摘要
我国的立法和司法实践,对功能性限定权利要求存在两种不同的解释方法,给专利实务和司法实践带来了诸多难题。对功能性限定权利要求应该采用相同标准的解释方法,即采用具体加等同的解释方法,增加和完善相关规定,为解释方法的统一提供法律依据。
There exist two interpreting approaches concerning means-plus-function claims in our legislative and judicial practices. The two different approaches have caused numbers of difficult issues in our patent affairs and judicial practice. The author holds that the interpreting approach should be consistent, that is, we should adopt the specific-plus-equivalent interpreting approach in all cases. Legal basis should be provided for the consistency with addition and improvement of relevant stipulations.
出处
《北京政法职业学院学报》
2010年第3期60-63,共4页
Journal of Beijing College of Politics and Law
关键词
功能性限定权利要求
所有方式的解释方法
具体加等同的解释
方法
means-plus-function claims
all-form interpreting approach
specific-plus- equivalent interpreting approach
