【作者】 彭英武；

【导师】 袁晓东；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 经济法学， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 现有技术抗辩是在法院审判实践中发展起来的一项规则。当被控侵权的技术被证明是现有技术时,允许被控侵权人自由实施该技术。这在一定程度上能减少不必要的诉讼程序,提高纠纷解决的效率。专利法第三次修改过程中,增加现有技术抗辩条款,明确了现有技术抗辩的法律地位。但是现有技术抗辩的立法模式及适用规则,在实践中还存在需要进一步完善之处。本文的研究旨在,通过行政公定力的视角,对现有技术抗辩的立法理论与实践进行考察,并试图提出相关完善的建议。本文首先阐述了行政公定力的理论及其在专利侵权审判中的体现。接着对现有技术抗辩适用中存在的争议和问题进行了总结。这些问题包括,司法判例中的直接法律依据与法律原则、技术对比关系、适用范围,以及标记权保护。现有的立法模式下,现有技术抗辩与行政公定力、“权利要求为中心”的侵权判定规则存在矛盾。同时本文也考察了国外关于现有技术抗辩适用的理论与规则,指出国外理论基本没有突破权利要求语义保护范围对法院的约束。这说明国外现有技术抗辩理论并未突破行政公定力及以“权利要求为中心”的判定规则。在考虑该国具体法制环境下,国外理论有其合理性,但并非最优解决办法。我国现有立法模式与国外当前的立法水平还存在差距,更谈不上优化。最后,本文分析了目前我国现有技术立法的思想重在调节专利权利的专属权利与公众权益两私权之间的协调,并没有认识到瑕疵专利表现出的真正冲突在于公权与私权之前的协调。现有技术抗辩与行政公定力的矛盾根本在于立法思路上未对公权与私权进行协调。因此,本文构建了一种理论,即专利权权能弹性理论。通过行政行为的附款完全可以实现专利权权能弹性。在专利权权能弹性理论的基础上,本文提出了现有技术抗辩适用的逻辑及新模式。更多还原

【Abstract】 The rule, called prior art defense, come from court trial practice. When the accused technology of patent infringement is considered as a kind of prior art, the court will allow the accused aside implement the technology freely. To a certain extant, it will reduce unnecessary litigation procedure and improve the efficiency of solving disputes. After the third modification process, The Patent Law adds a clause of prior art defense and gives legal recognition to it, but there are still some problem in practice that require further improvement, especially on the model of the legislation and the application of the rule. This paper tries to investigate the legislative theory and judicial practice from the perspective of presumed validity of administrative action, offer relevant improvement policy and proposal.Firstly, this paper elaborates the theory of presumed validity of administrative action and its implementation on court trial practice on patent infringement. Then this paper analyses problems and controversies existing on the application of prior art defense. These problems and controversies include direct legal grounds and legal principles on judicial precedents, technology comparison relationship, scope of application, and patent marking right protection. In view of the existing legislation mode,conflicts exist between prior art defense and the theory of presumed validity of administrative action, tort judgment rules of“surrounding patent right”. At the same time, this paper studies the application of prior art defense abroad. Foreign theories indicate that Patent infringement trial courts can not narrow the literal protection scope of patent right. It shows that prior art defense is coordinated with the theory of presumed validity of administrative action and tort judgment rules of“surrounding patent right”. Overseas application rules on prior art defense are coordination with themselves legal system. Our country shouldn’t simply copy the practices coming from foreign countries. Finally, this paper point out that our country’s legislation thoughts only try to coordinate the conflicts between two sorts of private rights, patent exclusive right and public interest, but ignore the fundamental conflicts generating between public power and private rights. Also, there is no any indication that the legislators plan to coordinate the fundamental conflicts.Therefore, this paper point out an theory called patent right elasticity function. Then, the assumed theory proves feasible through invoking conditional administrative action. Based on the patent right elasticity function, this paper puts forward the logic and new model in the process of the application on prior art defense.更多还原