知识产权惩罚性赔偿制度中故意认定的关键因素探析  

The Critical Factors of Subjective Intention in Punitive Damages for Infringement on Intellectual Property Rights

作　　者：张鹏[1,2] 

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学知识产权学院 [2]国家知识产权局办公室政策研究处

出　　处：《知识产权》2017年第5期40-46,共7页Intellectual Property

摘　　要：随着立法层面对知识产权惩罚性赔偿制度的引入,迫切需要对该制度构成要件的认定加以探讨。我国知识产权惩罚性赔偿制度以"侵权人故意""严重侵权后果"以及"权利人提出申请"为构成要件,最为核心的是如何通过被控侵权人的行为认定其存在故意的主观心态。通过被控侵权人的行为认定其存在故意的主观心态常见情形是,没有寻求和遵循称职律师的意见。在寻求和遵循适格律师意见过程中,故意侵权认定的标准出现了从宽松到严格再到相对宽松的演变历程,意图实现权利人与行为人之间的利益平衡,最终落脚到被控侵权人的动机或者意愿上。知识产权惩罚性赔偿制度构成要件最关键的抗辩理由是被控侵权人具有避免侵权的主观动机。从程序法角度而言,证明构成故意应当遵循优势证据的证明标准。With the introduction of punitive damages for infringement on intellectual property rights, it is imperative to carry out studies on the determination of the construction factors of the system. The constructive factors of China？s IP punitive damages system include willfulness, serious results and suitable application, among which, the determination of willful subjective state of mind is the most crucial part. The frequent situation that the accused infringer is thought to be willful is that he doesn5t seek and follow advice from competent lawyers. In the course of seeking and following qualified lawyer5 opinions, the standard for determining willful infringement experienced an passage of loose, strict, and loose, with the ultimate goal of realizing the interests balance between right owners and actors. The motivation or will of the accused infringer is the most important determining factor. The key defense to the constructive factors of the IP punitive damages is that the accused infringer has subjective motivation to avoid infringement. In the perspective of procedural law, the proof for establishing willfulness should obey the standard of preponderance of evidence.

关 键 词：知识产权侵权 惩罚性赔偿 侵权人故意 律师意见 优势证据 

分 类 号：D923.4[政治法律—民商法学]