智慧財產為現今時代企業及個人主要資產之一，其市場價值不容小覷，但礙於現今的會計制度、智慧財產擁有者狹隘的智慧財產運用方式，以及我國鑑價機制的不普及，智慧財產擁有者難以利用智慧財產進行一般資產價值發揮的交易，而形成智慧財產價值淬取上之限制。在一定程度上，此問題亦阻礙更多智慧財產之創造，而有加以解決之必要，因而本文提出增設智慧財產證券化制度之建議，期能藉由新興融資管道的增設來解決上述問題，並在研究中探討執行智慧財產證券化可能達到的成效。 本研究從架構中個體及社會總體面向，探討智慧財產證券化架構下之利益、成本與風險分配等問題，進而得出該制度值得在我國推行之結論。其次，從美國的實施經驗及近年金融風暴之教訓研究智慧財產架構證券化時的風險控制之道。最後回歸我國法制層面，先初步研擬智慧財產證券化的定義性條文，進而以既有法規為基礎，探討智慧財產證券化所涉之法律議題，並提出其他角度的價值考量，做為證券化下既有法規之調整參考。復在配套建議的補充下，期待我國法制環境能朝更適於智慧財產證券化制度的方向繼續發展。 Intellectual Property is one of the most important assets of enterprises and individuals in modern times. It holds high value as an asset, but is hardly represented at all in current accounting practices and formulations. Low extent of IP utilization and unrevealing appraisal institution made IP deals difficult to actualize in the past, which undoubtedly impeded attempts to maximize value by incorporating IP ownership and bringing the values of IP into full play. To a certain extent, such obstacles may delay or even prevent the birth of intellectual property, and thus it is a fundamental problem that truly needs to be solved. In consideration of the above, this study further explored the idea of applying the securitization concept to the scope of intellectual property, and endeavored to find out the efficacy that can be reached in such a hypothetical overall arrangement. We analyzed the benefits, risk allocations and costs of IP securitization for both individual transactions and the society as a whole. From the process, we could infer a conclusion through examining how the arrangement performs in the cost-benefit analysis and from balancing the contentions of the factors. Furthermore, consolidation of observations and lessons learnt from American experiences and the subprime mortgage crisis was also a prominent part of the study, from which we deciphered some valuable points to enlighten our IP securitization development. Lastly, this study made the proposal to enact a specific law governing such new and specialized transactions, and some suggestions on amending legislation and adjusting regulatory directions on the basis of existing laws and regulations were presented as well.
