Kējì Fǎxué Pínglùn (Dec 2006)
我國專利侵權訴訟之實證研究 Empirical Study of Patent Infringement Litigation in Taiwan
Abstract
自 1999 年8 月1 日至2005 年9 月30 日止，全國地方法院所做出與專利侵權訴訟相關之判決共計有169 件，其中原告勝訴之案件僅占23%，被告勝訴之案件則占了77%。關於申請專利範圍之解釋及故意過失之認定等兩大議題，我國法院仍未有一致的見解。我國法院對於專利侵權訴訟案件之審判仍相當依賴鑑定報告，然而，有26%之案件是由法官自己判斷，並未完全依賴鑑定報告，並且這些案件皆是由智慧財產權專庭所判決，可見智慧財產權專庭確實有較佳之審判品質。關於專利侵權相關之定暫時狀態處分案件，本研究透過問卷調查並藉由AHP 層級分析法分析所應衡量之因素的權重，其中「本案判決之勝訴可能性」、「專利權人是否將遭受無法彌補之損 害」，以及「對於公眾利益之影響程度」之重要程度相當，至於「權衡諸因素後對聲請暫時禁制令之一方有利」之權重則較低。然因為本案訴訟中原告勝訴之比例僅占23%，故本文認為「本案判決之勝訴可能性」應屬最關鍵之因素。 During the period between August 1, 1999 and September 30, 2005, there are a total of 169 cases of patent infringement litigation in all district courts of Taiwan. Among them, only 23% of judgments were in favor of plaintiff. Concerning the issues of claim construction and negligent test standard, the judgments are not in concert. In general, most of judgments mainly relied on the expert opinion(s) to determine whether defendants infringed or not. However, 26% of judgments were determined directly by the judge, not entirely relying on the expert opinion. The test standards of the preliminary injunction relief are investigated by using the AHP analysis. The factors concerning “reasonable likelihood of success”, “irreparable harm”, and “public interest” have roughly the same weight. Concerning that only 23% of judgments are in favor of plaintiff, the “reasonable likelihood of success” should be a key factor in Taiwan.
