專利侵權損害賠償－由美國法觀照台灣智慧財產法院與最高法院判決

Abstract

專利價值，重在獨占期間之排他權行使，及相對應之損害賠償，如何正確評估專利之價值與損害賠償數額，涉及專利權人可否受應得之補償、影響後續研發者公開發明之意願，對於整體專利制度運作之影響，謂之最關鍵的因素亦不為過。我國對損害賠償計算之規定，列於專利法第97條，總共可分為三大類計算模式，分別為專利權人所失利益、侵權人所得利益與合理權利金，惟計算方法間彼此差異甚多，並非僅處理單純之數字問題，對於操作之細節亦有待進一步規範。

實務運作中，對於損害賠償之計算方式、複數專利及產品中專利貢獻度之考量、侵權人之成本及必要費用如何認定、同業利潤率是否可採納、同一產銷鏈上權人之責任類型與分攤、是否能併用不同計算方式等等仍存有諸多爭議，本文先就比較法之層面，介紹美國、日本與德國損害賠償制度之運作以及背後之法理。

我國法之部分，本文就智慧財產法院成立以來之判決進行量化分析，從統計數據中得出判賠金額、修法後各計算方式之使用比例、及上訴審法院判賠金額之維持率等，並探討我國判賠金額不如專利權人預期之原因，接著再進行質性分析196篇判決後，將各計算方式在實務運作中最常引起之爭議以個案例示之方式進行探討，本文最後提出我國專利損害賠償方法之方法論，希冀能對專利損害賠償制度與運作提出可供參考之方式，而有助於專利法制之健全發展。

The most basic right that comes with a patent is the right to exclude and to receive damage awards for patentees in patent infringement cases. It is crucial to accurately estimate patent value and damage awards since it would affect inventor’s incentive to invent as well as the patent system. There are three approaches the patentee could choose from to calculate damages under Paragraph 1 of Article 97 of Taiwan's Patent Act. The three approaches are “lost profits” measurements, “infringer’s profits” and “reasonable royalties”, respectively. Nevertheless, the three approaches are quite different. In addition, patent damages are not just a question with one simple answer. Until now, courts and juries still have difficulty calculating appropriate damages for patent infringement.

This dissertation focuses on the most controversial issues including patent damages for complex, multi-patent products, determination of relevant costs to the infringer’s sale revenue, the change of whether to adopt the profit standard of the same trade concerned, liabilities among infringers on the same supply chain, usage of multi-approaches and so on. First, this dissertation refers to the regulations, practices, and trend of patent damage awards in the U.S., Japan, and Germany including statutes and cases.

This dissertation performs an empirical analysis of patent damages on the cases adjudged by Taiwan Intellectual Property (IP) Court. The empirical research quantifies with descriptive statistics for various approaches to damage compensation, effects of the percentage of damage awards after the amendment to Patent Act, affirmed appeals rate, etc. Based on the quantitative data, this dissertation examines the reasons why there is a huge gap between the expected value of the patentee and the damage awards from the court judgment. Furthermore, qualitative research is also conducted by analyzing the contents of 196 cases from the decisions of IP Court and Supreme Court. Consequently, this dissertation attempts to establish an optimal model for applying related provisions in future judicial practice. The proposed model could contribute a common guideline for the determination of an amount of damages and thus it is expected to promote the consistency and predictability of court decisions.