摘要
专利保护范围是由权利要求界定的。在申请专利的时候,申请人应当将自己要求保护的发明点记载于权利要求书中,而在发生侵权纠纷的时候,法院也会依据权利要求界定专利保护的范围,进而认定被控侵权的产品或者方法是否侵犯了原告的专利。在"岛野诉日聘"一案中,原告专利的技术特征主要有两个,自行车后支架的延伸部分,以及将换挡器安装于延伸部分之上。一审法院和二审法院均认为,被告虽然生产和销售了类似于换挡器的"后拨链器",但没有将"后拨链器"安装于自行车后支架上,因而没有侵犯原告的专利权。但最高人民法院则认为,被告生产和销售的"后拨链器",其唯一的用途就是安装在自行车后支架上,因而认定被告侵犯了原告的专利权。认定某一零部件的唯一或者主要用途是侵权性使用,进而认定被告侵权,是本判决的突出亮点。
The protection scope of a patent is defined by its claims. While applying a patent, the applicant should define the invention or the points of invention in the patent claims, the court in an infringement dispute should first interpret the claims and determine the scope of the patent, and then decide whether the defendant infringed the patent or not. In ＂Daoye v. Ripin＂, there are two main invention points in the patent claims, the extensive point of bicycles＇ rear bracket, and shift gears that are installed in the extensive point of the rear bracket. The first instance court and appeal court decided that because the defendant only manufactured and sold the shift gears but not installed them on the extensive point of the rear bracket of a bicycle, the defendant did not infringe plaintiff ＇s patent. The Supreme Court of China determined that, however, the only use of the shift gears manufactured and sold by the defendant is to be installed on the extensive point of the rear bracket, so the defendant infringed the plaintiff ＇s patent. The only use is to be used to infringe other ＇s patent, is the prominent point of the decision by the Supreme Court of China.
作者
李明德
LI Mingde(Institute of Law,CASS,Beijing 100720)
出处
《中国发明与专利》
2018年第10期103-105,共3页
China Invention & Patent
