摘要
惩罚性赔偿条款引入知识产权立法中的呼声颇高,《商标法》的修正案首先得以确立,《专利法》的修改草案中亦有体现。但二者在法定赔偿与惩罚性赔偿的关系上存在着分歧,前者采用单一性模式,后者采用兼容性模式。从惩罚性赔偿的功能、适用条件以及法定赔偿替代惩罚功能的角度考虑,单一性模式更符合惩罚性赔偿条款的设立本意,更契合惩罚性赔偿基本理论。因此,《专利法》乃至《著作权法》的修改应当参考新《商标法》的规定采取单一性模式并提高法定赔偿数额之上限。
Introducing punitive damages to the intellectual property law is very popular and the trademark law firstly adopts it in the latest amendment and the patent law also adopts it in the latest draft. But there is a difference between the relationships of legal compensation and punitive damages that the trademark law adopts oneness mode and the patent law adopts compatibility mode. From the view of functions of punitive damages, the application conditions of punitive damages and alternative punishment of legal compensation, oneness mode is more suitable for original purpose of establishing punitive damages in the intellectual property law and basic theory of punitive damages. So the amendment to the patent law and even the copyright law should adopt oneness mode and raise the upper limit of legal compensation like the trademark law.
出处
《电子知识产权》
2016年第1期52-58,共7页
Electronics Intellectual Property
关键词
法定赔偿
惩罚性赔偿
专利法修改
单一性模式
兼容性模式
legal compensation
punitive damages
amendment to the patent law
oneness mode
compatibility mode
