现有技术抗辩在专利侵权诉讼中的适用研究

发布时间：2018-03-02 23:22

本文选题：相同侵权　切入点：现有技术抗辩　出处：《烟台大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：法院在审里专利侵权诉讼过程中，一般是先根据原告提供的专利权利要求书及相关专利文件确定专利权保护范围，再对被控技术方案进行分析，判断是否落入了专利权保护范围以确定原告侵权主张是否成立。而被告的应对策略一般是证明自己使用的技术在专利权保护范围之外或者通过向国家知识产权局提出无效宣告审查申请，主张原告专利权无效，以达到不承担专利侵权责任的目的。然而，由于我国实行的是专利行政确权与侵权司法审查分离制度，即使被告主张自己使用的是现有技术，也往往需要先向专利复审委员会提出专利无效宣告申请，而陷入极为不利的诉累状态。 2008年修订的《专利法》正式以法律的形式确立我国现有技术抗辩制度，使得被告在面对专利侵权指控时，能直接以自己所使用的是现有技术为由进行抗辩，法院也无需中止诉讼等待专利复审委员会无效宣告审查结果，即可作出独立判决。实施现有技术抗辩制度能有效得提高诉讼效率，，减轻当事人的诉累，同时还有利于遏制专利权人恶意诉讼。现有技术抗辩制度在我国建立时间很短段，还有很多不完善的地方，目前学术界对于现有技术抗辩的适用范围、对比顺序、成立标准等还存在着较大的争议。本文从现有技术制度的起源开始介绍，对当前司法实践中争议较多的问题就行探讨，重点对可以用抗辩的现有技术范围、适用原则、现有技术抗辩成立标准的核心问题进行研究，希望对我国现有技术抗辩制度的发展与完善有些微参考价值。本文主要通过五个章节来介绍我国现有技术抗辩制度。第一部分主要介绍了现有技术抗辩制度的基本理论，包括现有技术抗辩的概念、起源、制度价值以及在我国的发展历程。第二部分主要从“时间限定”、“地域限定”和“是否为公众所知”三个方面论述了可用以抗辩的现有技术范围。同时着重阐述了现有技术能否延及简单组合问题，提出了用于抗辩的现有技术既可以是单独的一分现有技术，也可以是多份现有技术组合，但仅限于简单组合的观点。第三部分详细阐述了在等同侵权和相同侵权条件下适用现有技术抗辩存在的问题争议，同时介绍了美国、日本和德国在相同侵权情况下适用现有技术抗辩的制度。对我国现有技术抗辩使用范围提出建议。第四部主要论述了现有技术抗辩中的认定问题，包括对比顺序、认定标准等。介绍了当前关于现有技术抗辩成立标准的三种主要观点：新颖性标准、创造性标准和相同和十分接近准，并从法理基础、现实依据和立法依据三个方面提出了我国对比标准的构建。第五部分主要介绍了现有技术抗辩和无效宣告程序的区别和各自特点，为被控侵权人选择应对策略提供参考。
[Abstract]:In the course of the trial of patent infringement proceedings, the court usually determines the scope of patent protection according to the patent claim and related patent documents provided by the plaintiff, and then analyzes the technical scheme of the accused. The defendant's strategy is to prove that the technology he uses is outside the scope of patent protection or by addressing the state intellectual property office. Making an application for examination of the declaration of invalidation, Claims that the plaintiff's patent right is invalid in order to achieve the purpose of not assuming liability for patent infringement. However, since the system of separation of patent administrative confirmation rights from judicial review of infringement is implemented in China, even if the defendant claims that he is using existing technology, It is also necessary to apply for invalidation of a patent to the Patent Review Board first, and fall into an extremely disadvantageous state of litigation. In 2008, the Patent Law was amended to formally establish the defense system of the existing technology in our country in the form of law, so that the defendant can directly defend the existing technology in the face of patent infringement charges. The court also does not need to suspend the lawsuit and wait for the patent review board to invalidate the examination result, it can make an independent judgment. The implementation of the existing technical defense system can effectively improve the efficiency of the litigation and alleviate the litigant's burden. At the same time, it is also conducive to curb the patentee malicious litigation. The existing technology defense system has been established in China for a short period of time, and there are still many imperfections. At present, the academic circles compare the scope of application of the existing technology defense with the order in which it is applied. From the origin of the existing technical system, this paper introduces the current judicial practice of more controversial issues, focusing on the scope of the existing technology can be used, the applicable principles, This paper studies the core problem of the standard of the establishment of the existing technology defense and hopes to provide some reference value for the development and perfection of the existing technology defense system in China. This article mainly through five chapters to introduce our country's existing technology defense system. The first part mainly introduces the basic theory of the existing technology defense system, including the concept, origin, system value and the development course of the existing technology defense system in our country. The second part mainly discusses the scope of the existing technology which can be used to defend from the three aspects of "time limit", "geographical limitation" and "whether it is known to the public". At the same time, it emphatically expounds whether the existing technology can be extended to simple combination. The point of view that the prior art used for defense can be either a separate prior art or a combination of several existing technologies is limited to a simple combination. The third part elaborates the dispute of applying the existing technology defense under the condition of equivalent infringement and the same tort condition, and introduces the United States at the same time. Japan and Germany apply the existing technology defense system under the same infringement situation. The 4th part mainly discusses the cognizance problem in the existing technology defense, including the contrast order, the cognizance standard and so on. It introduces three main viewpoints about the existing technology defense establishment standard: the novelty standard, and so on. The creative standard is the same and very close to the standard, and puts forward the construction of the contrastive standard of our country from three aspects: the legal basis, the realistic basis and the legislative basis. Part 5th mainly introduces the differences and characteristics of the existing technical defences and invalidation procedures, and provides a reference for the alleged infringers to choose coping strategies.
【学位授予单位】：烟台大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923.42;D925.1

【参考文献】