论民法典视阈中标准必要专利停止侵害请求权

The Limitation of the Right of Claim to Cease Infringement of the Standard Essential Patent from the Perspective of the Civil Code

通说认为,知识产权停止侵害请求权的绝对性导因于《民法通则》第118条,受该条文的影响,实践中知识产权侵权停止侵害救济采用“类物权”的认定范式。新颁布的《民法典》未保留该条款,并且侵权行为是债权请求的成因,民法典中民事责任的规定采用开放式的立法模式。为防止权利的异化倾向,知识产权侵权不停止侵害,而代之以债之给付实现对民事权利的充分救济,符合民法典的社会本位。在公平、合理、无歧视(FRAND)承诺约束下的标准必要专利侵权停止侵害请求的正当性,受制于专利劫持和反向劫持,对侵权停止侵害请求的限制之后,持续性许可费可以正当化对专利权救济方式的限制,实现对专利权人的充分救济,契合《民法典》对知识产权侵权救济体系的设计。

According to the general theory,the absoluteness of the right of claim for ceasing the infringement of intellectual property originates from Article 118 of the General Principles of the Civil Law.Affected by this provision,the relief for cessation of infringement of intellectual property rights in practice adopts the identification paradigm of"quasi-real right".The newly issued Civil Code does not retain this provision,and the infringement act is the cause of the obligatory claim,and the provisions of civil liability in the Civil Code adopts the open legislative model.To prevent the alienation of rights,the infringement of intellectual property does not stop,instead,the full relief of civil rights is realized by the payment of debt,which conforms to the social standard of the Civil Code.The legitimacy of the right of claim to cease infringement of the standard essential patent under the restriction of the FRAND request subjects to patent hold-up and reverse hold-up.After the restriction on the request for cessation of infringement,continuous license fee can justify restrictions on patent right relief,realize the purpose of full relief to the patentee,which is in accordance with the design of intellectual property relief system of the Civil Code.