我國設計專利侵權判斷方法論之檢討：以整體觀察法及德國立法例為比較初探

智慧財產權制度之設計專利或設計權，係保護應用於產業之視覺訴求創作。權利人享有排他權，得禁止他人未經同意之實施行為。所謂的實施，係指物品之製造、散布之要約、散布、進口、出口及使用行為，且該物品利用到受保護之設計。於侵權訴訟中，法院應決定被控侵權物是否利用到智慧財產權所保護之設計，亦即侵權成立與否是在判斷，被控侵權物是否會在有認知使用者形成其乃不同於受保護設計之整體印象。依據德國訴訟實務，法院決定設計之保護範圍時，應考量設計人從事創作之際的創作自由。侵權爭議之審理，亦應界定有認知使用者、整體印象之概念；整體印象之判斷，不應著重於設計之細微差異，而應認定該設計之整體印象是否由被控侵權物所承襲。前揭侵權判斷之基本原則，亦適用於臺灣。本文認為，智慧財產及商業法院迄今仍未透過個案建立設計專利權之侵權判斷方法論，即便近年來不乏受到矚目之案件，各界亦日趨重視產業設計之保護。本文分析設計侵權案件之判斷方法與標準，包括創作自由度、設計之保護範圍、有認知使用者及整體印象。比較法研究上以德國立法例為主，涵蓋相關文獻及聯邦最高法院（BGH）判決。本文同時檢討我國設計專利侵權之規定、智慧財產及商業法院判決。

關鍵字

設計；專利；設計專利；整體視覺印象；有認知使用者；普通消費者；專利訴訟

並列摘要

Design patent or design right is a form of intellectual property right concerned with the visual appearance of articles which have industrial use. The protected design confers an exclusive right to use it and to prevent any third party from using it without the holder's consent. The use covers making, offering, putting on the market, importing, exporting, or using a product to which the design is applied. In the proceeding of infringement litigation, the court has to determine whether the accused product infringes the protected design. The test for infringement is whether the alleged infringing product does or does not ＂produce on the informed user a different overall impression＂. According to the legal practices in Germany, in assessing the scope of protection, the degree of freedom of the designer in developing the design should be considered. To determine whether the protected design is infringed or not, the concepts of ＂informed user＂ and ＂overall impression＂ should be interpreted by the courts. The overall impression test means that the court would not focus on minor variants in the designs, but would look at whether the overall impression created by the alleged infringement is the same as the protected design. The above-mentioned rule should be followed in Taiwan. However, methodology of determining design patent infringement has not been established by the Intellectual Property Court till now, even though some disputes attract attention and design patent plays more important role in recent years. This article reviews the normative conceptions and doctrines of determination of design infringement, including freedom of the designer in developing the design, scope of protection, informed user and overall impression. To address these issues, this article provides comprehensive assessment of the articles and decisions adjudicated by the Supreme Court (BGH) in Germany. Also, this article analyzes the regulations of design patent and decisions adjudicated by Intellectual Property Court in Taiwan.

並列關鍵字

design ； patent ； design patent ； overall impression ； informed user ； ordinary observer ； patent litigation

參考文獻

李素華（2021），〈我國設計專利保護制度之檢討：以德國及歐盟立法例為比較初探〉，《臺大法學論叢》，50卷2 期，頁 475-551。https://doi.org/10.6199/NTULJ.202106_50(2).0003

李素華（2021），〈設計專利權保護與權利行使：從維修免責條款之立法提案與新近訴訟案談起〉，《專利師季刊》，44 期，頁 96-121。https://doi.org/10.3966/221845622021010044007

徐銘夆（2017），〈「機車」與「電動自行車」為非近似物品？：從智慧財產法院 105 年度民專訴字第 62 號判決解析設計專利之物品近似原則〉，《專利師季刊》，31期，頁63-92 。https://doi.org/10.3966/221845622017100031005

葉哲維（2019），〈設計專利之侵權判斷方法討論與案例解析〉，《專利師季刊》，37 期，頁 58-83。https://doi.org/10.3966/221845622019040037006

Church, O., Derclaye, E. & Stupfler, G. (2019). An Empirical Analysis of Design Case Law of the EU Member States. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 50(6), 685-719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-019-00813-0

國際替代計量

我國設計專利侵權判斷方法論之檢討：以整體觀察法及德國立法例為比較初探

全文下載

主題瀏覽