公平會管制事業警告函管制效果之實證研究 ─以懸疑效果為中心

Abstract

行政院公平交易委員會為有效管理事業發警告函行為，以公平交易法及「行政院公平交易委員會對於事業發侵害著作權、商標權或專利權警告函案件之處理原則」，建構對事業發警告函行為之管制模式。雖警告函處理原則業經司法院釋字第548號解釋，肯認其合憲性地位，然此管制模式適用至今，於法理及實務確實產生不少爭議。相關探討文獻，大多以文獻探討、比較法及案例分析等研究方法，指摘處理原則規範違法不當。

本論文認為，該等批判之聲尚非檢討警告函處理原則之核心問題。對於事業發警告函行為是否應以公平交易法介入管制，行政院公平交易委員會初始係假設該行為將造成市場競爭秩序之危害，而認該行為可能應受公平交易法所規範，但該等假設是否正確？實務上，受信者於收受警告函後是否會因畏懼侵權責任而將系爭商品下架或斷絕販售？亦即所謂之「懸疑效果」發生機率有多高？尚查無文獻資料對此問題進行實證調查。本論文爰採實證調查方法，以事業發警告函行為是否會產生懸疑效果為主要命題，探討公平交易法介入管制事業發警告函行為之正當性。續以警告函中對侵害智慧財產權之描述狀況，以及警告函中是否併附相關文書，對受信者收信後之心理狀態產生如何影響進行研究，並據此結果，檢證行政院公平交易委員會對事業發警告函行為所採管制模式，是否有效達成其管制目的。

從實證調查結果發現，事業發警告函行為產生懸疑效果之比率相當之高，雖現今規模較大、組織較完備之公司，已建立一套標準流程來面對處理收受警告函後所產生之侵權問題。惟此種應變方式，對台灣大多數種小企業而言，恐無能力與資源建立，故從公平交易法維護市場公平競爭秩序之立法目的而言，公平交易法對事業發警告函行為係有介入管制空間。其次，警告函處理原則第4點所規定於警告函中將權利內容、範圍及受侵害具體事實敘明，並事先或同時通知可能侵權者之發函方式，是有助於降低受信者產生懸疑效果。從此而論，警告函處理原則應可認為達成其管制目的，但不可忽視的，處理原則所規定之其他發函方式，於實際適用上，因非為欲發警告函者所會選擇之發函方式，故該等規定是否發揮管制成效，則不無疑問。本論文建議，於前開問題進行更全面、周延之實證調查研究，充分掌握經濟活動之現況後，研議修法方向。

To monitor and regulate the conduct of sending warning letters to other entities who may be in suspect of infringing copyrights, trademarks and patents by the oblige entity in a efficient and effective manner, the Fair Trade Commission of the Executive Yuan (“FTC”) has published the “Guidelines on the Reviewing of Cases Involving Enterprises Issuing Warning Letters for Infringement on Copyright, Trademark, and Patent Rights” to set up its regulating and administrative mechanism to the conducts. Though the constitutionality of this Guideline has been affirmed by No.548 Interpretations of Justices of the Constitutional Court, this Guideline still incurs many disputes both in the areas of jurisprudence and practice of Antitrust Laws. From our research on the relative legal literatures and records, we found that most of them are criticizing this Guideline mainly by way of the methods of literature analysis, comparative jurisprudence or case study.

This essay argues that those criticisms did not touch the core issue of the Guideline. Regarding whether the antitrust law shall govern and involve in the management of the issued conduct, the preliminary presumption from FTC for the antitrust law shall involve this conduct is mainly based on that the conduct may result in possible damage on market competition.This essay also challenges this presumption. In practice, is it possible for the receiver of this warning letter might be threaten bypossible infringement liability and remove the suspected infringing products from shelf or refuse to sell such goods any more? That is, what is the probability of the so-called “suspense effect”? The essay shows it has not been verified in current literatures and records. This essay adopts the way of actual investigation to find out the probability of suspense effect to the warning letter to verify the legitimacy and soundness of the involvement of antitrust authority to the issued conduct. I will discuss the following topics in this essay in sequence on the description of conducts of Intellectual Properties Rights infringement: 1.Are related evidences to this infringement a compulsory attachment to the warning letter? 2.And the emotional impact to the receiver. Base on the research result to verify the effectiveness of controlling mechanism adopted by FTC.

This essay shows that the probability of “suspense effect” is really high in most warning letter cases. Even the contemporary big enterprises nowadays have built up its standard operation process to deal with the possible infringement issues when they receive a warning letter. But this kind of management cannot be applied to most medium and small enterprises in Taiwan. From the aspect the legal purposes of Fair Trade Act to maintain a fair market competition, there is a room for the involvement of Fair Trade Act to the conduct. is the essay also shows that Clause 4 of the Guideline has stipulated that the sender of the warning letter has to clearly define the content, scope and specific facts about the infringement and notify the possible infringers prior or simultaneously to the sending of warning letter, these will help to reduce the suspense effect. From above mentioned assessments, the Guideline still can fulfill its regulation purposes. But what should not be ignored is the due process of sending warning letters regulated in the Guideline will not be chosen by most of senders, there would be a question mark to the actual regulation effect of this Guideline. The essay suggests that the FTC take a more complete and broad practical investigation and collect more data related to the actual economic activities, and then a proper legal suggestion can be provided for future amendment.