对最高人民法院20号指导案例的思考

Rethink of No.20 Guiding Case of Supreme People's Court

最高人民法院20号指导案例打开了研究若干专利细节问题的大门:(1)当购销行为跨临时保护期时,是适用《专利法》第13条,还是适用第60条,取决于"销售"的完成时间。(2)后续实施行为是否为《专利法》允许,应考虑临时保护制度的目标宗旨。在临时保护期内许诺提供专利产品的售后服务,在专利授权后,能否继续提供售后服务,取决于售后服务是否构成再造。(3)实用新型专利权人放弃其专利权后,能否就弃权前的侵权行为主张权利,取决于主体的诉权是否仍然受保护。(4)如何界定专利善意侵权中的"善意"?在被告提交了合法来源证明并说明产品提供者的情况下,应推定为行为人不知道,除非另有证据证明。

There are several problems worthy of rethinking in No.20 guiding case of Supreme People＇s Court. （1） When purchase comes through over provisional protection period, it is a problem to decide whether it is an action under §13 of Patent Law, or under ~60.It is up to the finish time of sale. （2） The aim and purpose of institution of provisional protection should be considered to decide whether sequential exploit is permitted by Patent Law. （3） If the actio of utility model holder is still protected by law, he can assert his right on tortious acts against his patent which happened during provisional protection period. （4） What is the criterion for defining good faith in innocent infringement？ If the defendant can prove that he obtains the product from a legitimate source and explain the provider of aforementioned product, he should be identified as a man with good faith, only if other evidence shows that he is not.