English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 109925/140876 (78%)
Visitors : 45968431      Online Users : 717
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/60521


    Title: 論反仿冒貿易協定談判與智慧財產權保護多邊貿易架構之分合
    The relationship between the negotiation of anti-counterfeiting trade agreement and the intellectual property protection under the multilateral trade framework
    Authors: 鄭燕黛
    Cheng, Yen Tai
    Contributors: 楊光華
    鄭燕黛
    Cheng, Yen Tai
    Keywords: TRIPS
    反仿冒貿易協定
    智慧財產權保護
    TRIPS-Plus
    TRIPS
    Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement
    Intellectual Property Protection
    TRIPS-Plus
    Date: 2009
    Issue Date: 2013-09-05 16:48:52 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 自19世紀以降，各國體認以國內法律為基礎的保護方式具有侷限性，因此開始嘗試以國際條約的方式對智慧財產權進行規範，產生了巴黎公約、伯恩公約、羅馬公約等國際協定，可定位為智慧財產權保護多邊貿易架構形成的第一階段，也是第一次各國國內立法朝國際保護靠攏的現象。1967年WIPO成立使多邊貿易架構顯得較為完備，然而在WIPO之運作架構下又因為不同國家的立場分歧未能進一步修正智慧財產權公約，多邊架構發展出現瓶頸，已開發國家未因此退出多邊貿易架構，反而選擇持續完善此多邊架構。TRIPS於1995年烏拉圭回合後生效，規定了嚴格且具體的執行規範，但是多邊架構未能於TRIPS後再取得重大成果，已開發國家和開發中國家在智慧財產權利益之立場分歧使得多邊架構之發展陷入僵局。已開發國家於TRIPS後時期選擇了另一種途徑，本文舉美國FTAs貿易政策為例，發現此時出現了暫時偏離多邊架構，改以雙邊架構為政策重心的分離，惟雙邊貿易政策經本文分析並無法產生美國的預期效果。
    ACTA的發展可以定位出美國目前的政策走向，改採協商複邊貿易協定的方式，希望可以循FTAs政策的途徑，企圖讓ACTA此複邊架構的成果可以擴張到多邊架構中。本文認為2010年12月公布最終版本的ACTA能否順利生效仍屬未知數，即便順利生效，依其談判成果可以推定，已無法達到所有參與談判國的預期。不論已開發國家之後的政策走向為何，我們可以發現擁有智慧財產權利益國家的最終目標仍是提升國際間智慧財產權保護水準，過程中則變動地、持續地在多邊、複邊貿易架構中，選擇性執行能達成最終目標的政策，國際智慧財產權保護貿易架構中存在著各國政策反覆於多邊、複邊架構間來回擺盪的分合現象。
    關鍵字：TRIPS、反仿冒貿易協定、智慧財產權保護、TRIPS-Plus
    Countries found out that the protection of intellectual property based only on national law was insufficient. They chosen to base on international agreement from 19 century and concluded important treaties such as Paris Convention, Berne Convention and Rome Convention. This is the first phase in the process of which the intellectual property protection under the multilateral trade framework forming. WIPO was established at 1967 and completed the multilateral trade framework a little further. But countries had different positions thus could not obtain mutual recognition on specific issues. The developed countries did not walk away from the framework; nevertheless, they worked even harder to try to get some result. TRIPS came into force at 1995 after the Uruguay Round which is the most important multilateral agreement at the present day. The multilateral trade framework was stuck after TRIPS resulting from the gap between the developed and developing countries. The former began to work in other direction. We took the U.S. bilateral trade policy of FTAs as an example and found out there is a temporary departure from the multilateral trade framework at this phase. The U.S. policy of FTAs however didn’t achieve the goal expected.
    We could point out the next step of U.S. by observing the negotiation of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA). U.S. took a different approach by negotiating the ACTA and hoped there will be a spillover effect from the plurilateral agreement to the multilateral framework. Negotiating parties announced the final draft of ACTA on December 3rd, 2010. After analyzing the final draft, we could make a conclusion that the result from the negotiation is not outstanding; moreover, it is not clear whether the agreement will come into force in time. No matter what kind of action will the developed countries take in the next, their final and utmost goal is always trying to protect the intellectual property and their related interest. Changing policy becomes the normal condition. This leads to the phenomenon that the intellectual property protection is continuously swaying from the multilateral side to the bilateral or plurilateral trade framework, and vice versa.
    Key Words: TRIPS, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, Intellectual Property Protection, TRIPS-Plus
    Reference: 一、 中文文獻
    (一)、 專書
    1. 王澤鑑，侵權行為法(1)，2005年1月。
    2. 許忠信，WTO與貿易有關智慧財產權協定之研究，2005年5月。
    3. 經濟部智慧財產局資料服務組，巴黎公約解讀，2000年。
    4. 羅昌發，國際貿易法，1999年7月。
    (二)、 期刊與其他資料
    1. 元貞律師事務所，ISP業者協力防止網路侵權責任問題之外國立法趨勢及立法例之初析（上）（下），http://www.justuslaw.com.tw (最後瀏覽日：2010年5月31日)。
    2. 李湘雲，著作鄰接權制度之研究─以日本著作鄰接權制度為研究經緯，中原大學財經法律學系碩士論文，民國93年。
    3. 林彩瑜，WTO爭端機制與美國貿易法301條款之研究，1999全國智慧財產權研討會論文，國立交通大學，1999。
    4. 洪慕芳，科技保護措施規範之研究，交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文，民國95年。
    5. 胡心蘭，論科技發展對合理使用與著作財產權限制之影響，中原大學財經法律學系碩士論文，民國90年。
    6. 倪貴榮，WTO會員設定強制授權事由的權限：以維也納條約法公約之解釋原則分析飛利浦CD-R專利特許事由與TRIPS的相容性，第九屆國際經貿法學發展學術研討會，國立政治大學國際經濟組織暨法律研究中心，2009。
    7. 財團法人資訊工業策進會科技法律中心，網際網路服務提供者法律責任與相關法制之研究，民國92年12月。
    8. 張淑美，網路服務業者之侵權責任─以著作權侵權為中心，國立交通大學科技法律研究所碩士論文，民國95年11月。
    9. 馮震宇，數位內容之保護與科技保護措施—法律、產業與政策的考量，月旦法學雜誌，第105期，頁72，2004。
    10. 廖心予，WTO架構下國際智財權規範的發展與變遷，第四屆全國公共事務論文發表會，東海大學行政管理暨政策學系，2007。
    二、 英文文獻
    (一)、 專書
    1. GERVAIS, DANIEL, THE TRIPS AGREEMENT: DRAFTING HISTORY AND ANALYSIS (2d ed. 2003).
    2. MERCURIO, BRYAN, TRIPS-PLUS PROVISIONS IN FTAS: RECENT TRENDS, IN REGIONAL TRADE AGREEMENTS AND THE WTO LEGAL SYSTEM (Lorand Bartlels & Federico Ortino eds., 2006).
    3. SCHOTT, JEFFREY J., FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS: US STRATEGIES AND PRIORITIES (Institute for International Economics ed., 2004).
    4. WIPO, WIPO INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY HANDBOOK: POLICY, LAW AND USE (2d ed. 2004).
    (二)、 期刊與其他資料
    1. ACTA Parties Made Progress on Pre-established Civil Damages, INSIDE U.S. TRADE, Vol. 27 (Jul. 9, 2010).
    2. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Draft, at http://www.laquadrature.net/files/201001_acta.pdf (Jan. 18, 2010). Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Draft, at http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/1883 (April, 2010).
    3. Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Final, at http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/2417 (Dec. 03, 2010).
    4. Australia Digital Alliance, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement: Impact on Individuals and Intermediaries, at http://www.digital.org.au/submission/documents/20100519ADA-ACTAimpactonindividualsandintermediaries.pdf (May, 2010).
    5. Behsudi, Adam, India, China Attack ACTA as Running Afoul of TRIPS Agreement at WTO, INSIDE U.S. TRADE, Vol. 28, No. 23(June 11, 2010).
    6. Burrell, Robert, Weatherall, Kimberlee, Exporting Controversy? Reactions to the Copyright Provisions of the U.S-Australia Free Trade Agreement: Lessons for U.S. Trade Policy, U. ILL. J.L. TECH & POL’Y (Fall 2008).
    7. Congress of the United States, Letter from 12 Members of Congress to President Bush on Intellectual Property Provisions in CAFTA, at http://www.cptech.org/ip/health/trade/cafta/congress09302004.html (Sep. 30, 2004).
    8. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, ACTA: Discussion Paper, at http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/discussion-paper.html (Nov. 13, 2007).
    9. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Agreed Press Release: Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Report on the 8th Round of Negotiations Wellington, at www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/ACTAAgreedPressRelease16April2010.pdf (Apr. 16, 2010).
    10. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Agreed Press Release: Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Report on the 8th Round of Negotiations Wellington, at www.dfat.gov.au/trade/acta/ACTAAgreedPressRelease16April2010.pdf (Apr. 16, 2010).
    11. EDPS, Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor on the current negotiations by the European Union of an Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), at http://www.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/EDPS/PressNews/Press/2010/EDPS-2010-03_ACTA_EN.pdf (Feb. 22, 2010).
    12. El-Said H. and El-Said M., TRIPS, Bilateralism, Multilateralism and Implications for Developing Countries: Jordan’s Drug Sector, 2(1) Manchester Journal of International Economic Law (2005).
    13. EuroISPA, European ISPs Warn against A Trade Deal Threatening Internet Openness, at www.euroispa.org/files/0911_euroispa_pr_acta.pdf (Nov. 30, 2009).
    14. European Parliament, Resolution of 24 November 2010 on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (Nov. 24, 2010).
    15. FFII, Analysis Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, at http://action.ffii.org/acta/Analysis?action=print (May 24, 2010).
    16. FFII, EU Council Refuses to Release Secret ACTA Documents, at http://press.ffii.org/Press%20releases/EU%20Council%20refuses%20to%20release%20secret%20ACTA%20documents (Nov. 10, 2008).
    17. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, ACTA 10th Round of Negotiation-Washington D.C., at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/10_joint_statement-10_declaration_commune.aspx?lang=eng (last visited Aug. 23, 2010).
    18. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, ACTA 11st Round of Negotiation-Tokyo, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/joint_statement-finale-declaration_commune.aspx?lang=eng (last visited Oct. 02, 2010).
    19. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, ACTA 5th Round of Negotiation-Rabat, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/5-negotiation-5-negociation.aspx (last visited June. 26, 2010).
    20. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, ACTA 6th Round of Negotiation in Seoul, Korea; November 4 to 6, 2009, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/6-negotiation-6-negociation.aspx (last visited June. 26, 2010).
    21. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, ACTA 7th Round of Negotiation, Guadalajara, Mexico; January 26-29, 2010, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/7-negotiation-7-negociation.aspx (last visited June. 26, 2010).
    22. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, December 15-17 2008 Meeting in Paris, France, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/paris.aspx?lang=en (Dec. 18, 2008).
    23. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, July 29-31 2008 Meeting in Washington, D.C., at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/washington.aspx?lang=en (Aug. 1, 2008).
    24. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, October 8-9 2008 Meeting in Tokyo, Japan, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/washington.aspx?lang=en (Oct. 24, 2008).
    25. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Proposed Agenda for the 8th Round of ACTA Negotiations, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/8-agenda-8-ordre_du_jour.aspx (last visited May 30, 2010).
    26. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, Proposed Agenda for the 9th Round of ACTA Negotiations, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/9-agenda-9-ordre_du_jour.aspx (last visited June. 26, 2010).
    27. Geist, Michael, The ACTA Threat to the Future of WIPO, at http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/04/14/the-acta-threat-to-the-future-of-wipo/ (Apr. 14, 2009).
    28. Geist, Michael, The Effectiveness of Notice and Notice, at http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1705/125/ (Feb. 15, 2007).
    29. Global Congress Combating Counterfeiting &Piracy, Fifth Global Congress-Cancun, at http://www.ccapcongress.net/Cancun.htm (last visited June 26, 2010).
    30. Gross, Grant, U.S. Trade Office Release Information on Secret Piracy Pact, IDG NEWS SERVICE, at http://www.itworld.com (Apr. 7, 2009).
    31. ICTSD, Under Scrutiny, ACTA Negotiators Release Draft Text, Vol. 14, No. 14, at http://ictsd.org/i/news/bridgesweekly/74387/ (Apr, 21 2010).
    32. India, Brazil to Move WTO against EC over Drug Seizure Issue, BUSINESS STANDARD, at http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/india-brazil-to-move-wto-against-ec-over-drug-seizure-issue/75571/on (Oct. 09, 2009).
    33. Ingram, Matthew, Do We Need Copyright Cops?, INGRAM 2.0, at http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/ingram-2_0/do-we-need-copyright-cops/Article687387/ (May 27, 2008).
    34. INTERPOL, Intellectual Property Crimes: Trademark Counterfeiting & Copyright Piracy, at www.interpol.int/Public/FinancialCrime/IntellectualProperty/Publication/IIPCAGBrouchure.pdf (2007).
    35. INTERPOL, Operation Jupiter 2004-2009, at www.interpol.int/public/FinancialCrime/IntellectualProperty/OperationJupiter/Default.asp (last visited May 30, 2010).
    36. INTERPOL, Operation Mamba:Targeting Counterfeiting Medicines in Tazania and Uganda, at www.interpol.int/public/News/2008/mamba20081029.asp (last visited May 30, 2010).
    37. J., Rein, International Governance through Trade Agreement: Patent Protection for Essential Medicines, 21 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LAW AND BUSINESS (2001).
    38. Joint Statement on the 8th Round of ACTA Negotiations, at http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/fo/8_Joint_statement-8_declaration_commune.aspx (last visited May 30, 2010).
    39. Kaminski, Margot, Recent Development: The Origins and Potential Impact of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, 34 Yale J. Int’l L. (2009).
    40. Lee, Matt, Speak out against ACTA, FSF, at http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/acta/ (Dec. 07, 2009).
    41. McManis, Charles R., The Proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA): Two Tales of A Treaty, 46 Hous. L. Rev. (2009).
    42. Morin, Jean-Federic Multilateral TRIPS-Plus Agreements: Is the US Strategy a Failure?, 12 THE JOURNAL OF WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (2009).
    43. NGOs Withdraw ACTA Lawsuit, Blast USTR for Lack of Transparency, INSIDE U.S. TRADE, Vol. 27 (Jun. 19, 2009).
    44. Opderbeck, David W., Patent Damages Reform and the Shape of Patent Law, SETON HALL UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW LEGAL STUDIES RESEARCH PAPER SERIES (2008).
    45. R., Okediji, TRIPS Dispute Settlement and the Sources of International Copyright Law, 49 Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A. (2001).
    46. Trainer, Timothy P., Intellectual Property Enforcement: A Reality Gap (Insufficient Assistance, Ineffective Implementation)?, 8 J. Marshall Rev. Intell. Prop. L. (2008).
    47. United States Government Accountability Office, Intellectual Property: Observations on Efforts to Quantify the Economic Effects of Counterfeit and Pirated Goods, REPORT TO CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES, at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10423.pdf (April 2010).
    48. USTR, Ambassador Ron Kirk Announces Plan to Move Forward with the Negotiation of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, at http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2009/june/ambassador-ron-kirk-announces-plan-move-forward-negot (Jun. 22, 2009).
    49. USTR, Ambassador Schwab Announces U.S. Will Seek New Trade Agreement to Fight Fakes, at http://www.ustr.gov/ambassador-schwab-announces-us-will-seek-new-trade-agreement-fight-fakes (Oct. 23, 2007).
    50. USTR, Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement Trade Facts, at http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/factsheets/2008/asset_upload_file760_15084.pdf (Aug. 4, 2008).
    51. USTR, Bipartisan Agreement on Trade Policy, at http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/factsheets/2007/asset_upload_file127_11319.pdf (May, 2007).
    52. USTR, Free Trade Agreement, at http://www.ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements (May 19, 2010).
    53. USTR, Statement from USTR Spokesman Sean Spicer on ACTA, at http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/pdfs/press_release/2008/asset_upload_file757_14938.pdf (June 05, 2008).
    54. USTR, The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement – Summary of Key Elements under Discussion, at http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2009/april/acta-summary-key-elements-under-discussion (Apr. 6, 2009).
    55. Weatherall, Kimberlee G., ACTA in April 2010: Summary of Concerns, The Selected Works of Kimberlee G. Weatherall, at http://works.bepress.com/kimweatherall/20 (April, 2010).
    56. Weatherall, Kimberlee G., The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement: An Updated Analysis, The Selected Works of Kimberlee G. Weatherall, at http://works.bepress.com/kimweatherall/19 (November, 2009).
    57. WHO, Counterfeiting Drugs Kill!, at www.who.int/impact/FinalBrochureWHA2008a.pdf (2008).
    58. WIPO website, Member States, at http://www.wipo.int/members/en/ (Apr. 13, 2010).
    59. WIPO website, Treaties Statistics, at http://www.wipo.int (Apr. 13, 2010).
    60. WIPO website, What Is WIPO?, at http://www.wipo.int/about-wipo/en/what_is_wipo.html (Apr. 13, 2010).
    61. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, ACTA Countries Finalize Agreement, Adopt U.S.-EU Compromise, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Nov. 18, 2010).
    62. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, China Slams Nearly Completed ACTA, Questions Its WTO Compatibility, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Nov. 02, 2010).
    63. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, Companies Seek ACTA Signing Statement to Ensure U.S. Law Compliance, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Oct. 14, 2010).
    64. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, EU Taking A Hardline Approach on ACTA Scope Disagreement, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Sep. 09, 2010).
    65. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, Implementing ACTA Text Will Require Legal Changes in Some Countries, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Oct. 14, 2010).
    66. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, Nearly Final ACTA Text Shows Series of U.S. Compromise over Three Years, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Oct. 07, 2010).
    67. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, Released ACTA Text Highlights Four Sections Where Disagreements Remain, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Oct. 06, 2010).
    68. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, Transparency, Focus on Limits of Domestic Laws Weakened ACTA, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Nov. 24, 2010).
    69. WORLD TRADE ONLINE, U.S., EU Reach Basic Agreement on ACTA Scope; Several Areas Not Finalized, at http://insidetrade.com/ (Oct. 05, 2010).
    三、 WTO文件
    1. Multilateral Trade Negotiations, Ministerial Declaration on the Uruguay Round, WTO Doc. MIN.DEC (Sept. 20, 1986).
    2. WTO Ministerial Conference Fourth Session, Ministerial Declaration, WTO Doc. WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1 (Nov. 14, 2001)
    3. WTO General Council, Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, WTO Doc. WT/L/540 and Corr. 1 (Sep. 1, 2003).
    4. WTO General Council Trade Negotiations Committee, Doha Work Programme-the Outstanding Implementation Issue on the Relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity, WTO Doc. IP/C/W/474 (July 5, 2006).
    5. Appellate Body Report, Canada – Term of Patent Protection, WTO Doc. WT/DS170/AB/R (Sept. 18, 2000).
    6. Panel Report, Canada – Patent Protection of Pharmaceutical Product, WTO Doc. WT/DS114/R (Mar. 17, 2000).
    7. Panel Report, China — Measures Affecting the Protection and Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights, WTO Doc. WT/DS362/R, at 115 (Sept. 18, 2000).
    8. Request for Consultation by India, European Union and a Member State — Seizure of Generic Drugs in Transit, WTO Doc. WT/DS408/1 (May 19, 2010).
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    國際經營與貿易研究所
    97351038
    98
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0097351038
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[國際經營與貿易學系 ] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    103801.pdf1594KbAdobe PDF2540View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback