检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:邓恒 杨军辉 DENG Heng;YANG Junhui(School of Humanities and Law,North China University of Technology,Beijing 100144)
出 处:《专利代理》2023年第3期19-27,47,共10页Patent Agency
摘 要:制造行为的认定已经成为专利侵权案件中的焦点与难点。究其原因,有立法上治理理念与现实之间的冲突,也有司法实务中制造行为认定观点的不一。文章从“制造”的专利法意义入手,以技术方案的实际控制为核心,探析对制造行为认定的应然状态。专利侵权案件中制造行为认定规则的重构路径为,以主客观相一致的方式认定制造行为,统一案件中制造行为的认定规则,充分考虑各方主体的利益平衡。从立法及司法角度提出针对制造行为认定的建议,具有合理性。从我国实际出发,与现有制度做好衔接,具有可行性。The determination of manufacturing behavior has become the focus and difficulty in patent infringement cases.The reasons for this are the conflict between the legislative governance concept and reality,and the dif ferent views on the determination of manufacturing behavior in judicial practice.Starting from the meaning of “manufacturin” in patent law,this paper explores the state of determination of manufacturing behavior as a matter of necessity with the actual control of technical solutions as the core.The path of reconstructing the rules for the determination of manufacturing behavior in patent infringement cases is to determine the manufacturing behavior in a subjective and objective manner,to unify the rules for the determination of manufacturing behavior in cases,and to fully consider the balance of interests of various subjects.It is reasonable to put forward proposals for the determination of manufacturing behavior from the legislative and judicial perspectives.From the actual situation in China,it is feasible to connect with the existing system.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.217.52.224