|
|
|
| A Comparative Study on the Patterns of the Regulation of the Ownership of the Scientific and Technological Achievements in Posts from the Perspective of Legislation |
| Wang Haiyun,Cao Aihong |
| (Beijing Science Research Center, Beijing 100089, China) |
|
|
|
|
Abstract The ownership right of job-related scientific and technological outputs is one of the key factors affecting the transformation efficiency of scientific and technological outputs. The nature of rights, ownership of rights and division of management authority of scientific and technological outputs are the premise and key for the government to construct the market mechanism to play its role in promoting the transformation of scientific and technological outputs. In recent years, China has continued to promote the ownership reform of job-related scientific and technological achievements, and clearly put forward the "exploration of giving researchers the property right or long-term use right of scientific and technological achievements", in order to stress the intellectual labor value of scientific and technological personnel.#br#In May 2020, the Ministry of Science and Technology and other nine departments jointly issued the Pilot Implementation Plan for Giving Researchers the Ownership or Long-term Right of Use of Job-related Scientific and Technological Achievements, and proposed to select 40 colleges and universities and scientific research institutions to carry out the pilot in different fields, so as to enter the substantive promotion stage of the ownership reform of job-related scientific and technological achievements. At present, all provinces are actively exploring the ownership right reform of job-related scientific and technological outputs, and many provinces have stipulated relevant local regulations. #br#This paper summarizes the regulation modes of the rights of job-related scientific and technological outputs in the laws and regulations of all provinces, and compares and analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of different modes. It is found that at present, there are five modes of ownership of job-related scientific and technological outputs in local legislation: principled regulations, a certain proportion of ownership shares, the ownership classification, full or partial rights, and priority to scientific researchers if their organizations abstain. Different modes have their own advantages and disadvantages, and even the same model has different interpretations in the legislation of different provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the central government), and will have varying degrees of impact on the ownership right reform of job-related scientific and technological Outputs. Therefore, this study aims to deepen the understanding of the pilot reform of ownership and empowerment of job-related scientific and technological outputs.#br#Further policy support is needed for the implementation of local regulations on promoting the transformation of scientific and technological achievements. It is beyond dispute that strong policy support is conducive to the implementation of laws and regulations. At present, there are some pilot projects of empowerment reform in various places. In practice, there are problems in some regulations and policies. Therefore, suggestions are made as follows. First, the government should strengthen publicity and improve relevant policies. Second, regulations and policies on the income tax after empowerment should be clarified. The cash reward obtained by scientific researchers can be included in the salary income of the current month at a reduced rate of 50% and pay individual income tax. So can it be implemented in accordance with relevant government documents after being empowered to scientific researchers? It is suggested that the government should clarify it as soon as possible.Third, it is suggested that all local governments and departments should establish corresponding fault tolerance and error correction mechanisms, explore ways such as negative lists, and formulate diligent and responsible norms and rules, so as to better promote the smooth implementation of the reform of the long-term use right and ownership empowerment of post scientific and technological achievements.#br#
|
|
Received: 15 March 2021
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] 吴汉东.知识产权法学[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2000：10.[2] 肖尤丹.职务发明权属国家所有研究——兼论中国专利法中的国家所有权[J].中国科技论坛,2018,34(11):77-85.[3] 肖尤丹，徐慧.职务发明国家所有制度研究[J].知识产权,2018,32(8):62-72.[4] 张文斐.职务科技成果混合所有制的经济分析[J].软科学,2019,33(5):51-54，64.[5] 翟晓舟.职务科技成果转化收益配置中的权责规范化研究[J].科技进步与对策,2019,36(20):128-133.[6] 向波.职务发明的权利配置与激励比较——基于道德风险的博弈分析[J].法学杂志,2018,39(11):44-55.[7] 邓志红.高校职务科技成果的权利配置规则研究[J].科学学研究,2020,38(2):259-265.[8] 康凯宁.职务科技成果混合所有制探析[J].中国高校科技,2015,29(8):69-72.[9] 徐兴祥,饶世权.职务科技成果专利权共有制度的合理性与价值研究——以西南交通大学职务科技成果混合所有制实践为例[J].中国高校科技,2019,25(5):87-90.[10] 王清.《职务发明条例》:必要之善抑或非必要之恶?[J].政法论丛,2014,30(4):27-34.[11] 邓恒，王含.专利制度在高校科技成果转化中的运行机理及改革路径[J].科技进步与对策,2020，37(17):101-108.[12] 曹爱红,王涵.职务科技成果所有权的法律归属研究[J].科技中国,2018,23(5):71-77.[13] 李政刚.赋予科研人员职务科技成果所有权的法律释义及实现路径[J].科技进步与对策,2020，37(5):124-130.[14] 王影航.高校职务科技成果混合所有制的困境与出路[J].法学评论,2020,41(2):68-78.[15] 万浩,黄武双.论国有科技成果权属制度——使用权“类所有权”化[J].科技与法律,2019,31(1):40-49.[16] 张铭慎.如何破除制约入股型科技成果转化的“国资诅咒”——以成都职务科技成果混合所有制改革为例[J].经济体制改革,2017,35(6):116-123.[17] 刘群彦.职务科技成果产权激励的法经济学思辨——从经验命题到价值命题的理论选项[J].中国高校科技,2019,33(7):87-90.[18] 庆玲.论我国地方立法与国家立法之间的关系[J].四川行政学院学报,2009,11(5):62-65. |
|
|
|
