1月。
    陳秉訓,營業秘密法「不可避免揭露原則」之商榷:評智慧財產法院100年度暫字第5號民事裁定,法令月刊,65卷9期,頁10-33,2014年9月。
    陳信至,美國營業秘密案例中之必然揭露理論(the Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine),萬國法律,136期,頁2-16,2004年8月。
    曾勝珍,「美國離職後競業禁止條款」之適用探討-兼比較我國法,國立中正大學法學集刊,14期,頁395-444,2004年1月。
    黃程貫,客戶資訊是否為營業秘密與離職後競業禁止約款之審酌要素/台北地院九八勞訴一〇五,臺灣法學雜誌,141期,頁235-236,2009年12月。
    劉詠萱,美國法上營業秘密案例與「不可避免揭露」理論之淺介,資訊法務透析, 10卷10期,頁27-35,1988年10月。
    論文
    楊雅竹,營業秘密合理保密措施之研究,國立政治大學智慧財產研究所碩士論文,2013年1月。
    吳展宇,論客戶資訊之保護-以個人資料保護法與營業秘密法為核心,國立政治大學科技管理與智慧財產研究所碩士論文,2014年6月。
    黃偉銘,員工競業禁止條款效力之研究-以競業禁止制度及營業秘密制度為中心-,國立高雄大學法律學系研究所碩士論文,2011年7月。
    梁文中,營業秘密與競業禁止之研究,天主教輔仁大學法律學系碩士在職專班碩士論文,2013年7月。
    湯文章,勞工離職後競業禁止與營業秘密之保護,國立東華大學財經法律研究所,2008年6月。
    網路資源
    章忠信,「營業秘密」之範圍與條件,2003年9月, http://www.copyrightnote.org/ArticleContent.aspx?ID=8&aid=2466。
    章忠信,競業禁止條款之破解與攻防,2011年9月,http://www.copyrightnote.org/ArticleContent.aspx?ID=8&aid=2493。
    章忠信,經營高層之轉職應注意不可避免揭露原則之適用,2010年2月,http://www.copyrightnote.org/ArticleContent.aspx?ID=24&aid=523。
    章忠信,營業秘密與其他智慧財產權之關係,2001年10月,http://www.copyrightnote.org/ArticleContent.aspx?ID=8&aid=2467。
    英文文獻
    專書
    DAVID W. QUINTO, STUART H. SINGER, TRADE SECRETS: LAW AND PRACTICE (2009).
    PAUL GOLDSTEIN, R. ANTHONY REESE, COPYRIGHT, PATENT, TRADEMARK, AND RELATED STATE DOCTRINES : CASES AND MATERIALS ON THE LAW OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (6th ed. 2010).
    ROBERT P. MERGES, PETER S. MENELL, MARK A. LEMLEY, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY IN THE NEW TECHNOLOGICAL AGE (6th ed. 2012).
    期刊
    Alex Harrell, Feature: Is Anything Inevitable? The Impending Clash Between The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine And The Covenants Not To Compete Act, 76 TEX. B.J. 757 (2013).
    Barry L. Cohen, The Current Status Of The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, 3 NO. 2 LANDSLIDE 40 (2010).
    Eleanore R. Godfrey, Inevitable Disclosure Of Trade Secrets: Employee Mobility V. Employer`s Rights, 3 J. HIGH TECH. L. 161 (2004).
    Gregory Porter, Joseph Beauchamp, Feature: The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine And Its Effect On Employee Mobility, 44-DEC HOUS. LAW. 36 (2006).
    Gretchen L. Jankowski, The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine--Inability Of Former Employees To Perform Without Disclosing Confidential Information, 75 PA. B.A. Q. 34 (2004).
    Jessica Lee, The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine: Safeguarding The Privacy Of Trade Secrets, 33-OCT COLO. LAW. 17 (2004).
    Johanna L. Edelstein, Intellectual Slavery?: The Doctrine Of Inevitable Disclosure Of Trade Secrets, 26 GOLDEN GATE U. L. REV. 717 (1996).
    Jonathan O. Harris, Note: The Doctrine Of Inevitable Disclosure: A Proposal To Balance Employer And Employee Interests, 78 WASH. U. L.Q. 325 (2000).
    Juliet Ruth Otten, The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine In Illinois: Is It An Inevitable Mistake?, 2 J. MARSHALL REV. INTELL. PROP. L. 379 (2003).
    Kevin R. Eberle, Eroding Disfavor Of Non-Competes And The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine In South Carolina, 20-NOV S.C. LAW. 12 (2008).
    Melissa M. Stewart, Comment: Minnesota And The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine: Finding A Solution Amidst The Confusion, 33 HAMLINE L. REV. 649 (2010).
    Michael B. Carlinsky, Lara M. Krieger, Protecting Trade Secrets: Using ‘Inevitable Misappropriation’ And The Exit Interview, 71-FEB N.Y. ST. B.J. 29 (1999).
    Michael R. Levinson, Feature: Inevitable Disclosure: Inquiring Into The Minds Of Former Employees, 16-MAY CBA REC. 34 (2002).
    Michele B. Fagin, Non-Compete By Non-Disclosure: The Doctrine Of Inevitable Disclosure, 28-SEP COLO. LAW. 73 (1999).
    Nathan Hamler, Note: The Impending Merger Of The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine And Negative Trade Secrets: Is Trade Secrets Law Headed In The Right Direction?, 25 J. CORP. L. 383 (2000).
    Randy Burton, Esq., Samuel H. Johnson, Esq., Cara Burton, Esq., The Sound Of Inevitability: The Doctrine Of Inevitable Disclosure Of Trade Secrets Comes To Texas, 43-WTR TEX. J. BUS. L. 537 (2009).
    Renée Cavalovitch, Note and Comment: The Inevitable Demise Of “Inevitable Disclosure” In California: Appellate Court Rejects The Doctrine In Schlage Lock Co. V. Whyte, 22 J.L. & COM. 37 (2002).
    Robert B. Fitzpatrick, Inevitable Disclosure: New Jersey, Maryland, District Of Columbia, SD06 ALI-ABA 1347 (1998).
    Ronald J. Gilson, Article: The Legal Infrastructure Of High Technology Industrial Districts: Silicon Valley, Route 128, And Covenants Not To Compete, 74 N.Y.U. L. REV. 575 (1999).
    Ryan M. Wiesner, Comments: A State-By-State Analysis Of Inevitable Disclosure: A Need For Uniformity And A Workable Standard, 16 MARQ. INTELL. PROP. L. REV. 211 (2012).
    Shannon Aaron, Note and Comment: Using The History Of Noncompetition Agreements To Guide The Future Of The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, 17 LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 1191 (2013).
    Sonya P. Passi, Compensated Injunctions: A More Equitable Solution To The Problem Of Inevitable Disclosure, 27 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 927 (2012).
    Thomas A. Muccifori, Benjamin D. Morgan, Feature: Exploring The Nooks And Crannies Of The Inevitable Disclosure Doctrine, 287-APR N.J. LAW. 84 (2014).
    Thomas Propson, Livia Babcock, Expecting Inevitable Disclosure, 63-NOV BENCH & B. MINN. 20 (2006).
    William Lynch Schaller, Trade Secret Inevitable Disclosure: Substantive, Procedural & Practical Implications Of An Evolving Doctrine (Part II), 86 J. PAT. & TRADEMARK OFF. SOC`Y 411 (2004).
    William Lynch Schaller, Trade Secret Inevitable Disclosure: Substantive, Procedural & Practical Implications Of An Evolving Doctrine (Part I) Continued Next Month, 86 J. PAT. & TRADEMARK OFF. SOC`Y 336 (2004).
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    法律科際整合研究所
    101652010
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1016520101
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[法律科際整合研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    010101.pdf1458KbAdobe PDF22130View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback