專利侵害判斷均等論之再審視及建構

Abstract

在專利法制中，均等論與申請專利範圍，共同界定專利權範圍，是決定專利侵權的重要步驟。專利制度一方面要求發明人描述其發明，但要避免以僵化的字義限制專利權，以合理保護發明，進而鼓勵創新。但在另一方面，專利制度又要求明確定義專利權範圍，避免衝擊以技術為基礎的合法產品與服務投資，並鼓勵追求超越專利權的創新。在專利政策矛盾下，以均等論保護發明，具有高度不確定性，所以被認為是專利法中相當困難的原則之一。

我國智慧財產局訂定之專利侵害鑑定要點，被司法院作為判斷均等論之參考，但是其並非法律，對法院不具有拘束力。為瞭解我國法院實際適用均等論的標準，本研究以實證研究方式，分析我國最高法院及智慧財產法院判決，以了解法院實際認定均等論的實質內涵與運用方式。此外，由於專利侵害鑑定要點的內容，主要參考美國法，本研究亦以美國法為基礎，進行比較法研究，探究我國均等論的實際運用方式，是否與美國法規範有所差異，進而討論可能差異的正當性。

本研究發現，在我國均等論判決中，並未完全依循專利侵害鑑定要點，而且判決中均等論的實質內涵與運用方式，也無一致的標準。本文以為，司法對於均等論的判斷，在通案中應有一致的標準，在個案中應有更合理的標準。並且，均等判斷程序中，當事人進行主義可以再強化，而法院運用均等論侵權判斷則可更具彈性，以簡約司法資源，促進司法經濟，提昇司法效率與判決品質，追求更理想的公平性。此外，本文提出，以客觀保護發明合理內容，作為我國均等論之立論基礎，同時，也提出對我國均等論內涵與判斷方式的建議，以使均等論界定的專利保護範圍，更能符合專利法保護發明本質之精神。

The doctrine of equivalents is one of the most difficult and unpredictable doctrines in patent law to apply. By allowing patentees to gain exclusive right beyond the literal claims in their patents, this doctrine creates tension between the adequate protection of patent right and the public notice function in the patent system. The Taiwan Intellectual Property Office issued the Guidelines for Patent Infringement Verification (hereinafter “GPIV”) in 2004, which was regarded as the guiding principle for patent infringement verification in Taiwan. The GPIV introduced some principles in the doctrine of equivalents from the U.S. patent law. In applying the doctrine of equivalents based on the GPIV, if the difference between the accused subject and the patent claim is not substantial, then the two are equivalent. If there is any claimed technical feature or its equivalent that could not be found in the accused subject, there is no infringement by equivalence. To determine equivalency, the triple identity test or the insubstantial test should be applied. However, the courts treat the GPIV as a guideline for the designated organizations to provide patent infringement report, not as a law or a regulation with the binding force of law. Therefore, it will be desirable for the public to know how the courts apply the tests for the doctrine of equivalents in Taiwan. This thesis surveys the patent infringement decisions in the Taiwan Intellectual Property Court and the Taiwan Supreme Court, and analyzes the tests for the doctrine implanted in the courts decisions by empirical study. This thesis also studies the related US patent law and reviews the practice of the courts accordingly. Finally, this thesis provides some comments and suggestions on the test for the doctrine of equivalents in Taiwan.