中國專利法上現有技術抗辯之研究--兼論專利之相關修法

Abstract

隨著政府對國內企業至中國投資限制之逐漸鬆綁，越來越的台灣企業赴中國投資，勢必將在中國面臨專利之相關問題，如：專利之申請、專利權之維護、以及遭他人指控侵害其專利權等，均為赴中國投資之台灣企業將面臨之問題，惟目前國內對中國專利法之研究卻付之闕如，故對中國專利法即有深入了解之必要。 現有技術抗辯是中國專利侵權訴訟中，被控侵權人最常提出之抗辯之一。在中國專利法第三次修正前，現有技術之抗辯並無專利法之法律依據，但實務上仍肯認被控侵權人得主張現有技術之抗辯。而在2008年12月27日經歷第三次修正之中國專利法，已明文肯認被控侵權人於專利侵權訴訟中得主張現有技術之抗辯，此均顯示出現有技術抗辯於中國專利訴訟中之重要性。再者，本文撰寫過程中適逢中國專利法之第三次修法，故本文將針對專利法第三次修正中與現有技術相關之規定作一說明。 為深入了解目前中國專利侵權訴訟中，被控侵權人對現有技術抗辯之運用及法院之判斷過程，故本文將透過實證之方式，對中國專利侵權訴訟案件作分析，希望給予欲主張現有技術抗辯之被控侵權人一些準則，提升其抗辯成立之機率。 而對於中國專利法之第三次修正，本文提出以下建議：第一、應明確專利復審委員會之地位；第二、外觀設計之專利要件亦應包括創造性；第三、修正後之專利法第22條第5項「為公眾所知悉」之認定，應參酌外國立法例，解釋為公眾得知悉即可。

As Taiwan’s government release the restriction on investing in China gradually, more and more Taiwan’s industries go investing in China. Those who invest in China cannot avoid some problems on patent, including patent application, patent protection, and being accused of patent infringement. Nevertheless, research on China Patent Law in Taiwan is few and far between. In this way, it’s necessary to study China Patent Law thoroughly. Many accused in China would like to demur on the prior art in patent infringement cases. Before the third revision on China Patent Law, 27 December, 2008, there is no rule on prior art plea in China Patent Law; however, the prior art plea is still recognized practically. After the third revision on China Patent Law, the prior art plea has been recognized as a defense raised by the accused in patent infringement cases. They all show the importance of the prior art plea in patent litigation of China. Furthermore, it happens to meet the third revision on China Patent Law when writing this article, so this article also discusses the parts related to the prior art plea in the third revision. In order to figure out how the prior art plea used by the accused and judged by the court in China now, this article analyzes some patent infringement cases by empirical study. This article hopes to give those who wants to raise the prior art plea some advise to ensure his/her prior art plea would be accepted by the court. This article has some suggestions to the third revision of China Patent Law. First of all, identify the status of the Patent Reexamination Board. Secondly, the patentability of appearance design patent should include non-obviousness. Thirdly, “known to the public” in China Patent Law §22(5) shall interpret as “available to the public,” like Europe and US.