Earticle

초록

영어

In patent law, an invention patent application is published early and then will have substantive examination while utility model and design patent application are only examined from format perspective. A patent application needs not only to be novel and useful but also have inventiveness. Inventiveness lies in the heart of the patent system. Inventiveness sets a more strict standa rd f or g ra nting a pa tent a nd r equires tha t a n invention as a whole should be non-obvious in light of the prior art. The original purpose of the non-obviousness makes sense in preventing those obvious inventions from enjoying monopoly and having the real invention get protected thereby promoting inventors to make their invention public to promote the development of the technology. Through the empirical analysis of patent administrative cases in our country, we find that assessing inventive step is the most prominent focus and difficulty problem, but the systematic theory and practice research on this subject matter is little. This dissertation focuses on the methods of assessing inventive step, by comparison with the United States and European patent system to find solutions. This dissertation includes three parts, the first part referred to as the theoretical part focused on the basic theoretical issues about assessing inventive step, defines inventive step and discusses its system meaning, introduces the inventive step of U.S Patent law, the European patent convention and illustrates the importance of the establishment of the system of the inventive step and significant role of inventive step criteria in patent protection. The second part discuss the mainly methods of assessing inventive step, including main influential factors and the secondary considerations. The third part presents a number of recommendations aimed to promote the objectivity, stability and unity in assessment of inventive step.

중국어

专利法规定专利授权的实质条件是发明具备新颖性、创造性和实用性. 而创造性位于专利系统 的核心地带. 其意义在于, 既能够防止显而易见的、非实质性的发明享有垄断权, 又能够使得真正 对于现有技术有贡献的发明获得专利保护, 从而促使发明人愿意公开其发明创造促进整个社会的 技术进步. 对中国专利行政案件的实证分析表明, 创造性判断是专利行政案件最突出的重点和难点, 国内 还缺乏系统的理论和事务研究. 本文围绕中国专利创造性判断中的具体方法, 通过与美国、欧洲和 日本等国进行比较, 系统地研究了专利创造性判断. 本文整体上分为三大部分, 第一章主要讨论了 专利创造性的基本理论；第二部分讨论创造性判断的具体方法, 参考的主要因素和辅助因素；第 三部分是为了促进创造性判断的客观化、稳定性和统一性, 提出的一些建议. 第一章为创造性的内涵及制度评析. 第一节分别阐述了美国专利法中的创造性, 介绍了 “非显而 易见性” 的概念、欧洲专利公约中的创造性以及中国专利法中的创造性的涵义；第二节对中国目 前专利创造性标准进行评析, 分别介绍了美国、欧洲及日本等专利强国对于创造性判断标准的改 革方向及对中国的借鉴意义. 第二章为创造性判断的方法. 确定最接近现有技术和确定发明的区别技术特征以及判断所保护 的发明对本领域的技术人员来说是否显而易见. 这部分结合中国实务案例, 美国KSR案以后确立的 创造性判断标准及方法、欧洲 “最接近现有技术”, “客观技术问题” 的确定以及非显而易见性判断 等方面, 对中国创造性判断方法进行评析. 第三章为创造性判断的辅助因素包括发明解决了人民一直渴望解决但始终 未能获得成功的技术 难题；克服技术偏见；预料不到的技术效果以及商业成功. 并介绍了辅助因素在中国行政实务中 的全面运用情况 第四章和第五章为中国专利创造性判断方法的评析和完善, 全面总结了中国创造性判断标准的 优缺点, 提出了进一步完善中国专利创造性判断标准和方法的建议.

목차

摘要
 Ⅰ. 专利创造性概述
 Ⅱ. 中国专利创造性判断方法
 Ⅲ. 中国专利法中创造性判断的辅助因素
 Ⅳ. 对中国专利创造性判断的探析
 V. 针对中国专利创造性标准及方法的若干建议
 參考文獻
 

키워드

저자

• 仇蕾安 [ 구뢰안 | 中国北京理工大学法学院讲师, 专利中心, 助理研究员. ]
• 左思 [ 좌사 | 中国北京理工大学法学院2012级国际法学硕士研究生. ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  동북아법연구 [Northeast Asian law journal]

• 간기

  연3회

• pISSN

  1976-5037

• 수록기간

  2007~2026

• 등재여부

  KCI 등재

• 십진분류

  KDC 369 DDC 341