论文部分内容阅读
专利权是基于发明创造产生的民事权利,而专利行政机关的审查和公示是界定权利范围和行使权利的必要条件。对于授权后的专利权效力争议是专属于行政机关还是可以由普通法院受理,美国式的双轨制和德国式的二元制都有其各自运行背景。比较而言,日本的折中模式值得中国参考,即将无效宣告的准司法职能归属于行政机关,又允许专利侵权案件中被告提出专利明显应当无效作为不侵权的抗辩理由。引进专利无效抗辩可以在一定程度上减少侵权与无效案件交叉时程序的拖沓,有利于尽早明确双方的权利义务,但这需要首先建立与其相应的运行机制。目前,中国具有专利案件管辖权的法院分散在全国各地,专业化水平参差不齐,不宜直接赋予其审理专利无效抗辩的职能。结合中国的知识产权法院建设规划,应当先按实际需要建立几个跨省级的知识产权法院,将专利等技术性案件的管辖权适当集中,再通过专门立法赋予这些法院审理专利无效抗辩的职能,为最终设立知识产权高级人民法院做好制度准备。
The patent right is based on the civil rights arising from the invention and creation. However, the examination and publicity of the patent administrative organ is a necessary condition for defining the scope of the right and exercising the right. Whether the controversial effect of the patent right after the authorization is exclusively vested in the administrative organ or can be accepted by the ordinary courts, the U.S.-style dual track system and the German-style binary system all have their respective operating backgrounds. In comparison, Japan’s compromise model deserves China’s reference. That is to say, quasi-judicial functions to declare to be nullified effectively belong to the executive authorities. It is also allowed that the defendant in a patent infringement case should obviously be invalidated as a non-infringement defense. The introduction of the patent invalidation defense can reduce the procrastination of the procedure when the infringement and invalidation cases cross to a certain extent, which is beneficial to clarify the rights and obligations of both parties as soon as possible. However, this requires establishing the corresponding operating mechanism first. At present, the courts that have jurisdiction over patent cases in China are scattered all over the country and the specialization levels are uneven. They should not be given direct functions of hearing invalid defenses. In combination with the construction planning of China’s intellectual property courts, several inter-provincial IP courts should be established according to actual needs. The jurisdiction of technical cases such as patents should be properly centralized, and these courts should be given special powers to handle the functions of invalid defenses. Prepare system for the final establishment of Higher People’s Court of Intellectual Property.