科技进步法第20条和第21条的立法比较与完善

On the legislation comparison and its perfection of the 20^(th) article and the 21^(th) article of the Law of the People's Republic of China on Science and Technology Progress

结合科技进步法第20条和第21条有关规定,对照美国拜杜法案等有关内容,从比较法角度考察了中国与美国、日本、中国台湾地区、俄罗斯等国(地区)在上述立法模式选择及其制度安排上的异同。比较法制反思表明,我国将国家资助科技项目成果的知识产权保护与转化纳入科技进步法加以调整,其立法模式选择符合创新型国家建设的现实国情,不过其立法制度安排的体系化仍有待进一步推进。在其有关立法模式选择及其制度安排方面既要参照比较法制成果,更要体现本国科研体制及其社会发展需要。在其有关法制建设重心方面既要规范政府介入权行使,更要完善其权利配置机制并培育其知识产权意识。

By combined with the relevant provisions of the 20th article and the 21th article of the law of the People＇s Republic of China on science and technology progress and compared with the contents of U.S.bayh-dole system,this article studies the differences and similarities in the legislative mode selection and institutional arrangements about China and U.S.,Japan,China Taiwan,Russia and other countries（regions） above-mentioned from the perspective of comparative law.Reflections on comparative law shows that the protection and transformation of IPR about the government-funded science and technology project in our country has been adjusted by the law of the People＇s Republic of China on science and technology progress.This legislative mode adopted by China conforms to the actual needs of building an innovative country,but the systematization of the legislative institution arrangements remains to be promoted.We ought to compare with the results of comparative law,but we should pay more attention to combine with our RD system and social development needs in the area of the legislative mode selection and institution arrangements.Meanwhile we ought to regulate the exercise of March-in-rights,but we should pay more attention to improve the mechanism for the allocation of rights and the consciousness of right to applicate the IPR above-mentioned in the area of the key points of the legal system construction.