急用呀，哪位同学英语好点帮我翻译点东西

来源：百度知道 编辑：UC知道 时间：2024/06/17 06:13:48
First, we must define the terms of the license. The traditional definition of a compulsory patent license is: "The granting of a license by a government to use a patent without the patent-holder's permission," but that simple definition is next to useless when it comes down to creating a document. Is the scope of the intellectual property, particularly if it is a patent, clear? Is the license only a negative prohibition, meaning simply that a patent owner is barred from suing for infringement? Or does the patent owner have to provide know-how and technology support? Is this an implied license, such as a naked covenant not to sue, or is it a full written license, with normal license terms? Who gets to set field-of-use restrictions or geographic restrictions? Can the patent owner ever terminate for misconduct by the licensee? And this list does not even get into licensing boilerplate such as the term of the license, conditions for payment, accounting, or even indemnities to

首先，我们必须界定条款。传统定义强制性专利授权是： “由政府给予使用专利的专利持有人的许可。”但是，简单的定义是不起作用时候，以创建一个文件为好。知识产权，特别是对专利的范围界限，清楚了吗？专利许可证只是消极禁止，简单意味着专利权人不得起诉侵权？还是专利所有人必须提供专门知识和技术支持？如裸体盟约不起诉，或者是一个具备正常授权条款的完整的书面许可，这是不是一个暗示的授权？谁设置使用领域限制或地理限制？专利所有人能否终止不当行为持牌人的权利？如长期的许可，付款条件，统计内容，甚至对许可人或持牌人赔偿等这样表格甚至没有进入许可样板。
第二，强制许可将不可避免地需要一定的监督，因此很难管理。因为征收版税，使得监督难度增加，更增加强行转移“技术诀窍”和商业秘密的难度或贸易技巧，我们需要商业化的专利。
第三，今后的专利管道发展如何？一些旧的案件，特别是1953年通用电气案例，对今后的专利及已发行的专利实行了强制许可。一方面，若垄断出现阻止新的专利，那么强制许可的价值将消失，这是不无道理。但另一方面，在今后这一领域的研究和发展中，许可证可能因带走专利技术而损害创新或至少减少了投资者的积极性。

First, we must define the terms of the license. The traditional definition of a compulsory patent license is: "The granting of a license by a government to use a patent without the patent-holder's permission," but that simple definition is next to useless when it comes down to creating a document. Is the scope of the intellectual property, particularly if it is a patent, clear? Is the license only a negative prohibition, meaning simply that a patent owner is barred