English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 112721/143689 (78%)
Visitors : 49583245      Online Users : 891
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/100998


    Title: 美國專利間接侵權實務對我國專利法修正導入間接侵權之啟示
    Other Titles: A Case Study of Indirect Infringemet Practices in the U.S. and Some Notices To the Amended Patent Act in Taiwan
    Authors: 劉國讚
    Keywords: 專利;間接侵權;幫助侵權;教唆侵權;專利訴訟
    Patent;Indirect Infringement;Cotributory Infringement;Induced Infringement;Patent Litigation
    Date: 2009-10
    Issue Date: 2016-08-31 16:36:58 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 專利間接侵權是專利侵權訴訟的一項重要議題，經濟部智慧財產局於專利法修正草案中，研擬將間接侵權制度導入，所設計之條文較為接近美國專利法。\\r 美國專利法之間接侵權是指35 U.S.C. § 217第（b）項及第（c）項，第（b）項是教唆侵權，第（c）項是幫助侵權。有關教唆侵權，本文分析美國最高法院判例，以及五件聯邦巡迴上訴法院之判決；有關幫助侵權，本文分析三件具代表性的判決。判決之研析，可瞭解實務上何種行為會被法院評價為落入專利間接侵權。本文期能提供我國未來對專利間接侵權能有更深之瞭解。 本文分析顯示，美國專利法有關間接侵權之規定雖較為抽象，但有實務判決之輔助，公眾較能瞭解間接侵權所欲規範之範圍。我國在欠缺實務判決之情況下，須將條文設計更為具體化，方能消除公眾對新制度之疑慮。
    Patent indirect infringement is an important topic in patent litigation. Intellectual Property Office, MOEA has introduced the indirect infringement to an article of the amended Patent Act. This new article is similar to the U.S. Patent Act,271. There are two kinds of indirect infringement in the Patent Act of the U.S., active inducement of infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 217 （b）and contributory infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 217 （c）. Two precedents of the Supreme Court and five decisions of the CAFC regard to contributory infringement were studied here, and three representative decisions regard to induced infringement . By these real cases, it is helpful to understand what kind of conducts are not permissible and will be judged as indirect infringement. In the case study, people could catch the scope what the 35 U.S.C. § 217 （b）（c）defined even the paragraphs are not easy to make clear. The cases also give the notice to us how to draft a clear article in our Patent Act.
    Relation: 政大智慧財產評論, 7(2), 1-38
    NCCU Intellectual Property Review
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[智慧財產評論] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML2512View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback