1. What are the principles for judging invention or utility model patent infringement
1. Principle of comprehensive coverage
Comprehensive coverage means that the alleged infringing article (product or method) reproduces all the necessary technical features of the technical solution recorded in the patent claims. , the alleged infringement (product or method) corresponds one-to-one with all the necessary technical features recorded in the independent claims of the patent and are identical. The principle of comprehensive coverage is the most basic principle in determining patent infringement. It mainly includes the following forms:
(1) Literal infringement
Also known as all technologies Feature coverage means that if the technical features of the allegedly infringing object (product or method) include all necessary technical features recorded in the patent claims, they fall within the scope of patent protection.
(2) Superior concept infringement
When the necessary technology is recorded in the independent claim of the patent When the features adopt the features of a higher-level concept, and the alleged infringing article (product or method) adopts the corresponding features of a lower-level concept, the alleged infringing article (product or method) falls within the scope of protection of the patent right.
(3) Characteristic quantity infringement
If the alleged infringing object (product or method) On the basis of utilizing all the necessary technical features in the patent claims, new technical features are added, which still fall within the scope of protection of the patent right. At this time, whether the technical effect of the alleged infringing object (product or method) is the same as the patented technology is not considered.
(4) Subsidiary patent infringement
The alleged infringement (product or method) As far as the prior patent technology is concerned, it is an improved technical solution and has obtained the patent right, which is a dependent patent, also known as a dependent patent. Without the permission of the prior patentee, the implementation of a subordinate patent also covers the prior patent rights.scope of protection.
2. Principle of equivalence
The concept of "principle of equivalence": refers to the principle of equivalence that is basically the same means to achieve basically the same function and achieve basically the same effect, and a person skilled in the field can associate the characteristics without creative work by reading the description, drawings and claims when the infringement occurs.
The "equivalence" of the principle of equivalence refers to the equivalence in function and effect of specific technical features, rather than the overall equivalence between the infringing product and the patented technical solution. . Therefore, the combination of the three technical features of the accused infringing product and the necessary technical feature "elastic hood" claimed in the patent claim use basically the same means, achieve basically the same function, and achieve basically the same effect, and should be deemed to be equivalent.
The following two points should be noted when applying the principle of equivalence:
(1) For pioneering For major invention patents, the scope of equivalent protection can be appropriately relaxed; for combination inventions or selective inventions, the scope of equivalent protection can be determined appropriately strictly.
(2) For intentional omission of individual necessary technical features in patent claims, making the technical solution become a variation that is inferior to the patented technical solution in terms of performance and effect. If the technical solution is inferior, and the inferior technical solution is obviously caused by the omission of necessary technical features, the principle of equivalents should be applied to determine that it constitutes patent infringement.
3. The principle of estoppel
The principle of estoppel is a restriction on the principle of equivalents , means that during the process of patent application and patent infringement trial, the patentee’s interpretation of the claims should be consistent. The patentee cannot, in order to obtain a patent, explain the rights in the patent application documents (including correspondence with the patent office). A narrow or relatively narrow interpretation is required, and in the subsequent patent infringement litigation process, in order to make the alleged infringement fall within the scope of patent protection, a broad and broader interpretation of the claim is required. For content that has been promised, recognized or abandoned during the patent application process, the patentee cannot go back on it in subsequent patent infringement lawsuits.
The following points should be noted when applying the principle of estoppel:
(1) When equivalent When there is a conflict between the application of the principle and the principle of estoppel, that is, when the patentee claims to apply the principle of equivalents to determine infringement, and the accused infringer claims to apply the principle of estoppel to determine that it does not constitute infringement, the principle of estoppel should be applied first.
(2) The content of estoppel must be the content that has been recorded in the patent document, including the patent applicant’s actions from the submission of the patent application to the grant of the patent. All documents and correspondence with the Patent Office.
(3) The content of the estoppel must have a substantial effect on the grant or maintenance of the patent right.
(4) The people's court should not take the initiative to apply the "estoppel principle" because if the party does not claim that the right holder has given up or otherwise promised something in the patent application, rights, the court does not know and should not take the initiative to investigate.
2. Defense against patent infringement
1. Patent invalid
In patent infringement litigation, the accused infringer applies for a patent to the Patent Reexamination Board Invalidity is the most common and simplest defense against infringement. Once a patent is deemed invalid, the basis for infringement no longer exists and infringement is no longer possible.
2. Publicly known technology
Publicly known technology refers to the technology that has entered the public domain. Anyone can use it free of charge without restriction. Commonly known technology defense refers to the situation in a patent infringement lawsuit where the alleged infringing item (product or method) is equivalent to the patented technical solution recorded in the patent claim. If the defendant responds and provides evidence to prove that the accused infringing item (product or method) method) is equivalent to an existing technology, then the defendant’s behavior does not constitute an infringement of the plaintiff’s patent rights.
Issues that should be paid attention to when applying the principle of free and publicly known technology:
(1) Use When using prior art for infringement defense, the prior art should be a separate technical solution that existed before the patent application date, or a simple combination of prior art that is considered obvious by those of ordinary skill in the field.
(2) The court can only apply the defense principle of free and public knowledge to whetherA determination of infringement cannot be made on whether the patent is valid.
(3) The defense of common knowledge only applies to equivalent patent infringement, not to identical patent infringement. When the patented technical solution, the alleged infringement and the cited publicly known technical solution are obviously the same, the defendant may not rely on existing technology to defend, but may request the Patent Reexamination Board to declare the patent right invalid.
3. Duplicate authorization
If the infringing article has patent rights and precedes the plaintiff’s patent rights, According to the first-to-file principle stipulated in the Patent Law, patents filed first should be protected in accordance with the law.
Note: If the plaintiff’s patent rights precede the infringing patent, the above comprehensive coverage principle will be applied to determine whether there is infringement.
I believe that after reading the above introduction, you have a certain understanding of the legal knowledge on how to solve the responsibilities that need to be paid attention to. If you still have some knowledge about this aspect, For legal questions, please consult the lawyers on the Legal Savior Network and they will provide you with professional answers.
No comments yet. Say something...