【精品PPT文档】专利侵权判定(德国方式).ppt

1,1,The determination of patent infringement German Approach 专利侵权判定-德国方式,Dr.Klaus Grabinski博士Presiding Judge,Duesseldorf District Court Duesseldorf 地方法院首席法官Shanghai,10 July 20082008年7月10日上海,2,2,I.Legal framework法律框架,European Patent Convention(EPC)of 5 October 1973 1973年10月5日的欧洲专利公约(EPC)EPC came into effect on 7 October 1977德国专利公约(EPC)于1977年10月7日生效Currently 34 Contracting states(all member states of the EU,CH,HR,TR,.)目前有34个合约国（欧盟所有成员国、瑞士、克罗地亚和土耳其）EPC encompasses substantive and procedural law.欧洲专利公约(EPC)包括实体法和诉讼法,3,3,European patent(EP)欧洲专利（EP）Pre-grant授予专利前:Centralized application procedure(prosecution)before the EPO EPO之前的集中申请程序（起诉）Post-grant授予专利后:The EP splits up into a bundle of national patents with effect in those contracting states that have been designated in the grant request.欧洲专利（EP）划分为成束的国家发明专利，对在授予请求指定的合约国有效。Opposition proceedings only before the EPO欧洲专利公约之前的异议程序.Infringement and nullity proceedings in each of the Contracting States.每个合约国的侵权和无效程序,4,4,Article 69(1)EPC Extent of protection第69条（1）欧洲专利公约-保护范围Purpose:to ensure a uniform interpretation of patent claims in all Contracting States目的：确保所有合约国专利申请范围解释一致The extent of the protection conferred by a European patent or a European patent application shall be determined by the terms of the claims.Nevertheless,the description and the drawings shall be used to interpret the claims“欧洲专利或欧洲授予的专利申请的保护范围由申请费条款决定。然而，描述和图纸要被用作解释申请。,5,5,Protocol on the Interpretation of Article 69 EPC:欧洲专利公约第69条解释草案Article 1第一条:Article 69 should not be interpreted as meaning that the extent of the protection conferred by a European patent is to be understood as that defined by the strict,literal meaning of the wording used in the claims第69条不应当解释为欧洲专利授予的保护范围为申请所使用措辞严格的字面意思.nor should it be taken to mean that the claims serve only as a guideline.或者也不能解释为申请只作为指南.it is to be interpreted as defining a position between these extremes which combines a fair protection for the patentee with a reasonable degree of certainty for third parties.“它可以被解释为确定这些极端之间的位置，它采用对专利权所有人的公平的保护与对第三方合理的确定程度的结合。,6,6,Article 2第二条:For the purpose of determining the extent of protection conferred by a European patent,due account shall be taken of any element which is equivalent to an element specified in the claims“为确定欧洲专利授予的保护范围，应当考虑包括与申请指定因素一致的要素。(Art.2 came into effect only on the 13 December 2007 by a revision of the EPC called EPC 2000（第二条在2007年12月13日修订过欧洲专利公约之后生效)称为EPC 2000,7,7,II.Claim InterpretationII.申请范围解释,Point of view角度The patent has to be interpreted from the point of view of 专利必须要通过以下角度进行解释an average person skilled in the art工艺熟练的一般人员 at the application/priority date of the patent.在专利申请/优先权日Criteria for determining the average person skilled in the art确定工艺熟练的一般人员的标准:Expertise in the technology of the patent精于专利技术Professional qualifications(skilled worker,master craftsman,academic education)职业资格（技术工人、熟练的工匠，学术教育）Practical experiences实践经历Engagement in the development of technical innovation致力于技术创新的开发,8,8,The role of the patent judge专利法官角色Claim interpretation is a question of law.申请范围的解释是一个法律问题The judge has to interpret the patent.法官必须解释专利Therefore,he must not leave claim interpretation to an expert.因此，他不能把专利范围解释留给专家来做However,the trial judge may take expert evidence if he needs help with regard to claim interpretation in establishing what is the person skilled in the arts general knowledge/abilitiy/experience at the priority date.但是，如果需要优先权日工艺熟练人员的综合知识/能力/经验的申请范围解释时，审判法官需要听从专家的建议。,9,9,Admissible interpretation material允许的解释材料Patent claim专利申请范围 Description and drawings描述和图纸File history 文件历史No:DE,FR,UK;Yes:NL编号：德国、法国、英国；是：荷兰Prior Art现有工艺only when and insofar as mentioned in the description只有在描述中提及时,10,10,Interpretation rules解释规则No strict philological interpretation of the patent claim专利申请没有严格的语言解释.The patent claim has to be interpreted purposively with regard to the overall technical context.专利申请要按照整体技术背景进行有目的的解释The patent claim has to be interpreted always in the light of the description and the drawings.专利申请通常要按照描述和图纸进行解释As part of the description and the drawings there have to be taken into account:要作为描述和图纸的一部分进行考虑：Prior art mentioned in the description描述中提及的现有工艺General explanations of the invention(problem to be solved,advantages of the invention,etc.)发明的综合说明（要解决的问题、发明的优势所在等）Examples of the invention explained in the description and shown in the drawings描述中解释的或图纸中显示出的发明案例Examples do not restrict a broad claim.不限制广泛申请的例子,11,11,The patent specification can form a dictionary of its own专利规格可以形成自己的词典(Federal Supreme Court of 2 March 1999,GRUR 1999,909(German);30 IIC 932(1999)(English translation)Tension Screw).（联邦最高法院1999年3月2日，GRUR 1999,909（德国）；30 IIC 932(1999)（英语翻译）-膨胀螺栓）,12,Example:The drum type washing machine 举例：滚筒式洗衣机The patent concerns a driving unit for a drum type washing machine 此专利涉及滚筒式洗衣机的驱动单元.having a plastic tub mounted inside a cabinet and 在橱柜里面装有一个塑料桶a drum rotatably mounted in the tub by means of a shaft fixed to the drum for transmission of driving power to the drum,一个可以旋转的筒通过固定杆安装在桶上，从而把驱动力传输到筒上。the driving unit comprising驱动单元包括.What is a drum type washing machine什么是滚筒式洗衣机呢?,13,Is this a drum type washing machine这是不是一台滚筒式洗衣机呢?,14,Is this a drum type washing machine这是不是一台滚筒式洗衣机呢?,15,What does the description say描述是如何说明的?In general,a drum type washing,making by using friction between a drum rotated by a motor and laundry in a state detergent,washing water,and the laundry are introduced into the drum,provides effects of beating and rubbing washing,but gives almost no damage to the laundry,and shows no entangling of the laundry.“总体来说，滚筒式洗衣是使用旋转的马达在筒与洗衣粉和水之间形成摩擦力，从而把衣物带入筒内，达到敲打和清洗的效果。同时，它不会对衣服造成损坏和发生卷缠。,16,The skilled person is taught by the description that a drum type washing machine is not a washing machine simply having a drum but is a term for a washing machine with a substantially horizontal axis.针对专业人员的描述可以这样说，滚筒式洗衣机不但是一台带有筒的洗衣机，而是有牢固水平轴的洗衣机的一个术语。Even though the agitator washing machine like in the 2nd example has a spin tub and,therefore,a drum,it achieves the washing effect by the agitator and not by the rotation of the drum(causing friction between the drum and the laundry)as required by the description of the patent.虽然举例2中的搅拌式洗衣机有旋转桶，但是，按照专利的描述，筒是通过搅拌器达到洗衣效果，而不是通过筒的旋转（在筒与衣服之间产生摩擦）The patent forms its own dictionary!专利构成自己的词典！,17,17,III.Literal infringement字面侵权,Determination of the invention as disclosed in the claims(see II.)按照申请的内容确定发明（见II.)Break down of the patent claims into a feature analysis把专利申请范围分解为特征分析Comparison of the challenged product oder process with the feature analysis.有挑战性的产品订购流程与特征分析进行比较All elements of the claim have to be realized in the challanged product.The burden of proof lies with the claimant.If one element is not realized by the challenged product the patent is not literally infringed.所有的申请范围的要素都要在有挑战性的产品中实现。申请人负责提供证据。如果挑战性的产品的一个要素没有实现的话，就不会出现字面侵权。,18,18,IV.Doctrine of Equivalence侵权等同原则,The doctrine of equivalence 侵权等同原则is accepted in most European states(CH,BE,DE,FR,IT,NL,etc.,exception:UK)and在大部分欧洲国家都可以接受（瑞士、比利时、法国、意大利、荷兰等，但英国除外），以及provided for in Art.2 of the Protocol of Interpretation of Art.69 EPC.欧洲专利公约第69条解释的草案第二条规定,19,19,Requirements要求 Modified means have essentially the same technical effect with regard to the problem underlying the invention.改进的方式与发明隐藏的问题在本质上有相同的技术效果。The person skilled in the art was able to find the modified means.在此工艺方面熟练的人员可以发现改进方式The person skilled in the art considers the modified means as a solution of equal quality to the terms of the patent claim.在此工艺方面熟练的人员认为改进方式与专利申请范围的术语质量相同的解决方式(German case law,cf.Federal Supreme Court of 12 March 2002,2002 GRUR 511(German);34 IIC 302(2003)(English translation)Plastic Pipe)（联邦最高法院 2002年3月12日颁布的的德国判例法2002 GRUR 511(德国);34 IIC 302(2003)(英语翻译)-塑料管）,20,20,Example:案例：The Cutting Blade Cases I and II 锯片案例I 和 II(Federal Supreme Court,12 March 2002,2002 GRUR 515-Cutting Blade I and II(German);34 IIC 873(2002)Cutting Blade I(English translation)（联邦最高法院2002年3月12日GRUR 515 锯片I 和 II（德国）34 IIC 873(2002)锯片）The patent relates to a cutting blade for rotating cutter systems for papers.此专利与纸张旋转切割系统上的锯片相关Such blades interact with a counter-blade to cut a block out of individual overlapping products.这种刀片与对刃相互作用，把单个重叠产品切成块The cutting blade consists of a round base piece with a cutting edge at right angles to the axis of rotation with a conical bearing surface fitted with a number of blades.此锯片由圆形基件和旋转轴适当角度的刀锋以及圆锥轴承表面的许多刀片构成。,21,21,Patent claim(Feature analysis)专利申请范围（特征分析）The invention concerns a cutting blade发明与锯片有关(1)The blades(8)刀片are arranged on the truncated conical rear surface(3)of the base piece(4)and form an angle of 10 to 22,preferably 16,with the cutting level(6),被安放在基件（4）截形的锥形后表面（3）并与切割平面形成10到22的角,最佳角度是16。are located in a variety of cutting positions aligned along the cutting level(6)in longitudinal openings(18)on the base piece(4),in which they can be adjusted and fixed,在基件（4）纵向开口（18）的切割平面（6）排列的很多切割位置，可以调整和固定。with their longitudinal axis forming an acute angle to the radius of the base piece(4),the angle being between 9 and 12,与基件（4）的半径和它们的纵轴形成锐角，在9和12之间。,22,when seen from above are rectangular,and从上面看成直角，且form the cutting surface(13)in a tooth form切割面（13）成齿状.,22,23,23,Drawings:图纸：,24,24,Description 描述 Feature特征 2 c):In contrast to the prior art 与现有的工艺形成对比the patented blades form with their longitudinal axis to the radius of the base piece a small angle between 9 and 12专利刀片的纵轴与基件的半径形成一个小角度，在9和 12之间due to which the cutting edge dips flatly into the workpiece,因此，刀锋水平的嵌入工件with the effect of an advantageous cutting track良好的切割轨迹的效果.,25,25,Accused cutting blade 使用锯片Ibears blades that form with their longitudinal axis to the radius of the base piece an angle of 8 40.刀片的纵轴与基件的半径形成8 40.的角According to an industrial standard(DIN ISO 2768)known at the priority date of the patent there is a tolerance range of+/-20.按照申请专利的优先日获得的行业标准(DIN ISO 2768)，公差范围为+/-20。,26,26,Literal infringement(No)书面侵权（序号）No indication in the claim or the description that the angle requested range 9 to 12 can be further extended by a tolerance range to 8 40 to 12 20.申请或描述中没有表明所需角度的公差可以从9 到12扩大到 8 40 到12 20。,27,Equivalent infringement(Yes)实质侵权（是）Uncontested that an angle of 8 40 has the same effect(flat dipping of the cuting edge into the workpience)compared to an angle in the range of 9 to 12.没有异议，8 40 与9 到 12的角相比有相同的效果（刀锋水平的嵌入工件）It was not inventive for a person skilled in the art to find out that the marginal difference of 20 was of no importance with regard to this effect.工艺熟练的人员发现20 的边际差异对此影响不重要并不是发明。The person skilled in the art could identify the slightly smaller angle as a solution of equal quality to the problem underlying the patent.工艺熟练的人员可以识别出稍微小的角度是解决专利潜在问题的相同质量的方式。,27,28,Description-Feature 2 a)描述-特征2 a）The invention chooses for an angle range of 10 to 22,preferably 16,between the blades and the cutting level.发现刀片和切割平面之间的角度是10到 22最适合是16才是发明。Such an angle is sharp enough in order to allow the use of sufficiently thin blades for forming a sharp cutting edge and这个角度足够锋利，能够允许足够薄的刀片的使用，形成锋利的锯片such an angle is not too sharp in order to allow the use of blades that are not too thin for maintaining a stable quality of the blades at the cutting edge.这个角度不太锋利是为了使用不太薄的刀片以维持刀锋处稳定质量。,28,29,Accused cutting blade 所用 锯片IIprovides of blades which form an angle of 25 with the cutting level.刀片与切割平面之间形成25角。,29,30,Literal infringement(No)书面侵权（序号）No indication in the claim or the description that the angle range of 10 to 22 can be further extended by a tolerance range to 7 to 25.申请或描述中没有表明所需角度的公差可以从10到22扩大到 7到25。,30,31,Equivalent infringement(No)实质侵权（是）Uncontested between the parties that an angle of 25 between the blades and the cutting level has the same technical effect a range of 10 to 22.没有异议，刀片与切割平面之间形成25与 10 to 22的角相比有相同的技术效果。However,the person skilled in the art learns from the description that an angle of 16 is the prefered value and deviation are only tolerated in the range of 10 to 22 in order to achieve blades with a cutting edge that is sufficiently sharp and sufficiently stable.He has no reason to deviate from the range mentioned in the claim.但是，对工艺熟练的人员从描述中了解到16是最佳值，为了保持刀锋足够锋利和稳定，差异的允许值在10 和22之间。他没有理由偏离以上申请中的数值。,31,32,32,Thank you very much for your attention!非常感谢！,