摘要
刑法与民商法的规范保护目的不同决定了其在司法裁判路径上应当存在区别。刑事裁判过度依赖前置法的裁判结果,以至于刑法自身丧失了对于知识产权保护的独立判断能力。商业秘密的民商法保护以“对权利人的损失填补”的个人本位作为裁判的底层逻辑;而商业秘密的刑法保护则是建立在国家本位的基础之上,将“侵害行为是否造成市场竞争秩序被破坏”作为定罪的指引与保护的归宿。在法规范保护目的存在差异的前提下,对于侵犯商业秘密罪中商业秘密的“秘密性”与“商业性”的概念及其标准认定,刑法应当采取相对独立的判断方法。这样的判断模式符合国家本位下构建严密法网的制度要求。刑事裁判者的任务应当为:着重区分侵害行为类型的严重程度与衡量商业秘密的披露是否对市场竞争秩序造成了实质影响。
The different purpose of normative protection between criminal law and civil and commercial law determines that there should be a difference in the path of judicial judgment.Criminal adjudication relies too much on the judgment result of the preemptive law,so that the criminal law itself has lost the independent judgment ability of intellectual property protection.The civil and commercial protection of trade secrets takes the individual standard of"making up for the loss of the right holder"as the bottom logic of the judgment.However,the criminal protection of trade secrets is based on the national standard,and"whether the infringement causes the destruction of market competition order"is taken as the guidance and the destination of protection for conviction.Under the premise of different legal protection purposes,the criminal law should adopt a relatively independent judgment on the concepts and standards of"secrecy"and"commerciality"of trade secrets in the crime of violating trade secrets.Such judgment mode conforms to the system requirement of constructing strict legal network under the national standard.The task of the criminal judge should distinguish the severity of the types of infringement and to measure whether the disclosure of trade secrets has a material impact on the market competition order.
作者
董星宏
孙正一
Dong Xinghong;Sun Zhengyi
出处
《电子知识产权》
2025年第2期77-84,共8页
Electronics Intellectual Property
关键词
规范保护目的
商业秘密
裁判路径
竞争秩序
Normative Protection Purpose
Trade Secrets
The Path of Judgment
Competitive Order
