金融产品的专利保护

详细信息    本馆镜像全文|  推荐本文 |  |   获取CNKI官网全文

英文题名：Intellectual Property Protection of Financial Products 作者：冯孝荣 论文级别：博士 学科专业名称：民商法学 中文关键词：知识产权 ; 金融产品 ; 金融知识产权 ; 商业方法专利保护 ; 金融产品专利保护 英文关键词：intellectual property ; financial products ; intellectual property protection by business methods ; intellectual property protection for financial products 学位年度：2011 导师：张楚 学科代码：030105 学位授予单位：中国政法大学 论文提交日期：2011-03-01

摘要

本论文以“金融产品的专利保护”作为研究的主题与方向。作为一个香港研究生,在这个论题上并没有根据香港现时的专利保护状态来进行研究,因为自香港回归以後,虽然保留大部份英治时代的法例,但在知识产权及专利方面都是以国家法规为先,所以本论文就以宏观的角度和我国相关的法律意义来进行研究。
     基本上在研究一个知识产权、或称知慧财产的保护时,可以根据广阔的知识产品保护或在专利立法层面的某种专利保护模式来研究,这个研究将把论证的范围放在专利保护范畴内,同时亦论及针对论题标的「金融产品」知识产权保护内各种选择。
     論文的一個基本论點是金融產品是否比較適宜以商業方法的专利保護方式来實施保護。所以前提也必须澄清金融產品是產品,還是方法,應視為“產品孈币只蚴恰胺椒▽@薄;旧稀⒔鹑诋a品只不過是一種經營中直接或簡接獲取利益的工具之名稱。在商業營運,管理学及经济学中的定義,任何能獲取利益的東西都稱之為產品。购买者购买产品并非购买产品的单纯购买表面,而是购买产品能提供予的价值。而本论文的研究把金融产品划分为投资性(交易性)和工具性(金融管理工具),其中投资性的、如证券及各种储蓄存款已广泛被作用为群众的资金寄托工具,与一般民众的生活息息相关,而且传统上的金融产品因为其广泛被接受、认同及使用性,已具备了一定程度的公共性。在社会效益的前提下,较难具备可专利性;工具性是能作为一种能与计算机及软件结合,产生积极的金融盈利效果,虽然在一般习惯上仍视之为“产品”但在专利中应被归类为一种方法。金融产品只是对金融产品中金融工具的一种称谓。在论文本文中第一章、第五节,及第三章,第一及第二节有较详细的解说和论述。
     在研究的前提上,首先从对金融产品实施知识产品保护的价值角度,和提供了一些案例来确立对金融产品实施知识产品保护的必须性,同时在绪论内浅略地对金融产品专利保护之方式作了探讨,为研究定下了一个前期性的假设,即金融产品是比较适宜以商业方法类别的专利保护方式来实施保护。为了更有效地使本研究集中主题,同时也就现时的研究现状及本研究的方法与范围定一个方向。
     由于本研究认为从知识产权立法,以致对金融产品实施知识产权保护是对整个经济和社会状态都有着较大的影响,所以在文献综述及评析一章内较大量地援引了经典的法经济理论及中外的文献以作考究,并加以评析。这些文献的回顾及论点的指引,对本研究产生了指导性的作用,使研究上具备了适当的查考及思想范畴。
     在整个研究过程中,通过中外案例的启发和深入的探讨,发现了在知识产权的前提性意义上,金融产品是具备了独特的性质,一方面是该等产品的功能、交易方式和价值与其他类别的产品是无可比拟的;另一方面是因为其对各个重要范畴的影响力,对之实施保护的意义已不是像其他工业产品一样,更加是以保护权利人的利益和调整社会关系,促进科技发展那么标准性,更加是以通过保护金融产品的手段,平衡社会经济利益,维持其稳定性。根据研究成果,金融产品不旦对相关权利人具备了利益上的意义,而更加对整体经济的发展和稳定产生了巨大的意义;而由于现代社会环境及经济模式的促成,市民是广泛的涉及到金融产品的投资活动、或在各层面上受其影响力所波及,所以在社会意义上,对金融产品提供专利保护,使金融市场因而间接更有效地受监管,产生了稳定社会的作用。
     在保护的范畴内,本研究认为应该被知拖予专利保护的并非传统的金融产品,而是具备创新性的金融管理工具类金融产品。因为创新金融产品应被分为两类别,就是金融管理工具及金融投资类,而工具类金融产品是较具备可专利性的,致少目前以商业方法结合计算机软硬性的方式取得专利保护的状况是如此;投资性金融产品却具备较多的公共性,现时尚难以获保专利保护。
     在本研究中,其中一个重点是研究对象的「金融产品」之定义,及对之研究的意义。所以首先在第一章中分别确立了研究的必要性,同时论述了金融产品与知慧财产的关系,并分析金融产品的专利保护性质是方法专利;在第二章中引述了较多的相关文献,主要从经济及社会利益角度去评析金融产品知识产品保护的合理性;第三章我把金融产品的定义及特质说明了,并证明其与我国专利保护客体的关联;重点在第四章「金融产品专利保护的要件」,引证“金融产品”是符合我国专利保护的要件要求,除引述我国的相关法规外,并引用了世界知识产权立法先进国的对金融产品知识产权保护情况;在第六章则研究了金融产品的各种可能保护方式,并进一步确认为以商业方法保护,引证对金融产品采取以商业方法专利保护的正确性;在第五章则重点於世界各国的相关案例分析,以佐证各国对金融产品所采取的措施,及保护金融产品的现况,以证明本研究的合理性;整个研究在第七章作一总结,同时总结研究的成果,并提供进一步研究的建议。
     本研究的结论为金融产品的知识产权保护定出了保护的模式,指出了对其保护的价值及影响,同时也对实施保护的困难作出了论点,并定下了持续研究的范畴,如在这些持续研究的范畴上获得突破,将对整个金融产业及宏观经济能作出更大的贡献。
The present paper takes the research of“Patent protection for financial products”to be the subject and the direction. As a Hong Kong graduate student, I didn’t conducted the research in this thesis according to the Hong Kong present intellectual property rights condition after, because after the return of Hong Kong, although retention major part England governs the time the legal regulation, but in the intellectual property rights and the patent aspect all is take the national laws and regulations as first, therefore this research on is connected by the macroscopic angle and our country the legal significance carries on.
     Basically, an intellectual property in research, or protection of property known wisdom, based on extensive knowledge of product patent protection or patent protection for certain legislative level model to study the scope of this study will demonstrate the scope of patent protection on within, and also discussed the subject for the topic "financial product" within the intellectual property protection options.
     The basic main point of this paper is the financial product comparison being suitable commercial method category patent protection way implementation protection. Therefore the premise also must clarify the financial product is a product, the method, should regard as“the product patent”or is“the method patent”. Basically, the financial product is in one kind of tools used to directly or indirect gaining benefit. In the management science and the economic definition, any can gain the benefit thing all to call it“the product”. The buyer purchase products is target to purchases the product by no means the pure purchase surface, but purchases the value which the product can provide gives. But the present paper research divides the financial product into the investment (transaction nature) and utilizable, in which investment, like the negotiable securities and each kind of savings deposit has been affected widely for populace's fund reposing tool, is related with common populace's life all kinds, therefore existence big public nature. In under the social efficiency premise, difficult to have the patentability; Utilizable is can take one kind can with the computer and the software union, produces the positive financial profit results, therefore should regard as one method. The financial product only is to the financial product in the financial tool one kind of name. In paper this article first chapter, fifth, and the third chapter, first and second has the detailed illustration and the elaboration.
     In the research premise, first from the point of the value of implement the intellectual property rights protection of financial product, with provided some cases to establish to the financial product implementation knowledge product protection must the nature, simultaneously seized territory shallowly in the introduction to way of the financial product patent protection has made the discussion, has settled preliminary for the research the supposition, namely the financial product was compares being suitable to implement the protection by the commercial method category patent protection way. In order to causes this research centralism subject effectively, simultaneously also decides a direction on the present research present situation and this research method and the scope.
     Because this research reveals the intellectual property rights legislation, so that is all has to the financial product implementation intellectual property rights protection to the entire economy and the social condition the tremendous influence, therefore summarized and evaluates in one chapter massively to cite the classics law economic theory and the Chinese and foreign literature in the literature does elegantly, and evaluated. These literature review and the argument direction, has had the guidance function to this research, caused in the research to have the suitable investigation and the thought category.
     In the entire research process, through the Chinese and foreign case inspiration and the thorough discussion, had discovered in the knowledge product premise significance, the financial product has had the unique nature, on the one hand is this and so on the product functions, the transaction way and the value and other category product is incomparable; On the other hand is because of it to each important category influence, already was not other industry product is likely same to it implementation protection significance, protected obligee's benefit and the adjustment social
     According to the research results, the financial product has not had in the benefit significance to the correlation obligee, but and has had the huge significance stably to the overall economical development; But because the modern society environment and economic type facilitating, the resident is widespread involving to financial product investment, or is affected in various stratification planes its influence, therefore in the social significance, provides the patent protection to the financial product, causes the money market thus indirect receives effectively supervises and manages, has had the stable society's function.
     In the protection category, this research thinks should by the knowledge product protection by no means the traditional financial product, but has the innovative financial product, these financial product should divide into two categories, is the financial management tool and the financial investment class, but the tool class finance product has patentability, sends few at present obtains the patent protection by the commercial method union computer soft rigid way the condition is so; The investment financial product has many public actually, the present fashion attains with difficulty guarantees the patent protection.
     In this research, first separately has established the research necessity in the first chapter, simultaneously elaborated the financial product with to know the bright property the relations, and analyzed the financial product the intellectual property rights protection nature is the method patent; Has quoted many related literature in the second chapter, mainly evaluates the financial product knowledge product protection from the economical and the social benefit angle the rationality; Third chapter I explained the financial product definition and the special characteristic, and proved it returns to the knowledge product protection object with me the connection; Key in fourth chapter“financial product patent protection important document”, the adduction“the financial product”conforms to our country patent protection important document requirement, besides quotes our country's related laws and regulations, and has quoted the world multi-intellectual property rights legislation advanced country's to the financial product intellectual property rights protection situation; Has studied the financial product each possibility protection way in the sixth rules, and determines the nature of for it as by the commercial method protection, cites as proof adopts to the financial product by the commercial method patent protection accuracy; Key divides the benefit in the fifth rules in the various countries related case, by the evidence various countries the measure which adopts to the financial product, and protection finance product present situation, by card Ming dynasty printed books research rationality; The entire research in the seventh chapter in a summary, simultaneously summarizes the research achievement, and provides the suggestion which further studies.
     This research conclusion has decided on the protection pattern for the financial product intellectual property rights protection, had pointed out to its protection value and the influence, simultaneously also to implemented the protection the difficulty to make the argument, and has settled the category which studied continually, if obtains the breakthrough in the category which these studied continually, will be able to make a bigger contribution to the entire financial industry and the macroscopic economy.

引文

6知识产权法的经济结构第15页
    7知识产权法的经济结构第20页
    8知识产权法的经济结构第21页
    9知识产权法的经济结构第22页
    10知识产权法的经济结构第24页
    11知识产权法的经济结构第26页
    
    12知识产权法的经济结构第382页
    13知识产权法的经济结构第383页
    14知识产权的经济结构第386页
    15知识产权法的经济结构第389页
    16 Josh Lerner, Where Does State Street Lead? A First Look at Finance Patents, 1971 to 2000 [J]. The Journal of Finance, April2002, pp.901-930
    17 Paul R. Kitch., Patenting Innovative Business Methods-Protecting Intangible Assets [N]. Insurance Advocate2003. 10. 13, pp.29-49
    18 Josh Lerner., The Two-Edged Sword: The Competitive Implications of Financial Patents [EB/OL]. http://www.frbatlanta.org/invoke.cfm? objected=A6BDAC9C384A-4C59-9096A079D324A9B7&method=display.
    19 Christopher Petruzzi, Ivlarguerite Dei Vaiie, and Stephen Judiowe., Patent and Copyright Protection for Innovations in Finance [J]. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT/WINTER 1988, pp.66-71.
    21 Paul E. Schaafsma, Trends in the Law: Financial Product Patents [J]. Bank Accounting & Finance, Feb2003, pp.12-16
    22 Paul E. Schaafsma, Financial Product Patents: Au Update [J]. BANK ACOUNTING & FINANCE, DECEMBER 2005-JANUARY 2006, pp.21-27
    23美国专利是授予个人,但是如果个人被支付报酬进行发明创造,则专利授多雇主。
    24即如果雇主的资源被用于发明创造;但雇员没有被支付报酬,则雇主并不具有排它的专利授权,雇员可以保持授予专利的权利,即雇主和雇员可以共同拥有知识产权。这种知识产权共有模式对雇主的利益是灾难性的,因为和有形资产的联合产权不一样,任何一个专利共有者都可以不经过其它共有者而独立利用专利包括将专利许可绐竞争者。因此,一个金融公司的知识产权应该确保与雇员的书面协议清楚到位。
    25 ROBERT P. MERGES., The Uninvited Guest: Patents on Wall Street [J]. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta ECONOMICREVIEW Fourth Quarter 2003, pp.1-14
    26 U.S. Patent 6, 088, 685, issued July 20, 2000, assigned to Mopex Inc. A mutual fund securitization process permitting the trading of open end mutual funds. The targeted individual open end mutual fund or group of open end mutual funds, selected through a screening process is securitized through the creation of a new, separate security. This new security is preferably a“closed end fund of funds”and linked derivative securities, which synthetically replicate the statistical relationship of the defined individual or group of open end mutual funds.
    27 Bronwyn H. Hall., May 2003, Business Method Patents, Innovation, and Policy [R]. NBER Working Paper No.9717 http://www.nber.org/papers/w9717.
    28 most economists view the patent system as a necessary evil; With a patent grant we trade off short term exclusive (monopoly) rights to the use of the invention in return for two things- (1) an incentive to create the innovation and (2) early publication of information about the invention and its enablement.”
    29 JOHN M. CONLEY., The International Law of Business Method Patents [J]. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Economic Review Fourth Quarter 2003, pp.15-34
    30“a system of transacting business disconnected from the means for carrying out the system is not an art”(p.469). By“art,”it meant“process”as that term is currently used in Section 101.
    31 CLIFFORD S. STANFORD., Business Method Patents and Financial Services [J]. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta ECONOMIC REVIEW Fourth Quarter 2003, pp.5-8.
    32刘尚志、陈佳麟:《电子商业软件之专利保护──发展、分析、创新与策略》,中国政法大学出版社2004年版。
    33李柏静:《创新金融专利探索》,台湾地区元勤科技股份有限公司2001年版。
    34易宪容:“中国从容面对外资银行开放”,载WTO经济导刊2006.12,第12-13页。
    35投资者根据所购买的金融产品性质得到获利的机会,利益的模式可能是金钱、股权、未来购买权或其他应的价值。
    36投资者所获得的不只是表观价值,而且获得一种相应的权利和衍生的机会,能从这些权利和机会中得到附加的利益。
    40见《国际会计准则第18号一收入》第31段和《国际会计准则32号—金融工具:列报和披露》第61段
    41 basis points,指利率计算基点,一基点为1%的1%一译注
    42两国间利率差异.等同于其远期汇率升贴水的幅度,惟方向相反
    43 George C. Chacko : Financial Instryments and Markets
    44 C.w.Smithson.C.W.Smith,Jr.with D&Sykes wilford,Managing Financial Risk,1995.at235-246。
    45金融机构衍生产品交易业务管理暂行办法
    46 A, Hudson, The Law on Financial Derivaatives London: Sweet & Maxwell 2 nd
    64 U.S.Securities and Exchange Commission,Report to the Congress:Impact of Technology on Securities Markets,PartΠ,C3:Development of New Product and Services,Ref.:http://www.sec.gov/news/studies/techrp97.htm
    67 See Fonvard of Annual Report of 2003,at http//annual-report.European-Patent-0ffice.org/2003/review
    
    68《审查指南(1986)》第二部分第12章
    69《审查指南(1993)》第二部分第9章
    70《审查指南(2001)》第二部分第9章
    71《审查指南(2006)》第二部分第9章
    72《专利法(2008)》第25章
    
    73《审查指南(2006)》第二部分第1章第2条
    74《审查指南(2006)》第二部分第9章第2条
    75《审查指南(2006)》第二部分第1章第4条第2款
    77《审查指南(2006)》第二部分第1章第4条第2款
    78《审查指南(2006)》第二部分第1章第4条第2款
    79 Diamond v. Chakrabarty.447 U.s.303,309(1980)
    80 See Committee Reports accompanying the 1952 Act.H.R.Rep.No.1923.82d Cong.,2d Sess.,6(1952)
    81该款规定:「联邦议会...为促进科学与实用技术之发展,对于作者及发明人...,得给予一定期间内就其发明或创作享有独占、排他之权利」
    82 H.F. Schwartz, Patent Law and Practice, The Bureau of National Affairs. Inc., 3rded.2001, at 62
    83 PD Rosenberg Patent Law Fundamentals. Clark Boardman Company Ltd., 1981, chapter 6.01
    84 Schwartz. Supra note 60, at 63
    85 S.W Halpern, C.A. Nard & L.P. Keneeth, Fundamentals of United States Intellectual Property Law: Copyright, Patent and Trademark, Kluwer Law International, 1999, at 228
    86 Park-in Theatres, Inc. v. Rogers at..130 F.2d 745. 746
    87 Diamond v. Chakrabary. Supra note 55, at 304
    88 Schwartz. Supra note 60, at 64
    89 R.A.Choate, W. H. Francis & R.c. Collins, Casese and Materials on Patent Law, West Pub. Co., 3rded. 518-519
    90 Rosenberg, supra note 61
    91 Choate al., supra npte 67, at 526
    92 US. Manual of Patent Examining Procedure 706.03: Rejections Under 35 U.S.c. 101,规定三个客体不得受专利保护(印刷物Printed Matter;自然产生之物Naturally Occurring;非人为制造物nor human manufacture;科学原理Scientific Principle)
    93在Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175.185案中,联邦最高法表示有三个客体不得受专利保护,亦即自然法则Law of mature;自然现象natural phenomen;抽象观念abstract ideas。另在Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63.67案中,美国最高法院指出自然现象phenomena of nature;心智步骤mental processes;抽象概念abstract intellectual concepts是不能专利的,因为它们是科学与科技成果的基础工具
    94 42 U.S.C.§2128(a)(1999)
    95 We find here no authority to grant a patent for a“principle”or a“mode of operation”, or am idea, or any other abstraction. See Burrv v. Duryee, 68 U.S. 531, 570
    96 Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co. v. Radio Crop. Of America, 306 U.S. 86.94
    97 Rosenberg, supra note 61
    98 Rodenberg, supra noe 61, chapter 6.02
    99 W.R. Cornish & D. Llewelyn, Intellectual Property, London:Sweet & Maxwell, 5thed.2003, at 339
    100 Schwartz, supra npte 60, at 66-67
    101 Cornish et al., supra note 82. at 340
    102 Schwartz, supra note 60 at 71
    103 Halpern, supra note 63, at 203-204
    104 Cornish et al., supra note 82
    105 Halpern, supra note 63, at 217
    106 Schwartz, supra note 60, at 64
    107 Haplern, supra note 91
    108 In re Brana. 51 F.3d 1560, 1566,
    109 United States Court of appeals for the Federal Circuit,简称CAEC ,于1982年成立,为关税及专利上诉法院及政府赔偿法院(Court of Claims)受理上诉案件部门改制而成,其独立于13个上诉巡回法院(Circuit Courts fo Appeals)中,受理由全国各地地方法院上诉之关于国际贸易、政府契约、专利、商标及对美国政府相关金钱赔偿等案件
    110 Cornish et al., supra note 82, at 742
    111 Cornish et al., supra note 82, at 531-532
    112 In re Dow Chemical Co., 837F.2d 469, 473
    113 Cornish et al., supra note 82, at 530
    114 Graham et al. v. John Deere Co. 383 U.S.1.148
    115 Schwartz, supra note 60, at74
    116 Halpen, supra note 63, at 224-225
    117 In re Rex D. Schrader and Eugene D. Klingaman. 22 F.3d 290
    118 Automated Financial of Management Data Processing Methods ( Business Method), ref. http:// www,uspto.gov/web/menu/busmethp/indes.html
    119 Business Method patent Improvements Act o 2000, H.R. 5364 of 106thCongress,ref.:htto://www.thomas. loc.gov/home/search.html
    120 Hotel Security Checking Co. v. Lorain Co., 160F. 467
    121 In re Schrader, ssupra note 105, at 298
    122该案法官解释韦伯大字典对“art”的定义为:运用方法以达成所欲求之结果(the employment ofmeans to accomplish some desired end)、采用自然界的事没以运用于生活中(the adaptation of thinds in the natural world to the uses of life)、应用知识及力量在实际的目的上(the application of knowledge or power to practical purposes)
    123 Hotel Security Checking Co., supra note 108, at 469
    124 Loew's Drive-In Theatres,Inc.v..Park-In Theatres,174F.2d 547,552(1949)案中,CAFC指出单纯从事商业交易之制度,即使具备新颖性及非显而易见性等专利要件,或真能达成商务成功之目的,亦不具可专利性。
    125 William D Wiese,Death of a Myth:The Patenting of Internet Business Models After State Street Bank,Marqutte Intellectual Property Law Review ,4 Marq.Inetll.Porp.L.Rev.17(2000),at 30.
    126 In re Schader,supra note 105,at 298.
    127 Hotel Security Checking Co.,Supra note 108,at 472(1908).
    128 In re Schrader, supra note 15, at 298
    129 In re Ahoward, 384 F.2d 869,872,本案是Howard & Brobeck申请将其零售杂货存货定价方法及设备之发明。取得专利,经USPTO否决,而上诉CCPA
    130 Dann v、hohnston, 425 U.S. 219.221,案是Johnson申请将其以计算机系统自动记录银行支票及存款账户生状况,使银行能透过机器判读的分类密码,总结客户各账户交易的金额,而成为客户对银行的单一账户之发明取得专利,经USPTO否决,上诉CCPA时获得胜诉,惟USPTO再上诉联邦最高法院后,最高法院认为本申请案与在先技术即使有所不同,其差异性也没太大分别,足以题示其具有非显而易见性,故不能给予专利
    131 In re Patten, 127 F.3d 324, 327
    132 In re Schrader, supra note 105, at 298
    133 See,e.g.,In re Toma,575 F.2d 872,877-78,197 USPQ 852,857(CCPA 1978);In re Musgrave,431 F.2d 882,893,167 USPQ 280,289-90(CPPA 1970);In re Schrader,22F.3d 290,297-98,30 USPQ 2d 1455,1461-62(Fed. Cir .1994)(Newman,J.,dissenting);Paine,Webber,Jackson&Curtis,Inc.v.Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner&Simith, Inc., 564F.Supp.1358,1368-69,218USPQ 212,220(D.Del.1983)
    134 William D Wiese,supra note 114,at 36.
    135 Office personnel have had difficulty in properly treating claims directed to methods of doing business.Claims should not be categorized as methods of doing business.Instead,such claims should be treated like any other
    140 In re Chatfield, 545 F.2d 152,156(1976).
    141 See the definition of "algorithm" in C.sippl,computer dictionary and handbook 23(2nd ed .1972):"A fixed step-by-step procedure for accomplishing a given result;usually a simplified procedure for solving a complex problem".
    142 In re Freeman,573 F.2d 1237,1245(1978).
    143 In re Schrader,supra note 105,at 293
    144原文为The Court stated in Mackay Co.v.Radio Corp.,…that"while a scientific truth,or the mathematical expression of it ,is not patentable invention ,a novel and useful structure created with the aid of knowledge of scientific truth may be."The statement followed…"an idea of itself is not patentable" Rubber-Tip Pencil Co.v.Howard,…As we stated in Funk Bros. Seed Co.v.Kalo Co.,…"He who discovers a hitherto unknown phenomenon of nature has no claim to a monopoly of it which the law recognizes.If there is to be invention from such a discovery, it must come from the application of the law of nature to a new and useful end." See Gottschalk v.Benson,supra note 131,at 66.
    145 .Diamond v.Diehr,supra note 731,at 186
    148 Mackay v. Radio,Supra note 77,at 91.
    149 Tilghman v. Proctor,102 U.S.707,728(1880).
    150 Parker v. Flook, supra note 141,at 590.
    151 In re Chatfield,supra note 133,at 158.法院不同意所谓的「新颖性点」(at the point of novelty)即专利申请范围是否符合专利法中法定可专利客体的决定关键。
    152 In re Richman,573F.2d 1026,1030(1977)
    153 In re Freeman,573F.2d 1237(1978).Freeman所申请专利的发明,是透过计算机控制系统,将传统照相制版机器的排版系统,以字母与数字元元记号构成的格式执行排版作业。USPTO以其请求范围的新颖性仅存于排版所运用的定位演绎法则(Local position algorithm )而驳回其申请,经USPTO上诉委员会确认驳回处分后,申请人上诉CCPA.
    154 In re Walter,618 F.2d 758(1980).William C. Walter就其将地音探测器测得之地震波数据,转化为电子讯号,记录在磁带或图表载体上,以供分析地球地表以下结构性质之发明申请专利,经USPTO上诉委员会以非可专利客体理由决议驳回后,上诉CCPA.
    155 Id.,at 766.CCPA举出联邦最高法院在Flook案中曾说到:「我们的结论是推论能想象现代商业计算机程序发展前所写下的观念」,而最高法院所依据的判决先例,如Mackay Radio(Supra note 66)与Eibel precess Co.v.Minnesota and Ontario Paper Co.,261 U.S.45(1923)等案,都是把该测试法的适用而致纷争专利由原判决所认为的法定专利客体,变成非法定专利客体。
    156 Id.,法院特别在此声明,是因USPTO之前对algorithm定义后采购者。
    158 Gottschalk v. Benson, supra note 131,at 71
    159 Diamond v. Diehr,supra note 73,at 188-189
    166 In re Taner,681 F.2d 787(1982).
    167 In re Meyer,688 F.2d 789(1982)
    168 In re Alappat,supra note 162,at 1557,法官ARCHER不同意见书。
    169 State Street Bank ,Supra note 127,at 1373-1375.
    170 BUSINESS METHODS PATENT INITIATIVE :AN ACTION PLAN, Ref.: http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/actionplan.html
    171 USPTO于1813年建立美国专利分类,作为申请案审查前之分类,其分类是以机能为准,由主分类与次分类所构成,根据美国专利法第九条规定,为正确及迅速确定申请案之可专利性,专利局可依据已获准为美国专利保护客体之相关档案,修正美国专利之分类。其中第705分类的定义揭示该类型专利包括:处理或统计数据的机械及其相映之处理方法、主要系运用商业活动、行政事物、公司管理或财务数据之处理,才属于第705分类专利类型之范畴。http://www.uspto.Gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/def/705.htm
    172亦即「Business Method Patent Improvement Act of 2000」,supra note 107.
    173 H.R.1332 of 107th Congress,可查于http://thomas.loc.gov/home/search.html.该改革法案已陈于国会网络及智慧财产小组参考。
    174增订于现行专利法第三部分「专利及专利权保护(Patents and Protection of Patent rights)」中。
    175申请案提出12个月内需就该发明申请范围是否属于商业方法发明做初步判断,USPTO对于申请档非经申请人或所有人同意或法定规定,应予以保密不得公开,另亦规定申请日起算18个月后应公开申请案内容,并得请求提前公开(早期公开制度)。
    176法案经立法后,USTPO需在一年内成立管理异议小组,此外任何人均得于专利核发后9个月内提出该专利不符合专利法101、102、103、112之异议。
    177异议程序并不影响请求赔偿的诉讼权利。
    178主张专利无效者只有证据优势(preponderance of the evidence)的举证责任,亦即所提出之证据无须直接明确且具体证明专利无效。
    179若商业方法发明与结合(包括商业方法及计算机应用之)在先技术后无重大差异,或只是采用计算机技术,则推定为显而易见,除非应用之计算机技术具新颖性、或该计算机技术具新颖性且非其他专利所保护之客体。申请人反驳显而易见推定时,仅需负担证据优势下之举证责任。
    180 Examination Guidelines for Computer-Related Inventions, supra note 126
    181根据统计,日本与企业相关的发明在1999年逾4,100件申请案,2000年有19,6000件申请案,2001年有19,000件,2002年仅剩12,000件详见http://jpo.go.jp/tetuzuki/index.htm
    188《特定技术分野审查运用指标》,详见http://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou/kijun/kijun2/tokuteigijutu_index.html
    189依据该项规定,不得视为发明的(客体)包括:发现(discoveries)、科学原理(scientific theories)、数学方法(mathematical methods)、美学创作(aesthetic creations)、心智活动、游戏、从事商业的计书、规则及方法(schemes,rules and methods for performing mental acts,playing games or doing business)、计算机程序(programs for computers)、信息提供(presentations of information) http://www.enropean-patent-office.org/legal/epc/e/ar52.html
    190§53规定对于下列者不得授予欧洲专利(a)违反公共秩序、道德以及缔约国家法律规定的发明公开或利用(b)动植物或生产动植物之生物过程,除微生物及其产品外。
    191 Guidelines for Substantive Examination Part C(2003),at ChapterⅣ2.1.Ref.: http://www.Enropean-patent-office.Org/legal/gui_lines/pdf_2003/index.Html
    192 Report on Concurrent Search Program using PCT Applications for Business Method-related Inventions Carried Out Under Trilateral Project, Appendix 6.Ref.: http://www.enropean-patent-office.org/tws/business/business_start_page.htm
    193 Guideline for Substantive Examination,supra note 201,at ChapterⅣ9.8.
    194该项规定系对不得作为发明客体之标的的以负面表列的方式列出,其他标的尚包括发现(discoveries)、科学原理(scientific theories)、数学方法(mathematical methods)、艺术创作(aesthetic creations)、心智表现及游戏的计书、规则及方法(schemes,rules and methods for performing mental acts,playing games )、提供信息(presentations of information)等,惟依同条第三项之规定,前项所排除之发明客体,仅为条文中所称之标的或活动本身(such subject-matter or activities as such)。
    195 Journal Official,October 2001.Ref.: http://www.european-patent-office.org/epo/pubs/oj97/fts_index.htm#2001
    196 Case Law of the Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office,4thed.December 2001,at 1.A.1.4, ref.: http://www.european-patent-fffice,org/legal/case_law/e/index.htm
    197 T854/90(Mar.1992)专利申请人IBM,请求对其以身份辨识卡操作之自动服务机器及其操作方法授予专利,Ref.: http://legal.euroepean-patent-office.org/dg3/biblio/t900854 ep1.htm
    198 T0769/92(May 1994)案系专利申请人Sohei,Yamamoto,et.al,请求将其一般目的之管理计算机系统(包含财务、存货管理及操作系统等不同型态的管理系统)、营运方法的系统及转移技法(transfer slip)予以专利,Ref.: http://legal.european-patent-office.org/dg3/biblio/t920769ep1.htm
    199 T1002/92(Jul.1994)案,专利申请人为Pettersson,Per Martin,et.al,请求专利者对多数服务据点之顾客,决定其服务顺序之系统,并得由顾客自行选择特定之服务据点,系统由序号分配装置、服务据点之终端机、提供服务据点讯息之设备等部分组成。Ref.: http://legal.european-patent-office.org/dg3/biblio/t921002 ep1.htm
    200 IBM T1173/97(Jul.1998)案,请求将其不同期之保证程序同步化之计算机程序予以专利,ref.: http://legal.european-patent-office.org/dg3/biblio/t971173ep1.htm
    201 T0931、95案,请求专利是一改良式救济金之计算机应用系统,主要专利请求范围包含平均年龄,寿险成本及行政管理成本等计算法,并以监督投保人账户之方式作为控制退休金记叙之方法,案经专利局核驳后提起诉愿,上诉人认为在欧洲专利公约中,并未明订技术性是专利标的可专利的要件,故而审查基准所订技术贡献之要件并非妥适,然技术上诉委员会认为该请求仅为商业方法而欠缺技术性。予以核驳。
    202技术上诉委员会在本案中也指出技术(technical)或技术性(technical character)的定义虽不十分明确,但并不代表就不能以之作为检验标准。
    203 Act Revising the Convention on the Grant of European Patent,Munich,29 November 2000,Ref.: http://www.european-patent-office.org/epo/dipl_conf/documents.htm
    204 Report on the 80th meeting of the Administrative Council of the European Patent Organization,Official Journal,July 2000, Ref.: http://www2.european-patent-office.org/ojft/eng/7_2000/7_3070.htm
    205 Report on Comparative Study Carried Out Under Trilateral Project B3b,Appendix 6,Trilateral Technical Meeting June, 2000,Ref.: http://www.enropean-patent-office org/tws/b3b_start_page.htm
    206 Patentability of Method of Doing Business,EPO official information-press released at 2008.8.18,Ref.: http://www.european-patent-office.org/news/pressel/2000_08_18_e.htm
    207 Guidelines for Substantive Examination,supra a note 201,at ChapterⅣ2.3.5。
    209日本过去虽长久采用国内主义(相对主义),后来大部份专利刊物都采取世界主义(绝对主义),台湾也跟随日本的趋势
    210 Ref.: http://www.tipo.gov.tw/patent/oatent_law/explain/patent_law_3_1_8.sap
    211该审查基准对演绎法(algorithm)的定义为:一种逻辑推演的描述方式,用以对问题的解决方法。包括自然法、科学原理、数学方法、物理现象、抽象观念或人类思考步骤等方式所产生之步骤
    214 Ann Marie Rizzo, The Aftermath of State Street Bank & Trust v. Signature Financial Group : Effects of United States Electronic Commerce Business Method Patentability on International Legal and economic Systems. 50 DePaul L. Rev. 313, Fall (2000), at 356-357
    215 Id., at 357,在in re Karmarker(日本平成九年,日本审决公报第2452号)案中,日本审判法院判决平成八年登录之第20330473号专利有效的原因,在于其所请求专利的计算机程序有改进过的技术效果(improved technical effect),至此、JPO似乎把审查重点从解决方案(solution)是否使用到自然法则,转变为是否较在先技术有改进过的技术效果
    216原文為Thus, even if an invention is novel, it may nevertheless not meet the statutory requirements if it is not significantly different from the prior art. Note that the claimed invention must be significantly different, not necessarily better, than the prior art to satisfy§103. As a coauthor of§103 frequently admonished, we must avoid“the unsound notin that to be patentable an invention must be better that the prior art. Judge…Warren Burger, stated quoting Judge Giles Rich: Progress is most effectively promoted by protecting those who enrich the art as well as those who improve it. See Cornish, supra note 82, at 530-531
    217原文為：When the solution….is suchas utilize natural laws, than the claimed invertion should fall under「a creation of technical ideas utilizing natural laws」。Ref. Cornish, supra note 73, at 530-531
    218参见《中华工商时报》,2003-12-21:“宁波‘明州’卡连累12万用户”,载《银行卡天地》,2003-9-25。
    219该发明描述了一种通用的、使用网上银行办理转账的方法及系统。可以广泛地应用到银行的网上银行系统中,它的转账交易需要两方或多方参与,可充分与电子商务结合,是电子商务时代最佳的转账实现模式。
    220参考国家知识产权局数据
    222 Aaron Lucchetti, Patent Poses Problem for Amex Exchange-Traded Funds,WALL ST.J.,Sep.20,2000,at C1;U.S.Patent No.5,806,048
    223 Dann v. Johnston,supra note 121.
    224美国联邦最高法院认为这样的概念并不难理解。就如目前许多信用卡发行银行,在每年年终时,也会为客户分类其一年来所消费的类别及金额,供客户了解自己理财行为。
    225授予Gerhard Dirks的公司独立会计帐户系统专利,是使用数字计算机程序自动处理大型商业组织内的咨询,将所有交易分至各不同部门的系统。
    226 Paine,Webber,Jackson&Curtis,Inc.(简称Paine Webber) v.Merrill Lynch,Pierce,Fenner&Smith,Inc.简称(Merrill Lynch),564 F.Supp.1358(1983)。此案是原告Paine Webber向德拉威尔地方法院诉求宣示性判决(declaratory judgment),判决其未侵权、美国第4,346,442号专利(为Merrill Lynch所有)无效而无法执行,并命令不得对原告及所属关系人提出侵权诉讼。最后法院判决纷争专利有效。
    227 Brokerage scurity account,简称Scurities Account,是原本传统的保证金账户,用来买证券并支付经纪手续费
    228 Money market funds,提供货币基金,政府证券基金及免税基金三种开放型基金供选择,并将孳息再投资该等基金
    229 Charge / checking account,又称Visa Avvount,此一账户由Bank One of Columbus管理,亦即尤其是发给Visa卡及支票给参与现金管理之客户,用以消费
    230 In re Sherwood,613 F.2d 809,811
    231 See Application of Maucorp,609 F.2d 481,485(1979); Application of Gelnonatch, 595 F.2d 32,37(1979),Reference to Paine,Webber v. Merrill Lynch, supra note 242,at 1366。
    232 In the Matter of the Application of Peter P. Toma,575 F.2d 872(1978).此案是申请人Toma发明一以数字计算机将自然语言(俄文)翻译成另一自然语言(英文)的处理方法,向USPTO申请专利被驳回。
    233 D.L.Price Assessing the Patentability of Financial Services and Products, 3 J.High Tech.L.141 (2004),at 147。
    234 William D.Wiese,supra note 114,at 35。
    235 State Street Bank,supra note 127,at 1373.
    243 Morgan Stanley Capital International,摩根士单利为摩根士单利证券集团之子公司,负责编制全球指数及相关衍生性金融产品的衡量指数
    244本专利名为「Open end mutual fund securitization process」
    245 "available to the extent that persons interested and ordinarily skilled in the subjects matter or art,exercising reasonable,[could]locate it. "In re Wyer,655 F.2d 211,226(1981),see AMEX v. MOPEX ,supra note 268 at 328。
    246 P.E.Schaafsma,supra note 1,at Summary。
    247属于技术型的知识产权包括:特许权(专利)案件、实用新案权(新型)案件、半导体回路配置利用权及计算机程序的著作权等,其余诸如意匠权(新式样)案件,商标权案件或计算机程序外的著作权案件…等等,皆属非技术型之知识产权。
    248「知的财产权裁判例集」, http://courtdomino 2.courts.go.Jp/clizai.Nsf/$Help
    249目前所见者皆为著作权之计算机软件民事诉讼案件。
    251 Ref.: http://www.jpo.go.jp/tetuzuki/index.htm
    252例如代表商业方法专利的国际专利分类号G06F17/60即可对应F-term下的5B049
    253 Ref.: http://ww.jpo.go.jp/tetuzuki/index.htm
    254 Model supply system for risk management method of monetary property
    255英译为Mass customization of vulnerabitlty insurance and business method for premium determination
    
    256英译为Future transaction of intellectual property right
    257英译为Method for efficiently composing small scale real estate finance scheme
    258专利日文为「特别目的会社」其英文译文使用Special Purpose Company之词,而一般美国对此类特殊的公
    259 Ref http://v3.espacenet.com/eclasrch
    260 http://legal.european-patent-office.org/dg3/search_dg3.htm
    261 Automatic auction method,Application No.97306722.6
    262请参见EPO技术上诉委员会T258/03号决定
    263 Id.,at Reasons for the decision 3.7
    264本案中,日立公司所请求专利的拍卖系统,并未解决当有超过一人愿意出具相同出价金额时,荷兰式(Dutch Type)拍卖如何决定谁为最高出价人的问题,反而采用连续提高拍卖价格的步骤回避上述问题,技术上诉委员会认为,这样的方法修正,不必使用计算机程序的技术,拍卖者直接以眼睛看就可以这样做,
    265 Id.,at Reasons for the decision 3.7
    267原文为A method for providing a financial contract having a payout amount based on a specific return on an asset for a performance period
    268日本国际特许事务所:http://www.ondapatent.com/japanese/business/index.html
    269 Michael Rappa把商业模式定义为「一套可以维持一家公司生存下去的商业经营方法,也就是擭利的方法」。
    270此为Paul Timmers对CA"商业模式的定义,请见Patti Timmers.Electronic Commerse:Strategies and International Edition2004,at 2.
    271 A. Afuah, Business Model: A Strategic Management Approach. Magraw Hill Companies. Inc. International Edition 2004
    272在现代的经济学来说,产品一词是包括任何可以作价值交换的东西,包括有形、无形,商品或服务,表演等
    274 P.E Schaafsma,supra note 1,at 180
    276原文为A process is a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result,It is an act or a series of acts ,performed upon the subject-matter.to be transformed and reduced to different state or thing . If new and useful,it is just as patentable as a piece of machinery,In the language of the patent law,it is an art.请参见cochranev. deener ,94 u.s.780 (1877).
    277 Gottschalk v. Benson,supra note 131,at 70.原文为Transformation and reduction of an article”to a different state or thing“is the clue to the paterntability of a process claim.
    278 Rubber-Tip Pencil Co.v.Howard,87 u.s 498.507(1874)
    279 Rinaldo Del Gallo,Are”Methods of Doing Business”Finally out of Business as a statutory Rejection?,38 IDEA
    403,431-432(1998).
    280 In re Wlter,supra note 151,at 768
    281 In re Donaldson ,16F,3d 1189(1994)
    282原文为Where means plus function language is used to difine the characterisries of a machine or manrfacture invention, claim limitaeions must be interpreted to read on only the structures or materials disclosed in the specification and equiv Alents thereof. Ref. Examination Guidelines supra note 181. at 7480
    283 Ref. Examination Guidelines supra note 181. at 7480
    284 State Street Bank, spraa note 127, at 1371
    285 Method and apparatus for funding education by acquiring shares of students future earnings
    286 A.L. Durham.“Useful Arts”in the Information Age. 1999 B.Y.U.L. Rev. 1419. at 1497
    287 Tilghman v .Proctor,supra note 143.at 728.
    288原文为Unpatentable mathematical algorithms are identifiable by showing they are merly abstract idess constituting disembodied concepts or truths that are not“useful.”From a practical standpoint,this means that to be patentabel an algorithm must be applied in a“useful”way. See State Street Bank,supra note 127.at 1373
    289原文为In Alappat,we held that data,transformed by a machine through a series of mathematical calculations to produce a smooth waveform display on a rasterizer monitou,constitued a practical application of an abstract idea (a mathematical algorithm,formula,or calculation),because it produced“a useful,concrete and tangib result”—the smooth waveform. See State Street Bank,supra note 127,at 1373
    290 e In re Alappat,wupra note 162,at 1542-1543
    291原文为Unpatentable mathematcal algorithms are identifiable by showing they are merely abstract ideas constituting disembodied concepts or truths that are not“useful.”See State Street Bank,supra note 127,at 1373
    292C.L.Ogden,Patentability of Algorithms After State Street Bank :The Death of the Physicality Requirement,83 J.Pat.&Trademark Off. Soc’y491,July 2001,atⅠ
    293 State Street Bank,supra note 127,at 1377。
    294但Baldwin法官也曾在In re Musgrave,57 C.C.P.A.1352;431F.2d 882(1970)案的判决中,质疑两者之同义性,详参见A.L.Durham,supra note 336,at 1419,1438-1457
    295原文为The definition of "technology"is the "application of science and engineering to the development of machines and procedures in order to enhance or improve human conditions,or at least to improve human efficiency in some respect."Computer Dictionary 384(Microsoft Press,2nd ed. 1994)。
    296心智行为(步骤)是包含计算,比较,观察,推论等人类心理之活分理处,请见A.L.Durham,supra note 336,at summary.
    298 CCPA指出,在Diamond v. Diehr案中,申请人的发明是藉由数学的帮助,找出一种更好的实体方法步骤,处理融合合成橡胶的时间问题,以提高产品质量。而其所使用的数学方程式仍然可由其他不同或不同领域技术所使用。In re Walter, supra note151 at 770-771
    299 In re Johnson, supra note 349,at1081(1978)
    303 Id., at 956-957。法官R.W.Sweet认为像“tender option”等词是一种证劵产业通用的术语，而“tender option
    1.〔美〕威廉.M,兰德斯/理查德,A波兰网,《知识产权的经济结构》,北京大学出版社
    2.〔美〕罗伯特.A斯特朗,《衍生产品概论》,东北财经大学
    3.刘孔中、Heina Goddar等,《欧洲专利手册》,翰芦图书出版
    4.侨生,《知识产权保护与限制衡平研究》,中国检察出版社
    5.杜颖/易继明(译),《日本专利法》,法律出版社
    6.〔美〕盖多.卡拉布雷西等,《悲剧性的选择,对稀缺资源进行悲剧性分配时社会所遭遇到的冲突》,北京大学出版社
    7.吕薇,《知识产权制度,挑战与对策》,知识产权出版社
    8.〔美〕Jay Dratler, Jr《知识产权许可》,清华大学出版社
    9.〔美〕阿维纳什.迪克西特,《法律缺失与经济学:可供选择的经济治理方式》,中国人民大学出版社
    10.严永和,《论传统知识的知识产权保护》」,法律出版社
    11.何炼红,《工业版权研究》,中图法制出版社
    12.〔美〕弗里茨.马克卢普,《美国的知识生产与公配》,中国人民大学出版社
    13.〔澳〕胡.贝费利-史密斯,《人格的商业利用》,北京大学出版社
    14.戴志敏,陈立毅,《美国金融类商业方法专利及其启示》,外国经济与管理
    15.贾丽虹,《外部性理论研究,中国环境规制与知识产权保护制度的分析》,人民出版社
    16.冯晓青,《企业技术创新与专利战略之探讨,信息技术与标准化》
    17.冯晓青,《知识产权法利益平衡原理》,湖南人民出版社
    18.余翔,张玉容,《美国金融业专利》
    19.席靖彭等,《知识产权保护的新境界》,中国政法大学出版社
    20.〔澳〕布拉德.谢尔曼,〔英〕莱昂内尔.本特利,《现代知识权法的演进》,北京大学出版社
    21.张铭,《商业方法专利在欧洲的保护》
    22.〔澳〕马克.戴维森,《数据库的法律保护》,北京大学出版社
    23.王文宇,《新金融法》,元照出版
    24.李丽,《金融交换实务》,三民书局
    25.李丽,《衍生性金融产品》,三民书局
    26.台湾证券暨期货市场发展基金会编着,《金融期货》
    27.许忠信,《WTO与贸易有关知识产权协议之研究》,元照出版
    28.陈威光,《衍生性金融产品一选择权、期货与交换》,智胜文化
    29.冯震宇,《知识产权发展趋势与重要问题研究》,元照出版
    30.刘尚志、陈家麟,《电子商务与计算机软件之专利保护:发展、分析、创新与策略》,翰芦图书
    31.凯文G里韦特,戴维克兰。《尘封的商业宝藏》,中信出版社
    32.尹新天,《专利权的保护》,知识产权出版社.2005
    33.张平,《网络法律评论》,法律出版社2002
    34. Chisum,D.S.,Nard,G.A.,Schwartz,H.F,.Newman,P.&Kieff,F.S.,Cawes
    35. and Materials—Principles of patent law, Foundation Pree New york,1998.
    36. Choate,R.A,Francis,W.H.&Collins,R.C,Cases and Materials on Patent Law,West Pub.CO,.3NDed.1987.
    37. Comish,W.R&Llewwlyn,D.,IntellectualProperty,London:Sweet&Maxwell, 5THed.2003.
    38. Glazier, S. C., e-Patent Strategies for Software, e-Commerce, the Internet, Telecom Services, Financial Services, and Business Methods, Law& Business Institute(LBI), 3NDed. of Patent Strategies for Business published in 2001.
    39. Halpern, S W,. G. A & Keneeth, L. p., Fundamentals of United States Intellectual Property Law: Copyright, Patent and Trademark, Kluwer Law International,1999.
    40. Hudson, A., The Law on Financial Derivatives, London: Sweet& Maxwell,2NDed. 1998.
    41. Rosenberg, P.D., Patent Law Fundamentals, Clark Boardman Company,Ltd.,1981.
    42. Schwartz, H.F., Patent Law and Practice, The Bureau of National Affairs,Inc., 3NDed.2001.
    43. Timmers. P.. Electronic Commerse:Strategies and Models for Business to Business Tradings, Chichester: Wiley,2000.
    44. Bader, M. Intellectual Property Management in R&D Collaborations: the case of the service industry sector, Physicaverlag, 2006.
    45. Beresford, K. Patenting software under the European Patent Convention. Sweet & Maxwell. 2000.
    46. Berman, B.M. (ed.) From ideas in assets, investing wisely in Intellectual Property. Wiley & Sons, Inc.2002.
    47. Bronwyn, H. Business method patent, innovation, and policy.
    48. Davis, J. & Harrison, S. Edison in the boardroom, how leading companies realize value from their intellectual assets. John Wiley & Sons, Inc 2001.
    49. Graham, J.H. S. & D.c. Mowery. Intellectual property protection in the U.S. software industry. Berkeley, CA: Haas School, US Berkeley. 2002.
    50. Granstrand, O. The economics and management of intellectual property: towards intellectual capitalism, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 1999.
    51. Hall, B. Business method patents, innovation and policy.
    52. Hall, B, Graham, S, Harhoff, D. & Mowery, D. prospects for improving U.S. patent quality via post-trant opposition.
    1.郭斯伦,电子商务商业方法专利的创造性判判断标准分析〔J〕,云南大学学报(法学版)
    2.张平.论商业方法软件专利保护的创造性标准---美、日、欧三方专利宣查之比较〔J.〕知识产权,2003(1): 25-29.
    3.张平.商业方法软件专利保护:美国的实践及其启示〔J〕.法商研究.2005(4): 138-145.
    4.张玉容,余翔.美国金融业商业方法专利实证分析及其对我国的启示〔J〕知识产权2008(2): 70-78.
    5.郑万青,姜文鹏.简论电子商务的商业方法专利[J].知识产权,2001,(2).
    6. [2]陈力航.解读花旗银行“抢注”专利事件[N].中国知识产权报,20030912.
    7.李治安,〈网络时代中商业方法可专利性之政策分析〉,经社法治论,第二十九期
    8.李治安,〈商业方法相关知识产权问题之研究〉,科技法律透析,第十三券第十二期
    9.李森烟,〈谈日本商业方法专利制度与软件专利审查基准有关之修正〉,知识产权管理,第三十一期
    10.李丽,〈新金融产品介绍一海外存托凭证〉,贸易周刊,第一六一○期,
    11.何昱亭,〈美国电子商务商业方法专利方法专利趋势分析(上)〉,知识产权管理,第三十一期
    12.何昱亭,〈美国电子商务商业方法专利趋势分析(下)〉,智慧产权管理,第三十二期
    13.徐振康,〈门户人开一谈商业方法的可专利性〉,科技法律透析,第十二卷第四期
    14.袁建中,〈商用软件可专利性之探讨〉,信息法务透析,四十九至五十九页,一九九八年十二月
    15.张学尉,〈信用衍生性金融产品之介绍〉,彰银资料,第五三卷第二期,
    16.许忠信,〈海岸两岸金融竞争情势及因应之道——WTO法律规范下之资金阴流与回流机制〉,辅仁学志,第三十三期
    17.许晓芬,〈计算机软件与商业方法这专利保护:欧洲发展〉,政大智慧财产评论第一卷第一期
    18.陈锡琪等,〈衍生性金融产品上柜婆婆可靠性研究(二)〉,证券柜台,第三十九期
    19.冯震宁,〈从商业方法专利论软件专利的发展与保护(二)〉,知识产权,第四期
    20.刘孔中、宿希成,〈论商业方法、电子商务相关发明之专利保护-理论与实务之探讨〉,台大法学论从第三十卷第四期
    21.刘孔中,〈论计算机程序发明在欧洲聪明的专利保护〉,知识产权管理,第二五期
    22.李颖,怡林艳.论商业方法可专利性的利益平衡[J].中山大学学报(社会科学版),2004,(5).
    23.张平.商业方法软件专利保护:美国的实践及其启示[J].法商研究,2005
    24.苏运来.美、日、欧商业方法专利授权条件之比较[J].商业研究,2007,(4).
    25.闫文锋,文香平.“商业方法”专利迷人眼[N].中国知识产权报,20020927.
    26.王伟军,夏倩芳,徐锐.论电子商务与专利权[J].中国软科学,2001,(6).
    27.易宪容:“中国从容面对外资银行开放”,载WTO经济导刊2006.12,第12-13页
    28. Ann Marie Rizzo, The Aftermath of State Street Bank& Trust v. Signature Financial Group: Effects of United States Electronic Commerec Business Method Patentability on Intemational Legal and economic Systems, 50 Depaul L.Rev.313,Fall(2000).
    29. Bagley, M, A., E-Commerce and Equivalence: Defining the Proper Scope of Intemet Patents Symposium, 7 Mich. Telecomm. Tech.L.Rev.253(2000/2001).
    30. Chad king, Abort, Retry, Fail: Protection for Software-Related In- ventions in the Wake of State Street Bank& Trust V. Signature Financial Group,85 Cornell L, Rev. 1118, May(2000).
    31. Durham, A,L.,“Useful Arts”in the Information Age, 1998B.Y.U.L,Rev.1419(1999).
    32. Fine, G. S., To Issue or not to Issue: Analysis of the Business Method Patent Controversy on the Intemet, 42 B.V.L. Rev 1995, September (2001).
    33. Gruner, R,S., Everything old is New Again: Obviousness Limitations on Patenting Computer Updates of Old Designs, 9 Boston U.J,Sci&Tech.L.209, Summer(2003).
    34. Henry,S.J.,Patents on Software and Business Methods:A new Beginning or Beginning of the End? 3Yale Symp.L.&Tech.3,Fall(2000)
    35. Ogden,C.L., Patentablity of Algorithms After State Street Bank:The Death of the Physicality Requiement,83 J.Pat.& Trademark Off.Soc’y 491,July(2001)
    36. Price,D.L., Assessing the Patentability of Financial Services and Pruducts,3 J.High Tech.L.141(2004)
    37. Rinaldo Del Gallo,Are“Methods of Doing Business”Finally Out of Bussiness as a Statutory Rejecion?,38 IDEA 403(1998)
    38. Schaafsma,P.E.,A Gathering Storm in the Financial Industry,9Stanford J.L.Bus,&Fin,176.Spring(2004)
    39. Soma,J.T., K.Leyendecker,S.L.Webb,Software Patents:A U.S.and E.U.Cpmparison,8 U.Balt,Intell,Prop,L.J.1,Fall(1999)/Summer(2000)
    40. U.S Securities and Exchange Commission,Report to the Congerss:Impact of Tech-nology on Securies Markets, http://www.sec.gov/news/studies/techrp97.htm
    41. Wiese,W.D.,Death of a Myth:The Patenting of Internet Business Models After State Street Bank,Marquette Intellectual Property Law Review 4。
    42. Grindley. P. & Teece D. Managing intellectual capital: licensing and cross-licensing in semiconductors and electronics. California Management Review. 1997, 39 (2): 8-41.
    43. Hall, B, Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M. Market value and patent citations. RAND Journal of Economics. 2005, 36(1): 16-38.
    44. Hall, R.A. framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to sustainable competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal. 1993, 14: 607-618.
    45. Aaker, D.A. Managing assets and skills: the key to sustainable competitive. California Management Review. 1989, 18(1): 91-106.
    46. Alcorn, L.E. Pursuing business method patents in the U.S. patent and trademark office. Computer and Internet Law. 2003, 27: 30-37.
    47. Allison, J.R. & Tiller, E.H. Internet business method patents. In W.M. Cohen & S.A. Merrill (Eds), Patents in the knowledge-based economy. Washington, D.C. NationalAcademies Press, 2003: 259-284.
    48. Allison, J.R. & Tiller, E.H. The business method patent myth. Berkeley Technology Law Journal. 2003, 18: 5-27.
    49. Arora, A. & Fosfuri, A Licensing the market for technology. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2003, 52 (2): 277-295.
    50. Arora, A. Patenting, licensing and market structure in the chemical industry. Research Policy. 1997, 26(4/5): 391-403.
    51. Arora, A, Fosfuri, A & Gambardella, A Markets for technology and their implications for corporate strategy. Industrial and Corporate Change: 2001, 2(10). 419-451.
    52. Bader, M. Managing intellectual property in the financial services industry sector: learning from Swiss Re. Working Paper. www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation. 2007.
    53. Bagby, J.W. Business method patent proliferation: Convergence of transactional analytics and technical scientifics. Business Law. 2000, 56: 423-458.
    54. Bender, D. & Barkume, A.R. Patents for software-related inventions. Software Law Journal. 1992, 5: 279-298. Beresford, K. European patents for software, e-commerce and business model inventions. World Patent Information. 2001, 23(3): 253-263.
    55. Biddinger, B.P. Limiting the business method patent: a comparison and proposed alignment fo Europe, Japanese and United States Patent Law. Fordham Law Review. 2001, 5: 2523-2554.
    56. Bills, S. Patent lawsuit involving Citi seen having big implications. American Banker. The financial services daily, July 27, 2005.
    57. Blasberg, S. Beware patent trolls. Risk Management, 2006, 4: 22-27.
    58. Blind, D. Edler, J, Frietsch, R. & Schmoch, U. The patent upsurge in Germany: the outcome of a multi-motive game induced by large companies. Working Paper. www.schumpeter 2004.
    59. Blind, K. Edler, J., Frietsch, R. & Schmoch, U. Motives to patent: empirical evidence from Germany. Research Policy, 2006, 35: 655-672.
    60. Boscaljon, B., Filbeck, G. & Smaby, T. Information content of business method patents. The Financial Review. 2006, 41: 387-404.
    61. Brinbaum, J. The case for the U.S. patent and trademark office’s adoption of an open-source“bounty”system for reviewing business method and software patents,in light of the patent infringement battles featuring the U.S. financial exchanges that have been waged in recent years. UCLA Journal of Law & Technology, 2006, 2: 53-73.
    62. Bronwyn, H. & Ziedonis, R.H. The patent paradox revisited: an empirical study of patenting in the US semiconductor industry 1979-1995. RAND Journal of economics, 2001, 32: 101-125.
    63. Chesbrough, H. The logic of open innovation: managing intellectual property. California Management Review. 2003, 3 (45). 33-58.
    64. Chiappetta, V. Defining the proper scope of internet patents: Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Law Review. 2001, 7: 289-361.
    65. Chiappetta, V. TRIP-ping over business method patents. Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 2004, 37: 181-201.
    66. Cohen, W.M.Goto, A., Natata, A., Nelson, R.R. & Walsh, J.P. R&D spillovers, patents and the incentives to innovation in Japan and the United States. Research Policy. 2002, 31: 1349-1367.
    67. Conley, J. M. The international law of business method patents. Economic Review. 2003, 4(88): 15-33.
    68. Cremers, K. Determinants of Patent litigation in Germany, Work Paper. 2004.http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=604467.
    69. Diallo, B. Historical perspectives on IP protection for software in selected countries worldwide. World Patent Information. 2003, 25: 19-25.
    70. Dickinson, Q.E-Commerce and Business Method Patents: An Old Debate for a New Economy. Annual Tenzer Distinguished Lecture in Intellectual Property,
    71. Diamatteo, L. The new“problem”of business method patents: the convergence of national patent laws and international internet transactions. Rutgers Computer & Technology Law Journal. 2002, 28: 1-45.
    72. Dreyuss, R. Examining State Street Bank: developments in Business Method Patenting. Computer and Recht International. 2001, 1: 1-9.
    73. Drohos, P. Review of O. Granstrand: the economics and management of intellectual property, Information Economics and Policy. 2001, 13: 107-111.
    74. Dutcher, D.T. Patents on metholds of doing business. Denver University Law Review. 2001, 79: 173-198.
    75. Emst, H. Industrial research as a source of important patents. Research Policy. 1998 (a), 27(1): 1-15.
    76. Fine, G. To issue or not to issue: analysis of the business method patent controversy on the internet. BCL Review. 2001, 42: 1195-1213.
    77. Fink, M.E. Patenting business methods in Europe: what lies ahead? Indiana Law Journal. 2004, 79: 299-321.
    78. Frame, S. & White, L. Empirical studies of financial innovation: lots of talk, little action? 2002, 5: 171-180.
    79. Furutani, H. Patentability of business method inventions in Japan compared with the US and Europe. Working Paper. Presented at USPTO, November 3. 2003.
    80. Gallini, N. The economics of patents: lessons from recent U.S. patent reform. Journal of Economic Perspective. 2002, 16(2): 131-154.
    81. Josh Lerner, Where Does State Street Lead? A First Look at Finance Patents, 1971 to 2000 [J]. The Journal of Finance, April2002, pp.901-930
    82. Paul R. Kitch., Patenting Innovative Business Methods-Protecting Intangible Assets [N]. Insurance Advocate2003. 10. 13, pp.29-49
    83. Josh Lerner., The Two-Edged Sword: The Competitive Implications of Financial Patents http://www.frbatlanta.org/invoke.cfm? objected=A6BDAC9C384A-4C59-9096A079D324A9B7&method=display.
    84. Christopher Petruzzi, Ivlarguerite Dei Vaiie, and Stephen Judiowe., Patent and Copyright Protection for Innovations in Finance [J]. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT/WINTER 1988, pp.66-71.
    85. Paul E. Schaafsma, Trends in the Law: Financial Product Patents [J]. Bank Accounting & Finance, Feb2003, pp.12-16
    86. Paul E. Schaafsma, Financial Product Patents: Au Update [J]. BANK ACOUNTING & FINANCE, DECEMBER 2005-JANUARY 2006, pp.21-27
    87. ROBERT P. MERGES., The Uninvited Guest: Patents on Wall Street [J]. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta ECONOMICREVIEW Fourth Quarter 2003, pp.1-14
    88. Bronwyn H. Hall., May 2003, Business Method Patents, Innovation, and Policy [R]. NBER Working Paper No.9717 http://www.nber.org/papers/w9717.
    89. JOHN M. CONLEY., The International Law of Business Method Patents [J]. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta Economic Review Fourth Quarter 2003, pp.15-34
    90.“a system of transacting business disconnected from the means for carrying out the system is not an art”(p.469). By“art,”it meant“process”as that term is currently used in Section 101.
    91. CLIFFORD S. STANFORD., Business Method Patents and Financial Services [J]. Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta ECONOMIC REVIEW Fourth Quarter 2003, pp.5-8.
    1.章景〈银行业金融商业方法专利研究〉,对外经济贸易大学,硕士论文.2005
    2.施纯贞,〈店头市场衍生性金融产品相关法律问题之研究〉,台湾东吴大学学士后法律硕士论文,二零零二年。
    3.陈定富,〈因特网商业模式与专利关系之探讨〉,台湾政治大学科技管理研究所硕士论文,一九九零年六月。
    4.阮子珊,〈网格商业方法专利之研究〉,台湾政治大学科技管理研究所硕士论文,二零零一年六月。
    5.倪颂军,〈商业银行的金融专利保护问题研究〉,硕士论文.2005
    6.夏志华,〈基于金融创新的金专利研究〉,硕士论文.2004
    7.吉玉成,〈商业方法软件专利之研究〉,政治大学法律系硕士论文,二零零一年。
    8.陈宣全,〈新金融产品发展暨销售之探讨〉,台湾大学国际企业研究所硕士论文
    9.陈龙升,〈论美国计算机软件之商业方法专利〉,台湾中正大学法律研究所硕士论文
    10.苏裕钧,〈美国电子商务商业方法专利之探讨〉,台湾交通大学科技管理研究所硕士论文
    11.林小爱,〈我们商业银行知识产权保护问题研究〉,华中科技大学硕士论文
    12.向成阳,〈论金融衍生工具的国际监管〉,中国政法大学博士论文