智慧財產權的邊境管制措施，係全球貿易近一個世紀所發展出來的制度，時至今日各國仍不斷在立法更新。然而在我國有關之規定卻係為加入 WTO，因應 TRIPS 之最低標準所出的規範，對此制度之由來、運作及國際趨勢幾乎沒有任何的經驗即移植立法，以至於產生不少問題，如有關適格的申請人、程序及實體性質、舉證責任、……等等，本文先由 TRIPS 之基礎理論及各國相關實務運作來嘗試界定邊境管制措施在我國法律應有的定位。
邊境管制措施問題反應在擔保金的規定上，最能突顯其實益，蓋擔保金之規定能反應出立法者對邊境管制措施上開問題的認識，由於我國相關規定（以商標法為主）與世界各國立法迥異，本文嘗試以前述之法律定位來檢討我國規定之合理性，並參酌世界各國對於智慧財產權的邊境管制措施之相關規定及實務，提出本文之建議。

The border control measures of intellectual property rights are the system developed for global trades for nearly a century and each country keeps renewing legislations nowadays. However, relevant regulations in our country are made for TRIPS to meet the minimum standards so as to join WTO. The legislation is making without experiences in the origin system, operation and international trend so that there are many problems raised such as qualified applicants, procedures, entities and burden of proof and etc. This article tries to define the position of border control measures with our country laws according to the basic theory of TRIPS and relevant practical operation in each country.
The problems of border control measures reflect on the provisions of security. The most prominent benefit is that the provisions of security can reflect legislators’ knowledge to the foregoing problems of border control measures. Because relevant regulations (especially Trademark Act) in our country are different from that in each country in the world, this article tries to discuss the reasonability of regulations in our country based on the aforementioned law position and refers to the relevant rules and practices of border control measures of intellectual property rights in each country in the universe in order to come up with the suggestions to the article.