Abstract
It is not difficult to locate several papers covering variable topics of IP evaluation. However, in Taiwan, the differentiation between academic studies and practices tend to be large. Actually, there are two major practical reasons for conducting an evaluation. At first, it is for the “pricing” purpose pending a royalty negotiation. Secondly, it is to satisfy the needs of compensation determination. To a business operator, licensing process, just like other supply-demand chains, should be treated differently subject to the role he/she plays within it. In other words, Should we define the licensing negotiation and judicial settlement as part of resources allocation process, businessmen would certainly take different self-benefit foot standing according to the role they play in the transaction. Further, their licensing demands will be different subject to their industry implication, too. With these economic variants in mind, the businessmen are able to establish an evaluation logistic from the standpoint of IP management as well as the strategic planning. On the other hand, if we may look into normal evaluation theories, form the perspective of economic analysis, and, together with the expertise’s of management, accounting and law, for a rational “licensing” price. Usually, the evaluation result will get closer to the reality. Therefore, it becomes important to consider the inclusion of the integration of economic, management and accounting theories in the legal process of legal dispute settlement. To sum up, while this paper emphasizes on the study of patent infringement compensation, the American judicial practices will be analyzed to support the research basing on the integrative approach composed of economic, management and accounting principles. Finally, this paper turns to the rules, theories and practices of compensation in Taiwan and tries to figure out the way that we can learn from the American judicial experiences in applying the IP evaluation mechanism to infringement compensation cases.