日韩专利行政部门确认专利侵权制度比较研究

日本和韩国均由专利复审委员会来判断第三人实施的技术方案是否落入涉案专利权的保护范围,即日本的专利侵权判定制度和韩国的专利权范围行政确认制度。日本的制度实际上是行政机关鉴定制度,其处理的案件数量不多,因此有效性遭到质疑。在韩国的制度下,行政确认的结果具有法律效力,却因此被指责与侵权诉讼重复且两种程序的法律关系模糊。两国制度的共同优势在于可实现专利侵权纠纷数量控制、具有专业性和公正性以及提供不侵权的确认程序等,因此属于行政机关实施的灵活的侵权纠纷解决或侵权判断机制。对日韩两国的比较研究可对中国提供有益启示,因为在中国仍需要保留专利侵权纠纷的行政处理制度,并需要对该制度作出进一步完善。

A Comparative Study on Patent Infringement Confirmation System Practiced by Japanese and Korean Patent Administrative Organs

It is up to the patent reexamination board to decide whether the technical solution practiced by a third party falls into the protection scope of the implicated patent right,which correspond respectively to Japan's hantei system and Korean's patent protection scope administrative confirmation system.Japan's hantei decision has no binding legal effects on parties,leading to the question over its effectiveness.Under the Korean system,the result of administrative confirmation has legal effect,which is,however,criticized for duplicative procedures and ambiguous relationship with the infringement litigation.Both systems have strengths in quantitative control of patent disputes,professionality and fairness,and the usefulness of non-infringement confirmation procedure.With these strengths,Japan and Korea maintain those systems to provide flexibility of patent dispute settlement mechanism enforced by administrative organs.The comparative study is enlightening to China,because China still needs to maintain the administrative protection system to resolve patent infringement disputes,and meanwhile to make improvement to it.