[4] 笔者并不否认，知识产权的“独占性”是有期限并且受合理使用的限制。

　　因此，此处讨论的独占也是相对的而并没有过于偏激的意思。本文全文都是建立在已有的知识产权的制度基础之上，并不是对知识产权本身的质疑，而主要是从反垄断角度和整体社会发展的角度进行一些思考。同时，我也并不否认，知识产权取得的最初，也是在市场公平竞争的情况下权利人创造性的劳动的结果。

　　[5] “有效竞争”是一种经济学意义上目标模式，在这种模式下，竞争被视为实现整体经济和社会公共利益的手段，提出这种模式是为了建立有利于经济发展的市场结构。作为法律上可操作的目标模式，关键是如何确立一个标准，以评价市场上的竞争是有效竞争。根据其他国家的经验，建立有效竞争的目标模式主要是从规范竞争性市场结构出发。按照德国康森巴赫的理论，优化的市场结构，市场上要有多个竞争者，他们的商品有适度的差异性，且市场的透明度高。王晓晔：《竞争法研究》出版社99年版第73－90页

　　[6] 刘宁元司平平林燕萍：《国际反垄断法》上海人民出版社2002年9 月版第7 －9 页

　　[7] “To the extent there has been a perceived conflict ， however，it seems to stem from four principal areas of uncertainty ：（a ） the extent to which competitio policy is about short-run allocative efficiency or long-run dynamic efficiency，（b ） whether market power should be inferred from the existence of an IPR ，（c ） certain distinctive economic characteristics of IPRs ， and（d ） whether a particular contract， license，or merger should be regarded as horizontal or vertical. ” See“competition policy and intellectual property rights ”， OECD ， committee on competition law and policy， DAFFE/DLP（98）18

　　[8] “Discussion of the overlap between antitrust and intellectual property law frequently observes that the former opposes monopoly ， while the latter confers monopoly rights. ” See Ronald A. Cass ：“COPYRIGHT，LICENSING， AND THE”FIRST SCREEN“

　　[9] “合理原则”、“本身违法原则”是反垄断法的两个基本原则。

　　“本身违法”适用于那些已经被确定为不合理地限制了贸易的行为，因而只看是否有行为的存在，无需对行为产生的原因和后果进行调查。一般适用于法律明确规定的情形下，如滥用市场支配地位，限制竞争协议等。“合理原则”的基本含义是某些行为构成了对竞争的限制，但又不能适用本身违法原则。是否构成违法须在慎重考察企业行为的意图、行为方式以及行为后果之后，才能做出判断。

　　[10]“Normal competition law， applied under a rule of reason standard，seems entirely adequate for distinguishing between”pro “

　　and anticompetitive tying in cases where the requisite market power is conferred through IPR. “ See”competition policy and intellectual property rights “， OECD ， committee on competition law and policy，DAFFE/DLP （98）18

　　[11]“1. it should not be presumed that an intellectual property right creates or increases market power ；2. competition policy should acknowledge and respect the basic rights granted under patent law ；3. a licensing restriction should not be prohibited under competition law if it leads to a situation which is less anticompetitive than would occur if there were no license at all（i.e. competition agencies should not implicitly assume that if the restriction were proscribed， the license would still be granted）。 Where a licensing restriction fails this test，it should nevertheless be permitted under competition law if it is associated with sufficient actual or potential efficiency effects.” See“competition policy and intellectual property rights ”， OECD ， committee on competition law and policy， DAFFE/DLP（98）18