在我国，知识产权融资是近十年来逐步发展起来的一种科技金融创新模式，相较于美日等国家起步较晚。故此，我国知识产权融资规模、融资模式、参与融资的知识产权类型等都与后者存有较大差距。2008年我国相继出台《国家知识产权战略纲要》、发布《全国知识产权质押融资工作试点方案》，从中央到地方普遍出台了关于鼓励和支持利用知识产权进行融资的政策法规，对知识产权融资的开展起到了一定的指导和推动作用。历时五年，有必要对知识产权融资领域既有经验和得失进行系统梳理，博采他国经验之所长，推动国内知识产权融资走向规范、高效和法治化，以利于国内知识产权融资持续、健康发展。本文以探讨我国知识产权融资法治化建设的法治机制为研究目的，旨在系统梳理我国知识产权融资相关政策法规、介绍国外相关领域成熟经验的基础上，结合我国存量知识产权及知识产权融资现状，探索对知识产权融资进行规范引导，促使其健康、持续、快速发展的法治机制，在健全知识产权投融资体系、完善多层次的资本市场的同时，拓宽知识产权相关产业的融资渠道，在一定程度上化解相关主体融资难的问题。本文主要分为六个部分。第一部分主要介绍我国知识产权融资的缘起、相关基础理论，并分析了我国知识产权融资法治化建设的必要性。阐述了我国知识产权融资的产生、发展历程，对各种类型的知识产权进行了剖析，分析得出具备融资能力的知识产权类型，并结合我国相关领域政策法规现状和融资市场发展现状，认为当前我国有必要探索推进知识产权融资法治化的路径；第二部分对我国知识产权融资领域相关中央和地方政策、法规进行了系统梳理，分析认为，我国从中央层面针对知识产权融资尚未有统一、规范、操作性强的指导性文件，在地方层面虽然有详尽的政策法规，但融资市场混乱，不利于统一监管，容易引致破坏资本市场安全稳定的重大隐患；第三部分一方面详细介绍了我国截至2012年存量知识产权情况以及利用知识产权进行融资的状况，对比得出我国存量知识产权虽然数量庞大，但用于融资的知识产权占比很小，未来知识产权融资拥有相当大的发展空间，可以并且应当提高知识产权的利用效率，避免知识产权闲置造成资源浪费；另一方面研究归纳了我国知识产权融资的既有模式，认为我国知识产权权益型融资和负债型融资均有一定程度的发展，但均处于起步阶段，融资形式不够成熟且由于指导文件的权威指导性和统一性不足，造成知识产权融资市场较为混乱；第四部分介绍了美日两国在知识产权融资领域的成熟经验，认为美日两国是开展知识产权融资较早、融资模式较为成熟的国家，其成熟经验一方面说明既有的知识产权融资模式是现实可行的，另一方面也为我国具体开展知识产权融资业务提供了较为成熟的路径选择，以尽早规避不合理的制度安排，优化我国知识产权融资的相关制度设计；第五部分利用法经济学的分析方法，对国内外知识产权融资的特征、法律供求、融资成本以及融资过程中的限制性因素进行了总结分析，指出知识产权融资具有不对称性、高风险性、政策依存度较高等特征，同时我国知识产权融资相关法律存在供求失衡、效力不足，且由于知识产权融资存在诸多成本和限制性因素，导致我国知识产权融资存在成本过高、参与方动力不足、发展迟缓的问题；第六部分针对当前我国知识产权融资的现状和问题，提出了一系列促进知识产权融资法治化的措施建议。

In China, the intellectual property financing is a kind of financial innovation mode developed in recent ten years, implemented later than other countries. Therefore, China's intellectual property financing scale, financing mode, the types of intellectual properties participating in the financing are all have bigger difference with the latter. In 2008, our country has issued the "outline of national intellectual property strategy", and issued "national intellectual property rights pledge financing the pilot program of work", from central to local levels have introduced on the encouragement and support of financing policies and regulations of intellectual property, guiding and promoting the intellectual property financing. For five years, it is necessary to summarize the gains and losses systematically, to learn the experience of other countries, to promote the domestic intellectual property financing, standardized, efficient and the rule of law, in order to facilitate the sustainable, healthy development of domestic intellectual property financing. This paper focuses on construction of the legal mechanism of China's rule of law of financing of intellectual property. Based on China's intellectual property financing related policies and regulations and the introduction of foreign mature experience of related field, combined with China's stock of intellectual property and intellectual property financing present situation, the paper explores for guidance on intellectual property financing, the rule of law mechanism promoting its health, sustained, rapid development, in the perfect intellectual property investment and financing system, improving the multi-level capital market at the same time, widening the relevant industry intellectual property financing channels, resolving the financing problem of subjects related to a certain extent.This paper is divided into six parts. The first part introduces the origin of China's intellectual property financing, basic theory, and analyzes the necessity of financing the construction of intellectual property law. Describes the emergence and development process of China's intellectual property financing, all types of intellectual property were analyzed. The analysis results with the intellectual property types that have financing. Combined with regulatory policies of financing and the development of China's financing market , it’s advised that it’s necessary for our intellectual property financing to explore the path of the rule of law ; The second part systematically summaries related central and local policies , laws and regulations of the field of intellectual property financing, it’s believed that our intellectual property financing from the central level we lack unified, standardized , workable guidance document , and at the local level although there are detailed policies and regulations, but the financing market is disordered, not conducive to unified supervision, and easily leading to damage to the security and stability of the major capital market; The third part in one hand introduces the stock of intellectual property rights of the country as of 2012, and intellectual property financing conditions. The results show that although the stock of the number of intellectual properties is large, but only a small proportion of intellectual property rights are used for raising capital. In the future, intellectual property financing has considerable room for development. Intellectual property rights can and should be improved use efficiency and avoid waste of resources; In the other hand, the part concludes the existing model of intellectual property financing, showing that there is a certain degree of development both in the type of equity financing and debt-based financing of intellectual property. But they are all in its infancy and the lack of authoritative guidance and unity guidance documents results in the babelism of the intellectual property financing market; The fourth part describes the mature experience of the United States and Japan in the field of intellectual property financing. The intellectual property financing carried out earlier in America and Japan, their financing models are more mature. The above explains that their experience in intellectual property financing is realistic and also provide a more sophisticated path selection for us, to avoid unreasonable institutional arrangements as early as possible to optimize the design of the system of intellectual property rights related to financing; By using the method of law and Economics, the fifth part analyses the domestic and foreign intellectual property financing characteristics , supply and demand of law, financing costs and limiting factors in financing process, pointing out that the asymmetry of intellectual property financing, with high risks and policy dependence and other features. The existence of supply and demand imbalance of the intellectual property financing laws, lacking efficacy , and the presence of intellectual property financing costs and many other limiting factors that lead to that the costs of intellectual property financing are too high, participants underpowered , slow development issues; Based on the current situation and problems of China's intellectual property financing , the sixth part proposed a series of suggestions to promote the legalization of intellectual property financing initiatives.