【摘要】 专利侵权惩罚性赔偿制度具有惩戒、预防和激励功能。该制度在司法实践中面临“故意”事实认定标准不一、“情节严重”认定存在分歧和赔偿基数确定难等问题。实践中出现问题的根源在于，法官认定“故意”事实时运用不同债法理论，认定“情节严重”时方式僵化以及赔偿基数的确定方法不科学。为充分发挥专利侵权惩罚性赔偿制度的功能，更好地保护专利权与激发社会创新活力，应进一步完善该制度的规则建构和司法适用。应以“意思主义”解释“故意”,实现侵权的精准惩戒并防止过度威慑；优化“情节严重”的认定方法，系统性审查法定情形和运用考虑因素；灵活量化赔偿基数，确立“主要贡献推定”原则以降低举证难度，适度拓宽许可费倍数的确定途径。更多还原

【Abstract】 The punitive damages system for patent infringement serves punitive, deterrent, and incentive functions. In judicial practice, however, this system faces dilemmas such as inconsistent standards for finding the fact of “intent, ” divergences in identifying “serious circumstances, ” and difficulties in determining the calculation base for damages. The root causes of these practical dilemmas lie in the fact that judges apply different theories of the law of obligations when determining “intent”, adopt the rigid approaches to identifying “serious circumstances, ” and the unscientific methods for calculating the base amount for damages. To fully exert the functions of the punitive damages system for patent infringement, better protect patent rights, and stimulate social innovation vitality, the rule construction and judicial application of this system should be further refined. Specifically, “intent” should be interpreted through the “doctrine of intention” to achieve precise punishment of infringement and prevent over-deterrence; the identification methods for “serious circumstances” should be optimized by systematically reviewing statutory circumstances and applying relevant factors; and the calculation base for damages should be flexibly quantified by establishing the principle of “presumption of primary contribution” to alleviate the burden of proof, while moderately broadening the approaches to determining the royalty multiplier.更多还原