摘要
技术启示的认定对专利法上的创造性评价具有工具价值。以技术创新和技术效果构建技术启示认定的体系,可为实务中创造性的评价提供指引。以技术创新为视角判定技术启示存在与否,可以更好地阐释技术方案是否具有技术超越的特质。当现有技术对于系争专利存在反启示时,可作出不利于技术启示认定的判断,但仍需结合其他因素进行判定系争发明是否具有创造性,如此利于判定系争技术方案是否实现了对现有技术的技术超越。当现有技术存在对显而易见尝试的启示时,不能以系争方案产生的方式作为判断其是否具有创造性的标准,仍需回归到对现有技术所提供的研发动力的关注。专利的价值不限于技术方案的技术价值,更及于技术方案价值的具体实现。以技术效果为技术启示关系的认定角度,将关注的焦点转移至系争技术方案本身。其所要求的技术效果范围需限定在系争专利申请文件中的权利要求范围之内,将与现有技术无关的技术效果排除在外,方可使得高品质发明与有限排他权具备正当的对价关系。
The determination of technical motivation has an instrumental value to the assessment of inventiveness of the patent law. Building a system framework of the determination of technical motivation based on technological innovation and technical effects can provide a guideline for assessing the inventiveness in practice. Among them, judging the existence of technical motivation from the perspective of technological innovation can better explain whether the technical scheme has the characteristics of technological surpassing.When the prior art has an anti-motivation to the disputed patent, a judgment that are unfavorable to the determination of technical motivation may be made. However, it is still necessary to combine other factors to determine whether the disputed invention has the inventiveness, which is conductive to determine whether the disputed technical scheme has achieved technological surpassing to the prior art. When the prior art has a motivation to the obvious technical attempt, the way in which the disputed scheme is produced should not be used as a criterion for judging whether it has the inventiveness and it still needs to return to the concerns of the R&D power provided by the prior art. The value of patents is not limited to the technical value of technical scheme, but also the concrete realization of the value of technical scheme. Taking the technical effect as the determination point of the technical motivation relationship, the focus of attention will be shifted to the disputed technical scheme itself. In the process of determining the technical motivation, the claimed range of technical effect is not unlimited. It should be limited to the scope of the claims of the application document of the disputed patent while excluding the technical effects which are unrelated to the prior art. In this way, the consideration relationship between high-quality invention and limited exclusivity can be justified.
出处
《浙江社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2018年第3期85-92,共8页
Zhejiang Social Sciences
关键词
技术超越
技术创新
反启示
技术效果
technological surpassing
technological innovation
anti-motivation
technical effects
