等同原则的限制性规则——权利要求妨害原则

A New Restriction on Equivalent Doctrine——Claim Vitiation Doctrine

美国联邦法院自20世纪末开始在专利案件中适用的权利要求妨害原则,植根于等同侵权中的全面覆盖原则,初衷是对等同原则的适用进行进一步限制,强调技术特征对专利权保护范围的限定作用。通过对美国联邦法院多个案例的分析,梳理权利要求妨害原则在美国的起源、定义、功能,归纳了权利要求妨害原则在美国联邦法院的适用。该原则在定义上难以自洽,在适用上没有统一的标准和逻辑,结果缺乏可预期性,发挥的功能不是对等同原则的限制而是彻底否定。权利要求妨害原则的中国法移植会打破字面侵权原则和等同原则共同构建的平衡,影响专利体系的安定性,使得专利侵权判定与字面侵权等义,不符合中国国情,亦不能服务于中国专利制度促进技术进步的制度目标。

The patent vitiation doctrine has developed in the United States more than 20 years, which roots in all elements rule of equivalent infringement. The original intention of patent vitiation doctrine is to impose further restriction on the application of the equivalent doctrine,emphasizing the limitation role of claim elements. Through the analysis of several cases in the United States, the article introduces the origin,definition and function of the patent vitiation doctrine, and summarizes the application of patent vitiation doctrine. The doctrine is deficient of self-consistent and there is no uniform standard and logic in application. The application of patent vitiation doctrine lacks predictability. Its function is not to impose further restriction on the equivalent doctrine but to negate it completely. The transplantation of that doctrine will break the balance between the doctrine of literal infringement and equivalent infringement, affecting the stability of the patent system, making the patent infringement judgment just a literal infringement. Patent vitiation doctrine is neither in line with China’s national conditions, nor serving the Chinese patent system.