心智步驟於專利法之評價：以美國與我國為中心

The Assessment on Mental Steps in Patent Law: Focused on the U.S. and Taiwan

郭宏杉(Hung-San Kuo)

《臺大法學論叢》 46卷4期 (2017/12) Pp. 1819-1878

https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.2017.46.04.04

摘要

美國專利制度建立之初，認為發明係對具體物之創造或改良，後來陸續開放方法發明之申請，惟初期的觀念，仍是有關對具體物之製造程序、步驟或方法。而當近年來方法發明種類繁多時，由於不易確定所請求內容究竟為何，故易引起爭議。尤其近年來科技變革日新月益，當一發明若需要人之心智步驟參與時，得否授予專利保護？此處之心智步驟，係指非由傳統的具體裝置所實施，而係藉由人類心智活動之參與。於美國的專利法，既未將心智步驟明文訂為法定不予專利類別，而於實務審判，卻經常以發明含有心智步驟而提出質疑。而我國的專利法規，雖曾一度將有關人之推理力與記憶力之發明類別，排除授予專利權之外，但不久之後也隨之刪除，惟我國的專利審查基準，仍將之列為不符發明定義之說明中。因此，本文希藉由對美國有關此類型標的案件之檢視，瞭解其相關之判決標準與理由；同時，也瞭解我國對於此類發明之處理，期待能釐清此類標的之合理地位，以及對之的判斷標準與處理。

關鍵字

方法專利 ； 心智過程 ； 心智步驟 ； 專利適格 ； 推理力 ； 記憶力 ； 心智活動 ； 美國專利法101條

並列摘要

At the beginning of the American patent system, the grant of patent is only to material subject matter for the innovation. Later, the initial concept of the patent system is renovated to grant process patents based on that they are the steps or methods to manufacture material objects at that time. The issue occurs when a claimed invention is not directed to material subject matter, and is not clear for what it claims. With the increasing of varieties of technology, some inventions involving mental processes or steps apply for patents. Can they be deemed to be eligible subject matter under patent laws? The called mental steps are spiritual activities of human involving in the invention, which are not material subject matter. There is no statute to exclude ＂mental steps＂ in U.S. patent laws; however, they are often raised inquiries about the patent eligibility in the patent practice. The Taiwan Patent Act had been listed that an invention with analytic and memorial capabilities of human is patent-illegible, but later amendment had eliminated this soon. The subject matter should have an eligible status based on the legal principles and rules ; however, they are still listed as ineligible subject matter that does not meet the definition of invention within the quidelines of patent examination. This article will trace back to those cases relating to mental steps in the United States, and analyze the judicial viewpoints and judgement over time, as well as those in Taiwan. This article hopes to clarify the legal status for mental steps, as well as the current way to deal with the specific subject matter in the claimed invention.

並列關鍵字

process patent ； mental processes ； mental steps ； patent eligibility ； reasoning ； memory ； mental activities ； section 101

參考文獻

司法院第一廳編(1987)。民事法律專題研究。臺北:司法院。

許忠信(2005)。WTO 與貿易有關智慧財產權協定之研究。臺北:元照。

趙晉枚、蔡坤財、周慧芳、謝銘洋、張凱娜、秦建譜(2012)。智慧財產權入門。臺北:元照。

蔡明誠(2007)。專利法。臺北:經濟部智慧財產局。

經濟部智慧財產局(2014)。專利法逐條釋義。臺北:經濟部智慧財產局。