论专利间接侵权规则的移植--以权利限制为视角

Introducing Patent Indirect Infringement Rule:From the Perspective of Limiting Patent Right

我国对于是否应当移植专利间接侵权制度一直存在争议,目前主流意见是认为这一制度并不必要。从历史起源来看,专利间接侵权完全是利益平衡的产物,其一方面明确将专利权的保护范围扩张到专用品上;另一方面将那些非专用品型的专利侵权责任限制于积极引诱的情形。传统大陆法系国家由于其历史传统,无法针对专利间接侵权行为提供充分的救济,因而,其基于专利权保护的角度另行建立了专利间接侵权制度。而我国存在自身的特殊性,当前的共同侵权理论可以规制相应的专利间接侵权行为,无需照搬他国之经验。实际上,问题在于这一共同侵权理论造成了非专用品型侵权情形下的侵权责任的泛化以及司法实践“分裂”的做法。因此,我们应当基于权利限制的视角移植具体的间接侵权规则,并在《专利法》中明确规定相应的条款。

While scholars have different views about whether China should introduce the system of patent indirect in⁃fringement,it has been recognized as the current mainstream opinion by the scholars that this system is not necessary.In history,the concept of patent indirect infringement was a consequence of balancing the competing interests,which on the one hand expanded the protection scope of patent to cover special article,on the other hand,the patent infringe⁃ment liability of non-special article is limited to the situation of positive inducement.In civil law families,due to lack of sufficient remedies for indirect infringement under the traditional tort theories,many countries established indepen⁃dent patent indirect infringement systems to strengthen the protection of the patent.As for China,the distinctive theory of joint tort can ensure sufficient remedies for indirect infringement and thus legislature does not need to follow the ap⁃proaches of civil law families.The problem,however,is that this joint tort theory has caused the generalization of indi⁃rect infringement liability of the providers of non-special article and the divisive opinions in judicial practice.There⁃fore,it is advisable to transplant the specific rule of patent indirect infringement in Patent Act to establish a limitation on patent rights.