관련 논문
*정책원 미소장 자료이며 관련 논문 소개 게시판입니다. 게시물 관련링크를 눌러 소속기관에서 열람가능한지 확인해주시기 바랍니다. lib@nibp.kr
글 수 4
발행년 : 2014 
구분 : 국내학술지 
학술지명 : 산업재산권 제44호 
관련링크 : http://www.dbpia.co.kr/Article/3505541 
영어 초록
  The researches on human embryonic stem cells(hESC) which are carried out by many developed countries in this area including the U.S., west european countries, Japan etc. are aiming for treatment of neural diseases such as Alzheimer"s disease, cancer. However, patent protection on hESC brings an issue on bioethics, in which the matter is from which stage of development after fertilization embryo is regarded as a human being, because it generally originates from destruction of human embryo if stem cells are derived from the embryo. The Directive 98/44/EC on legal protection of biotechnological invention as to including matters on biotechnological inventions in Europe does not have any definition on what is ‘human embryo’. Therefore, there have been many disputes on the correct meaning of what is embryo as well as what is use of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes according to Rule 28 of Implementing Regulation to the EPC(European Patent Convention). In this regard, the Br¨ustle v. Greenpeace case of European Court of Justice in 2012 has an important meaning. This case shows what is embryo, which is broadly interpreted than ever. Following the purpose of this case, the UK Intellectual Property Office has revised the Practice Notices in 2012, and published the Examination Guidelines for Patent Applications relating to Biotechnological Inventions in 2013. In addition, German Federal Supreme Court has made a decision on Brüstle case in 2012, in which the human embryo appears to be interpreted narrower than the ECJ. In the future, it is anxious how both ECJ’s judgment and German Federal Supreme Court(BGH)’s judgment on Brüstle case are influenced upon European Patent Office as well as other european countries’ courts. It is meaningful for us to compare and analyze the interpretations of ECJ and BGH on patentability of human embryonic stem cells in Europe.



목차

I. 들어가며
II. EU 바이오지침에서 인간배아줄기세포의 특허보호
III. 유럽사법재판소의 판결 - Brüstle v. Greenpeace 사건(C-34/10)
IV. 유럽사법재판소 판결(C 34/10) 후 각국의 동향
V. 맺으며
참고문헌
Abstract



키워드

인간배아줄기세포의 특허성, EU 바이오지침(98/44/EC), 인간배아의 파괴, 유럽사법재판소, Brüstle 사건, Patentability of Human embryonic stem cells, Directive 98/44/EC, destruction of human embryo, European Court of Justice, Brüstle case



상세서지

  • 발행기관 : 한국지식재산학회
  • 자료유형 : 전자저널 논문
  • 등재정보 : KCI 등재
  • 작성언어 : 한국어
  • 파일형식 : Text PDF
  • KORMARC
  • URL : http://www.dbpia.co.kr/Article/3505541
List of Articles
번호 제목 발행년 조회 수
공지 ! 논문 정보 제공 게시판입니다.   343
4 13 인구 유럽의 인구동향 및 저출산 대응 가족정책과 한국 인구정책의 과제 / 전광희 2018  56
3 12 낙태 낙태에 관한 유럽인권재판소의 입장 : 대한민국에서의 논의에의 시사점 / 오미영 2014  313
2 1 윤리학 첨단치료 의료제품(ATMP)에 대한 유럽연합의 규제법 고찰 / 박수헌 2014  122
» 18 인체실험 인간배아줄기세포의 특허보호에 관한 유럽의 최신 동향 : 유럽사법재판소의 Brüstle v. Greenpeace 판결을 중심으로 / 한지영 2014  1088