本文選題：專(zhuān)利 + 侵權(quán)認(rèn)定��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)全球化程度不斷加深，各國(guó)經(jīng)貿(mào)交往日益密切，科學(xué)技術(shù)對(duì)生產(chǎn)力發(fā)展的作用日益凸顯，各國(guó)鼓勵(lì)發(fā)明創(chuàng)造并為保護(hù)專(zhuān)利權(quán)人智力性勞動(dòng)成果而專(zhuān)門(mén)制定一系列規(guī)則，賦予其有限壟斷使用的權(quán)利。以美國(guó)為代表的發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家不僅專(zhuān)利的數(shù)量領(lǐng)先于發(fā)展中國(guó)家，在法律保護(hù)上更設(shè)定了較成熟的專(zhuān)利保護(hù)規(guī)則體系。美國(guó)已成為中國(guó)最大的貿(mào)易伙伴，雙方的貿(mào)易摩擦屢見(jiàn)不鮮，而專(zhuān)利技術(shù)領(lǐng)域更是首當(dāng)其沖。然而中國(guó)企業(yè)一旦成為涉外知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)訴訟的被告，往往因?yàn)椴涣私馔鈬?guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的法律規(guī)定或懼怕訴訟成本太高而不敢應(yīng)訴，任由外國(guó)法院做出缺席判決而不出庭應(yīng)訴。古人云：“知己知彼，百戰(zhàn)不殆”，逃避不能解決任何問(wèn)題，更不利于企業(yè)的長(zhǎng)久發(fā)展，所以我們有必要認(rèn)真研習(xí)外國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)制度、總結(jié)應(yīng)訴技巧、制定應(yīng)訴方案，這才是解決問(wèn)題的正確態(tài)度。 本文以美國(guó)的專(zhuān)利保護(hù)規(guī)則為切入點(diǎn)，使用了實(shí)證分析的方法，邏輯論證法、比較分析法。由個(gè)案分析著手，得出法院對(duì)美國(guó)專(zhuān)利法律制度運(yùn)用的規(guī)則及技巧，對(duì)以后涉外專(zhuān)利案件的解決有著積極的作用。另外，本文用了多學(xué)科交叉分析方法，法理學(xué)的知識(shí)提供了邏輯上的依據(jù)，侵權(quán)法的理論為損害賠償?shù)於藞?jiān)實(shí)的基礎(chǔ)，合同法為專(zhuān)利授權(quán)契約提供了制度支撐。 本文首先介紹Enzo案的案情及法院判決的詳細(xì)分析，得出美國(guó)專(zhuān)利保護(hù)的實(shí)體及程序規(guī)則，例如舉證責(zé)任的問(wèn)題、專(zhuān)利侵權(quán)認(rèn)定的步驟及標(biāo)準(zhǔn)；接下來(lái)本文分別站在原告和被告的立場(chǎng)上，提出不同的應(yīng)訴策略準(zhǔn)備，例如專(zhuān)利權(quán)人是否標(biāo)注專(zhuān)利號(hào)是專(zhuān)利權(quán)人日后能否獲得損害賠償?shù)年P(guān)鍵，被告可以通過(guò)提出反訴爭(zhēng)取在訴訟中爭(zhēng)取更多的有利籌碼；本文接下來(lái)分析了專(zhuān)利侵權(quán)救濟(jì)方式，損害賠償與停止侵害、排除妨害的救濟(jì)方法適用條件是不同的；本文之后著重論述了侵權(quán)損害賠償?shù)挠?jì)算依據(jù)，我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律關(guān)于侵權(quán)所造成的損失的確定、計(jì)算方法、證明程度沒(méi)有可操作性的規(guī)定，應(yīng)當(dāng)將“誰(shuí)主張，誰(shuí)舉證”充實(shí)到雙方主張中，由法院作為中立的第三方，按照權(quán)利人能夠證明的內(nèi)容為依據(jù)進(jìn)行裁判，如權(quán)利人的損失、侵權(quán)人的得利、按既存許可費(fèi)用、專(zhuān)利研發(fā)成本為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行計(jì)算，既要充分填補(bǔ)權(quán)利人的損失也要避免侵權(quán)成本低廉而誘發(fā)的重復(fù)侵權(quán)的出現(xiàn)；最后提出對(duì)專(zhuān)利侵權(quán)救濟(jì)方式的完善建議，，不但在賠償數(shù)額上做到公正合理，起到懲戒作用，還要確定以權(quán)利人的研發(fā)成本為最低補(bǔ)償標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的原則；要對(duì)涉嫌侵權(quán)產(chǎn)品進(jìn)行價(jià)值分析，將核心技術(shù)與專(zhuān)利技術(shù)進(jìn)行對(duì)比，請(qǐng)同行業(yè)專(zhuān)家評(píng)估侵權(quán)技術(shù)在產(chǎn)品中所占的價(jià)值比重，并根據(jù)該比重確定損害賠償數(shù)額，既讓原告拿到屬于他技術(shù)的份額，也不會(huì)讓被告損失其勞動(dòng)成果產(chǎn)生的價(jià)值；另外，不能忽視的問(wèn)題是跨國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)訴訟的成本高昂，以中小企業(yè)的實(shí)力難以承擔(dān)如此大的開(kāi)銷(xiāo)，就需要行業(yè)組織來(lái)幫助企業(yè)渡過(guò)難關(guān)，這對(duì)企業(yè)的發(fā)展有積極的推動(dòng)作用。 專(zhuān)利權(quán)侵害的救濟(jì)和保護(hù)是激勵(lì)發(fā)明創(chuàng)造人繼續(xù)發(fā)明新技術(shù)和發(fā)明的研究的需要，但是一切權(quán)利不加約束都有濫用的危險(xiǎn)。隨著貿(mào)易往來(lái)的日益密切，專(zhuān)利訴訟的數(shù)量呈上升趨勢(shì)，就需要我們做好準(zhǔn)備，沉著應(yīng)對(duì)，能夠運(yùn)用他國(guó)的法律規(guī)則維護(hù)自身的合法權(quán)益，通過(guò)總結(jié)程序規(guī)則及實(shí)體規(guī)則的應(yīng)用戰(zhàn)略戰(zhàn)術(shù)，來(lái)最大限度的爭(zhēng)取在訴訟中的主動(dòng)，爭(zhēng)取在未來(lái)的和解程序中增加談判籌碼，避免出現(xiàn)因?yàn)椴涣私馑麌?guó)法律而不敢應(yīng)訴的情形發(fā)生。建立海外訴訟行業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)來(lái)解決中小企業(yè)跨國(guó)訴訟的困難，避免出現(xiàn)因?yàn)樵V訟成本高而不敢出庭應(yīng)訴的情形。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of economic globalization, the economic and trade exchanges between countries are increasingly close, and the role of science and technology in the development of productive forces is becoming increasingly prominent. Countries encourage inventions and create a series of rules to protect the intellectual labor results of the patenenters and give them the right to use limited monopolies. The developed countries represented by the United States are not only The number of patents is leading to the developing countries, and a more mature system of patent protection is set up in legal protection. The United States has become China's largest trading partner. The trade friction between the two sides is common and the patent technology is the first to bear the brunt. In order not to understand the legal provisions of foreign intellectual property rights or to fear that the cost of litigation is too high and dare not to respond to the lawsuit, the foreign court will make an absence of judgment but not appear in court. The ancients cloud: "knowing oneself and the enemy, the war is not dangerous", the escape cannot solve any problems, and is not conducive to the long-term development of the enterprise, so it is necessary for us to study foreign knowledge seriously. It is the correct attitude to solve the problem of property right system, summarizing the skills of responding to complaints and formulating a response plan.
Taking the rules of patent protection in the United States as the breakthrough point, this paper uses the methods of empirical analysis, logical demonstration and comparative analysis. From the case analysis, the rules and techniques of the application of the court to the patent legal system of the United States have been obtained. The law of law provides a logical basis for the knowledge of jurisprudence. The theory of tort law lays a solid foundation for compensation for damages, and the contract law provides institutional support for the patent contract.
This article first introduces the case of the Enzo case and the detailed analysis of the court's judgment, and draws the substantive and procedural rules of the patent protection of the United States, such as the issue of the burden of proof, the steps and standards for the identification of the patent infringement, and then, on the standpoint of the plaintiff and the defendant, this article puts forward the different preparations for the response, such as whether the patented person is subject to the standard. The patent number is the key to the patenholder in the future, and the defendant can strive for more favorable bargaining in the lawsuit by putting forward the counterclaim; this article analyzes the remedy of patent infringement, the damage compensation and the stop infringement, and the applicable conditions for the remedy of the nuisance are different. After this, the article focuses on the discussion. The calculation basis of the compensation for tort damages, the determination of the loss caused by the tort caused by the current law of China, the method of calculation and the Unoperable proof of the degree of proof, should be enriched to the two sides by "who advocates, who give evidence" to the third parties of the court, which are based on the content of the rights that the holder can prove. The judgment, such as the loss of the right holder, the benefit of the tortfeasor, the cost of the existing license and the cost of the patent R & D are calculated as the standard, which should not only fully fill the loss of the right holder but also avoid the occurrence of repeated infringement caused by the low cost of infringement; finally, it puts forward a perfect proposal for the remedy formula of the patent infringement, not only in the amount of compensation to the public. It is reasonable to play a disciplinary role, and also to determine the principle of the minimum compensation standard for the right person's R & D cost. To analyze the value of the suspected infringed products and compare the core technology with the patent technology, the industry experts should be asked to assess the proportion of the value of the tort technology in the product and determine the amount of damages according to the proportion. Not only let the plaintiff get the share of his technology, but also it will not let the defendant lose the value of its labor results. In addition, the problem that can't be ignored is the high cost of the transnational intellectual property litigation. It is difficult for the small and medium enterprises to bear such a big expense. It is necessary for the industry group to help the enterprise through the difficulties, which is the development of the enterprise. It has a positive role to promote.
The relief and protection of infringement of patent rights is the need to encourage inventions and inventions to continue to invent new technologies and inventions. However, all rights without restraint have the danger of abuse. With the increasing close of trade, the number of patent litigation is on the rise, which requires us to prepare, deal with and apply the law of other countries. Rules to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests, through the summary of the procedural rules and the application of the substantive rules and tactics, to maximize the initiative in the litigation, strive to increase the bargaining chips in the future reconciliation process, avoid the occurrence of not knowing the law of other countries and dare not to respond to the case. Establish an overseas litigation Industry Association to solve the problem. In order to solve the difficulties of small and medium-sized enterprises in transnational litigation, we should avoid appearing in court because of the high cost of litigation.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.42

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 楊紅軍;;淺析美國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)國(guó)際保護(hù)[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年26期

2 鄭成思;反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)——知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的附加保護(hù)[J];中國(guó)工商管理研究;2003年08期

3 張新寶;李倩;;懲罰性賠償?shù)牧⒎ㄟx擇[J];清華法學(xué);2009年04期

4 鄭成思;;侵權(quán)責(zé)任、損害賠償責(zé)任與知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)[J];中國(guó)專(zhuān)利與商標(biāo);2004年01期

5 鄭成思;;國(guó)際知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)和我國(guó)面臨的挑戰(zhàn)[J];中國(guó)專(zhuān)利與商標(biāo);2007年01期

6 李芳;;美國(guó)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)政策的調(diào)控——基于經(jīng)貿(mào)危機(jī)的影響談起[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 和育東;美國(guó)專(zhuān)利侵權(quán)救濟(jì)制度研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2008年

本文編號(hào)：1806471