CAJ | 학술논문

方法专利是由多个有时间过程要素的步骤组成,易为多个主体拆分实施,Akamai案即为典型.该案中,地方法院依实质性侵权的“控制或指挥”标准判定被告不构成侵权;联邦巡回上诉法院改变现有规则做出了近乎相反的判决;而联邦最高法院却撤销原判,发回重审,有回归现有规则的趋势.我国多主体专利侵权认定的司法实践中对直接侵权与共同侵权的界限不明,对“全面覆盖”原则适用不严,不当扩大了专利权的保护范围.我国应严格遵守“全面覆盖”原则,借鉴“控制或指挥”标准,权利人也可从撰写技术层面避免拆分侵权.
방법전리시유다개유시간과정요소적보취조성,역위다개주체탁분실시,Akamai안즉위전형.해안중,지방법원의실질성침권적“공제혹지휘”표준판정피고불구성침권;련방순회상소법원개변현유규칙주출료근호상반적판결;이련방최고법원각철소원판,발회중심,유회귀현유규칙적추세.아국다주체전리침권인정적사법실천중대직접침권여공동침권적계한불명,대“전면복개”원칙괄용불엄,불당확대료전리권적보호범위.아국응엄격준수“전면복개”원칙,차감“공제혹지휘”표준,권리인야가종찬사기술층면피면탁분침권.
Method patent is composed of several steps involving elements of time process, which can be splited to implement by multiple legal subjects, such as Akamai case. In this case, the district court verdicted that the defendant＇s act was not infringement on the basis of ＂control or command＂ criterion of substantive tort, which was modified by Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in the almost opposite verdict, and might be recovered due to the revocation decision of the Federal Supreme Court. In the judicial practice of Determination of multiple legal subjects infringement of patent in China, the boundary of direct infi-ingement and joint infringement is not clear, the application of the principle of ＂comprehensive cover＂ is not strict, which results in the improper expansion of the protective scope of patent fight, the principle of ＂comprehensive cover＂ should be observed and the ＂control or command＂ criterion should be used for reference in China. Split infringement can be avoided through technical writing by subjects.