English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 111316/142225 (78%)
Visitors : 48392384      Online Users : 814
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/140.119/55950


    Title: 專利文義侵害的認定—以美國法為借鏡探討「申請專利範圍」的解釋
    Other Titles: Determination of Literal Infringement of Patent—Study of Interpretation of Patent Claims on a Comparative Base of U.S. Patent Law
    Authors: 沈宗倫
    Contributors: 國立政治大學法律學系
    行政院國家科學委員會
    Keywords: 專利文義侵害;申請專利範圍;專利說明書;專利審查記錄;先前技術;周邊界定主義;中心界定主義;內部證據;外部證據;文義解釋派;體系解釋派
    Literal Infringement;Claims;Specification;Prosecution History;Prior Art;Peripheral Definition System;Central Definition System;External Evidence;Internal Evidence;Literalism;Contextualism
    Date: 2011
    Issue Date: 2012-11-26 09:38:47 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 由於專利文義侵害的認定涉及「申請專利範圍」的解釋問題，向來為各國專利法所高度重視。關於「申請專利範圍」的解釋，現今有三個重要議題，值得特別探討。首先，「申請專利範圍」的解釋的證據來源爭議極待釐清。亦即究應以專利的「內部證據」作為主要解釋來源，抑或以「外部證據」為優先？關於此點，美國專利法判例法的發展值得我國借鏡。再者，「申請專利範圍」與「專利說明書」的其他記載間是否存在一定的解釋關係？尤其當「專利說明書」的其他記載具有「申請專利範圍」所無的要件時，究竟應以「專利說明書」的其他記載作為限定「申請專利範圍」解釋的證據，或者直接忽略「專利說明書」的其他記載，而逕以「申請專利範圍」為基準以解釋權利範圍？此議題乃與專利權利範圍界定有關，本研究將由專利法理論與政策著手，探求專利權利範圍的解釋方針。最後，本研究所關注的問題乃新興科技對「申請專利範圍」解釋的影響？進一步而言，「申請專利範圍」的解釋是否及於專利申請後的新興科技內容？若為肯定的答案，其解釋範圍又應為何？本研究試圖從發明者誘因的確保與累積創新的鼓勵二方面的利益衡量，探討此一議題。
    Patent literal infringement is determined by interpretation of claims. There are three issues around interpretation of claims. Firstly, it is necessary to clarify the evidentiary sources for interpretation of claims. In other words, while the court interprets patent claims for determination of literal infringement, the precondition for this interpretation is to inquiry whether the internal evidence or external one should primarily dominate interpretation of claims. This applicant believes that the development of U.S. patent case law on this issue has provided precious lesson for resolution of the same issue in Taiwanese patent law. Secondly, on interpretation of claims, it is also worth discussing the relationship between claims and specification. Especially, if the written description under specification is narrower than claim’s, it is difficult to find out an approach to reconcile their difference. It is not sure whether the specification should be used to be a limitation of the claim, or whether the specification should be ignored. We are prepared to proceed in this issue through the patent policy and jurisprudence to seek the guideline for claim interpretation. Finally, the issue of after-rising technologies is also our focus. This issue is reflected in whether claim interpretation should cover some after-rising technologies never happening at that time when the patent application was filed. We will be examining this issue form balance of interests between assurance of inventors’ motivation and encouragement of accumulated innovation.
    Relation: 基礎研究
    學術補助
    研究期間:10008~ 10107
    研究經費:398仟元
    行政院國家科學委員會
    計畫編號NSC100-2410-H004-192
    Data Type: report
    Appears in Collections:[法律學系] 國科會研究計畫

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    100-2410-H004-192.pdf1505KbAdobe PDF2634View/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