發(fā)布時間：2018-05-17 08:25

  本文選題：商業(yè)秘密保護 + 惡意訴訟��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著經(jīng)濟發(fā)展方式的轉(zhuǎn)變,商業(yè)秘密逐漸成為企業(yè)競爭的核心因素。為保證本企業(yè)在激烈的市場競爭中立于不敗之地,企業(yè)也盡最大努力來保護其擁有的商業(yè)秘密。訴訟作為當(dāng)事人維權(quán)的一種重要方式,也應(yīng)逐漸完善訴訟進程中對商業(yè)秘密的保護。但在我國目前法治環(huán)境下,即使是商業(yè)秘密權(quán)利人的合法權(quán)益被侵害之后,在涉及商業(yè)秘密的民事案件的審理過程中,也由于我國目前訴訟程序制度的不健全,而使訴訟成為商業(yè)秘密二次泄露的原因。我國目前法律體系下對侵犯商業(yè)秘密行為的規(guī)制大多是從實體法方面對侵犯商業(yè)秘密的行為予以制裁,程序性立法方面仍十分欠缺。我國目前法律對審理涉及商業(yè)秘密案件的程序性規(guī)定主要體現(xiàn)在《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法》第68條不公開質(zhì)證、第134條不公開審理以及《最高人民法院關(guān)于適用中華人民共和國民事訴訟法的解釋》第255條限制對涉及商業(yè)秘密內(nèi)容的裁判文書的查閱。一方面,上述立法僅是原則性的規(guī)定,缺乏具體的可操作程序,不能為具體司法實踐的操作提供指導(dǎo);另一方面,上述制度僅規(guī)定涉及商業(yè)秘密的案件不得對當(dāng)事人以外的第三人公開,并沒有把對方當(dāng)事人作為禁止或者限制的對象。由此以來,不可避免會出現(xiàn)一方當(dāng)事人通過惡意訴訟方式將競爭對手訴至法院以窺探其商業(yè)秘密的情形。雖然我國目前法律對商業(yè)秘密保護的程序性立法仍不完善,但在實踐中,各地司法機關(guān)已充分發(fā)揮主觀能動性解決上述問題,如簽署審前保密承諾書等。上述做法在避免權(quán)利人的商業(yè)秘密在訴訟中二次泄露發(fā)揮了一定的積極作用,但仍有許多需要完善的地方。我國廈門中院首創(chuàng)的“保密令制度”是在借鑒了國外及我國臺灣地區(qū)相關(guān)制度的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合我國大陸實際情況的一次大膽嘗試,有其合理性與創(chuàng)新性。美國、日本及我國臺灣地區(qū)在長期司法實踐中就民事訴訟中商業(yè)秘密的保護問題形成了相對完備的制度及實踐經(jīng)驗,通過對國外相關(guān)制度的探究與我國目前司法實踐的總結(jié)來解決涉及商業(yè)秘密案件的訴訟發(fā)現(xiàn)案件事實、公正審理與商業(yè)秘密保護之間的沖突,對完善我國民事訴訟中商業(yè)秘密保護制度有著重大意義,也是推進我國法治進程的題中之義。本文先是對我國目前民事訴訟中商業(yè)秘密保護的現(xiàn)狀及面臨的困境進行分析進而引出本文所要研究的問題,通過對美國、日本及我國臺灣地區(qū)在司法實踐中商業(yè)秘密保護先進經(jīng)驗的借鑒,分析保密令制度與我國司法環(huán)境與社會環(huán)境的契合性并加以引進同時提出具體的制度設(shè)計,意在有效的避免商業(yè)秘密在訴訟中的二次泄露,平衡“當(dāng)事人正當(dāng)程序權(quán)的保障”與“訴訟中商業(yè)秘密的保護”之間的沖突。
[Abstract]:With the change of economic development mode, trade secret gradually becomes the core factor of enterprise competition. In order to ensure that the enterprise in the fierce market competition in an invincible position, enterprises also do their best to protect its own trade secrets. As an important way for the parties to protect their rights, litigation should gradually perfect the protection of trade secrets in the process of litigation. However, in the current legal environment of our country, even after the legitimate rights and interests of the owners of trade secrets have been infringed, in the trial process of civil cases involving trade secrets, the current procedural system of our country is not perfect. And make lawsuit become the reason that trade secret divulges twice. At present, the regulation of infringing trade secrets under the current legal system of our country is mainly from the aspect of substantive law to punish the infringement of trade secrets, but the procedural legislation is still very deficient. The procedural provisions of the current law of our country concerning the trial of cases involving trade secrets are mainly reflected in Article 68 of the Civil procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, which is not open for cross-examination. Article 134 closed hearings and the interpretation of the Supreme people's Court on the Application of the Civil procedure Law of the people's Republic of China Article 255 restricts access to judicial documents concerning the content of trade secrets. On the one hand, the above legislation is only a provision of principle, lacking specific operational procedures, which cannot provide guidance for the operation of specific judicial practices; on the other hand, The above system only stipulates that cases involving trade secrets may not be made public to any third party other than the party concerned, and the other party is not regarded as the object of prohibition or restriction. Since then, it is inevitable that one party will bring a competitor to court through malicious litigation to spy on its trade secrets. Although the procedural legislation on the protection of trade secrets in our country is still not perfect, in practice, the judicial organs in various places have taken full advantage of their subjective initiative to solve the above problems, such as signing the promise of confidentiality before trial, and so on. The above practice has played a positive role in avoiding the second disclosure of the obligee's trade secret in the lawsuit, but there are still many areas that need to be improved. The "secrecy order system" initiated by Xiamen Intermediate people's Court is a bold attempt based on the reference of relevant systems in foreign countries and Taiwan region and combining with the actual situation in mainland China. It has its rationality and innovation. In long-term judicial practice, the United States, Japan and Taiwan have formed relatively complete systems and practical experience on the protection of commercial secrets in civil proceedings. Through the exploration of the relevant systems abroad and the summary of the current judicial practice in our country, the conflict between the discovery of the case facts, the fair trial and the protection of the trade secret is resolved. It is of great significance to perfect the protection system of commercial secrets in civil litigation in our country, and it is also the meaning of promoting the process of rule of law in our country. This paper first analyzes the current situation and difficulties of the protection of commercial secrets in China's civil litigation, and then leads to the problems to be studied in this paper. Through the analysis of the United States, Japan and Taiwan learn from the advanced experience in the protection of commercial secrets in judicial practice, analyze the compatibility between the secrecy order system and the judicial and social environment of our country, and put forward the concrete system design at the same time. The purpose is to effectively avoid the secondary leakage of trade secrets in litigation and balance the conflict between the protection of due process rights of the parties and the protection of trade secrets in litigation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.1

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 李\，

本文編號：1900659