论文部分内容阅读
本文从两个判决结果相反的案例入手,指出国内司法界在面对平行进口案例上的不一致态度,随后梳理了在平行进口领域用来支持和反对平行进口现象的两大理论,以及学者们对它们的批判;通过归纳各国立法和司法实践中的做法,指出平行进口现象的本质在(?)后涉及到的不同价值取向以及利益取舍;在对所涉及的利益主体进行逐一分析之后,指出司法上的个案判断是目前我国司法实践中可以采取的比较适当的办法。文章还从合同的视角,对“独占经营许可”这一经营模式与平行进口的联系进行了分析,指出了平行进口问题对民商法学领域的借鉴意义。
This article starts with two cases with opposite judgments, points out the inconsistency of judiciary in the face of parallel import cases, then combs two theories to support and oppose parallel imports in the field of parallel imports, They point out that the nature of parallel imports is different from the value orientation and benefit choice after the (?). After analyzing the involved stakeholders one by one, it points out that the judiciary Judgment on the case is the most appropriate measure that can be taken in judicial practice in our country at present. From the perspective of the contract, the article also analyzes the relationship between the business model of “exclusive license” and parallel imports and points out the reference significance of the parallel import issue to civil and commercial jurisprudence.