【作者】 杨建新；

【导师】 刘斌斌；

【作者基本信息】 兰州大学 ， 法律， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 专利法在保护专利权人合法权益的同时,又要顾及社会公众利益,对其专利权进行适当的限制。这种限制在司法实践中主要体现为被控侵权人可以选择各种抗辩事由对抗专利权人的诉讼请求。被控侵权人使用的抗辩事由通常有下列几项:诉讼主体资格抗辩、法定免责事由抗辩、未落入涉讼专利保护范围抗辩、专利无效抗辩、现有技术抗辩、合同抗辩、诉讼时效抗辩等。近年来,现有技术抗辩在专利制度中的重要性受到了广泛关注,理论界对现有技术抗辩的讨论方兴未艾,实践中现有技术抗辩的适用也得到越来越多的认可,李光诉首钢重型机械公司“旗杆”专利侵权案就是现有技术抗辩成功运用的典型案例。但是现有技术抗辩的适用一直存在法律方面的障碍,我国2008年12月27日通过的《专利法修正案(三)》第一次用法律的形式对涉及现有技术方面的内容作出了规定,为现有技术抗辩原则在专利侵权纠纷中的应用提供了法律依据。但是,相关规定依旧比较原则,法官、律师、当事人在司法实践中运用现有技术抗辩原则还存在一定难度。本文写作的目的,就是要进一步探讨现有技术抗辩的价值、法理依据,并着重从实务的角度探讨现有技术抗辩的适用条件及判断抗辩是否成立的具体步骤,以期对专利侵权诉讼中现有技术抗辩的适用工作有所帮助。本文主要通过四个部分论述现有技术抗辩原则。引言部分主要介绍了“旗杆案”的案情、法院判决,并进行了初步分析。第一部分论述了现有技术抗辩的基本理论。首先阐明了现有技术抗辩的基本内涵,其次对现有技术抗辩的法理依据及价值进行了深入分析,最后重点对现有技术抗辩原则否适用、适用范围的相关学说及判例进行比较分析,最终明确现有技术抗辩的适用范围。第二部分探讨现有技术抗辩的适用条件及具体操作步骤。首先对一直存在较大争议的、可作为抗辩的现有技术的范围进行详细阐释,进而对判断抗辩是否成立的具体步骤作了深入探讨,以期有助于司法实践中对现有技术抗辩的判定。第三部分通过对判决结果和双方策略的选择进行分析,进一步加深对现有技术抗辩在司法实践中运用的理解。更多还原

【Abstract】 The patent law should protect patentee’s rights,on the other hand ,it should take the public’s interest into accout by resticting the patent right .The accused infringer could choose reasonable matters to opposed the patentee’s plea,which is the main embodiment of the restricting.The excuses which may be as a plea in the action of the infringement of patent right,such as qualification of cient,right of defense, different technical characteristics, invalidation of patent right, prior art, contract,prescription.In recent years,the importance of the prior art has caused wide public concerned, the discussion of prior art in theorists has just been unfolding,the appliation of prior art are received more and more from the practice. The case that li guang accused the capital steel&iron machinery corporation for the "flag pole"patent infringment, is the typical case of successfully applied of prior art,but there is always a legal obstacle to apply prior art.An amendment to the patent law first time to involved prior art the related article to make the stipulation on December 27, 2008. Contradicted the principle for the prior art to provide the legal basis suitably in the patent infringement dispute, but it still stipulated that compares the principle as before. It is difficult for judge, lawyer and the litigant to contradict the principle of the prior art in the judicial practice. The goal of this article is to further discuss the value and the legal principle theory of the prior art and emphatically discuss the suitable condition of the prior art and how to judge whether the defense is right or not from the practice angle ,hoping to have some help of the application of the prior art in the patent infringement lawsuit.This article mainly contradicts the principle of prior art through four parts.The introduction part mainly introduced the case and court decision of "flagpole"document and has carried on the preliminary analysis.The first part elaborated elementary theory of the prior art plea. First expounded the basic connotation of the prior art plea, next the legal principle theory of law basis and the value of the prior art plea have carried on the thorough analysis.Finally,focus on the comparative ananlysis of cases and theory on whether the prior art plea is suitable as well as the applicable scope.Finally clear about the applicable scope of the prior art plea.The second part discuss applicable conditions and the specific concrete operations steps of the prior art plea. First to carry on the detailed explanation of the scope of prior art which has been a big controversy . Then made thorough discussion to the concrete judgment step of prior art, which is helpful to the determination of the prior art plea in the judicial practice.The third part through carries on the analysis to the ruling and the bilateral strategy’s choice, further deepens the understanding of the prior art plea in the judicial practice.更多还原