侵權訴訟中專利有效性爭議之研究

我國近年全力發展知識經濟，而全世界各國的產業也以知識產能形成之專利、商標、著作權及營業秘密等智慧財產權競逐全球各地之驚人利潤，可見智慧財產權已成為促進國家產業升級及經濟發展之關鍵，更是未來世界各國爭取成為產業核心的重要關鍵。但是，因為智慧財產權是一種無體財產權，並無實體及明確之傳統法律定位，故保障智慧財產權仍需仰賴各國自行建置完整之智慧財產法制，特別是日漸受到產業重視的智慧財產權爭訟程序。而涉及智慧財產案件之訴訟內容或審理方式具有較高的科技專業性，並非一般傳統法院可以輕易掌握而能深入審理，也形成我國累積多年的訴訟難題；又因國際間智慧財產技術的法規更替週期短暫、涉外訴訟機會高，因此為滿足加速審理、裁判正確之要求，於2007年通過設置專責智慧財產法院的智慧財產案件審理法及智慧財產法院組織法，並且在民國2008年7月1日正式成立智慧財產法院。但智慧財產案件審理法當中的專利有效性審理權限實存有立法瑕疵，行政訴訟與民事訴訟審理過程中存在難以解決的矛盾，若是未能充分整合兩種制度的運作，此一矛盾問題將形成保障智慧財產權及衡平社會公益時之漏洞。故整理出智慧財產案件審理法的專利有效審理，並就針對所產生問題例如再審或是更正問題，期能幫助瞭解目前智慧財產訴訟制度的矛盾之處，並就智慧財產有效性爭議所涉司法審查相關議題，提供法制上研議或實務處理之相關參考。

關鍵字

智慧財產案件審理法；專利有效性；裁判歧異

並列摘要

In recent years, our country has made every effort to develop the knowledge economy, and industries around the world have also competed with intellectual property rights such as patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets formed by knowledge production capacity for amazing profits around the world. It can be seen that intellectual property rights have become the key to promoting the country's industrial upgrading and economic development, and it is also an important key for countries around the world to strive to become the core of the industry in the future. However, intellectual property rights are intangible property rights, classical law has no substantive and clear traditional legal positioning, so the protection of intellectual property rights still needs to rely on the sound and complete intellectual property legal system of each country, especially the intellectual property rights disputes that are increasingly being valued by the industry program. The litigation content or trial methods involving intellectual property cases have a high degree of scientific and technological professionalism, which is not easy for ordinary traditional courts to grasp and can conduct in-depth trials. It has also created a litigation problem that has accumulated for many years in my country; In addition, due to the short replacement cycle of international intellectual property technology regulations and high opportunities for foreign participation, my country passed the Intellectual Property Case Trial Law and the Intellectual Property Court Organization in 2007 to meet the requirements for accelerated trials and correct judgments. Law, and the Intellectual Property Court was formally established on July 1, 2008. This article observes that there are legislative flaws in the patent validity trial authority in the Intellectual Property Case Trial Law, and there are conflicts that are difficult to resolve in the process of administrative litigation and civil litigation. If the operation of the two systems is not fully integrated, this contradiction will be a problem. Form a loophole in the protection of intellectual property rights and the balance of social welfare. This article sorts out the effective patent trials of the Intellectual Property Case Trial Law, and addresses the problems that arise, such as retrials or corrections. It is expected to help understand the contradictions of the current intellectual property litigation system, and propose a proposal for improving my country's intellectual property litigation system Set of reasonable solutions.