專利侵害均等論之過去、現在及未來－我國法應何去何從？

Retrospection, Inspection and Prospection of Doctrine of Equivalents-Where Taiwanese Patent Law Will be Going?

沈宗倫(Chung-Lun Shen)

《東吳法律學報》 20卷2期 (2008/10) Pp. 173-222

https://doi.org/10.6416/SLR.200810.0173

摘要

無可置疑的，專利侵害均等論在專利侵害案件之啟動及適用一直是專利法上頗具爭議的議題，此不以美國法為然，日本、英國及歐陸各國亦面臨同一問題，在我國專利法未來逐漸參考或繼受外國先進的法制而落實本土法體系之同時，均等論之爭議亦勢必將在我國的專利法上發動一番的論辯。均等論一方面從專利權利範圍之保護而論，係屬超越專利請求範圍文義解釋的權利擴張，當其啟動及適用時，令專利權人得享有未經專利審查機關核准的部分權利範圍；另一方面，就專利之公平及適切的角度而言，均等論的創設及承認亦為不得不然，若無均等論之存在，第三人動輒得以就他人之專利內容，修改就專利評價上不重要的元件而實施他人之專利，在無需投入相當之研發成本下，輕易便可躲避專利文義侵害的訴追，享有他人的大部分研究成果。因此，如何在專利的公平保護的法理下合宜地啟動及適用均等論，便為我國專利法下值得關注的焦點。另外，國際間，例如：美國、德國等國，已發展出專利侵害均等論之適用限制，特別是根據專利先前技術或基於「禁反言」法則所形成之限制，其間之合理性及其於我國專利法之可行性，仍值得進一步之探究。
鑑於我國專利法之司法實務尚未建立完整的均等論啟動及適用體系，本文本於專利公平及適切保護的法理基礎，並以比較法的觀點檢討以美國、英國、德國及日本為主關於均等論之相關議題，嘗試建立一套最適的法律模式，以供未來立法之參考及司法實務於個案上之斟酌運用。

關鍵字

專利侵害 ； 均等論 ； 主要技術 ； 次要技術 ； 三階段同一性測試法 ； 非重大差異測試法 ； 專利目的解釋原則 ； 先前技術排除原則 ； 均等公開拋棄原則 ； 審查協商禁反言原則 ； 審查期間拋棄原則

並列摘要

Without doubts, launching and application of the doctrine of equivalents has been among the most controversial issues under patent law. Not only U.S. patent law is faced with this controversy, but patent laws under Japan, U.K and other European continental states also confront it. As Taiwanese patent law has been being reformed and refined by learning from legal experience of the advanced states, the disputes concerning the doctrine of equivalents will be introduced to Taiwan patent law in the coming future. On one side, in terms of protection of patent, the doctrine of equivalents proceeds as an expansion of claims of patent, and its launching and application would make the patentee enjoy what is not within the patent scope that has been through examination of the patent office. On the other side, from the angle of fair and adequate protection of patent, the doctrine of equivalents is necessary to be created and affirmed. Were it for the doctrine of equivalents, anyone could legally apply patent to manufacture products by amending some insubstantial elements disclosed in the patent claims. This situation seems to indicate that a minor change that is done without involving in much research and development cost would protect the infringer from legal action of patent infringement, and the infringer could enjoy major parts of the invention. As a consequence, it becomes essential how to interpret adequately the doctrine of equivalents under fair and adequate protection of patent in Taiwanese patent law. Additionally, among states with advanced patent law, especially, U.S. and Germany, some limitations of the doctrine of equivalents have been developed, some of which focus on prior art or estoppel are drawing the attention. The justification and feasibility of those limitations under Taiwanese patent law are still worth further examining.
In view of lack of complete and perfect legal system concerning the doctrine of equivalents under Taiwanese judicial cases, this article, based of the fair and adequate protection of patent, tries best to establish an optimal legal model for launching and application of the doctrine of equivalents, through the comparative approach, as a reference for amendment of Taiwanese patent law and Taiwanese judicial cases in the future.

並列關鍵字

patent infringement ； the doctrine of equivalents ； main technique ； supporting technique ； the triple identity test ； insubstantial difference test ； purposive construction ； prior art defense ； the public dedicatio

參考文獻

倪萬鑾(2002)。均等論之比較研究(碩士論文)。國立國防大學國防管理學院法律研究所。

陳志杰、劉尚志(2004)。論均等論之比對方式—逐項測試法之優缺點探討。科技法學評論。1(2)，397-425。

陳佳麟(2005)。申請專利範圍之手段功能用語解釋及其侵和判斷。科技法律評論。2(1)，147-203。

曾勝珍()。

曾陳明汝(2004)。兩岸暨歐美專利法。台北:學林。