1、I硕士学位论文（20 届）美国专利诉讼中永久禁令的适用及对我国的启示姓 名学 科 、 专 业 法律硕士（全日制法律硕士）研 究 方 向 知识产权法指 导 教 师论文提交日期II美国专利诉讼中永久禁令的适用及对我国的启示（硕士论文摘要）本文从 eBay 案着手，比较 eBay 案前后美国法院在专利诉讼中适用永久禁令的不同标准，分析美国提高专利诉讼中永久禁令适用标准的背景、深层原因以及从 eBay 案最终判决所显现的美国对专利的保护趋势。在此基础上，进一步结合我国现有专利制度的特点以及我国专利法第三次修改的新成果，对完善我国专利诉讼中停止侵害民事责任的适用提出一些建议和想法。文章分为导言、正文、结
2、论三个部分。导言部分，说明撰写本文的目的，即希望通过对美国专利诉讼中永久禁令适用问题的研究，总结并提出一些建议来完善我国专利诉讼中停止侵害民事责任的适用。正文部分由四章组成：第一章，美国专利诉讼中的永久禁令。该章对永久禁令这一衡平法上重要的救济方式作一概述，并分别介绍了美国传统民事诉讼中签发永久禁令所适用的“四要素检验标准”以及美国专利诉讼所特别适用的“自动签发规则”。“自动签发规则”尽管有其优点，但是随着“专利渔夫”的层出不穷，适用“自动签发规则”所带来的弊端越来越明显。笔者通过介绍几例典型的“专利渔夫”案例对“专利渔夫”现象及其成因进行剖析。第二章，eBay 案与永久禁令。本章介绍了最终改
3、变二十多年来美国专利诉讼中永久禁令适用标准的 eBay 案。美国最高法院在 eBay 案的判决中重新确立了在专利诉讼中签发永久禁令应适用传统衡平法的“四要素检验标准”。笔者进一步对 eBay 案判决后美国地方法院在审理专利诉讼过程中遇到的一系列新问题进行分析和展望。第三章，从 eBay 案看美国对专利的保护趋势。本章通过介绍 eBay 案后美国法院针对专利权人要求签发永久禁令的诉请所陆续作出的一系列判决，评析美国专利诉讼中适用永久禁令的趋向，从中归纳美国提高专利诉讼中永久禁令适用标准的背景及其深层原因。第四章，完善我国专利诉讼中停止侵害民事责任的适用。永久禁令实质上III与我国法上的停止侵害民
4、事责任相类似。在我国专利诉讼的司法实践中也存在把停止侵害这一民事责任当然化的现象，笔者通过分析造成这一现象的原因，并结合对 eBay 案等美国专利诉讼司法判例的总结以及我国专利法第三次修改的新成果，对完善我国专利诉讼中停止侵害民事责任的适用提出一些建议。最后，结论部分对文章进行归纳总结。 关键词 专利诉讼 永久禁令 停止侵害 自动签发规则 四要素检验标准 专利渔夫IResearch on the Application of Permanent Injunctions in American Patent Cases and Its Inspiration to China（Abstract）
5、This paper discusses under eBay V. MercExchange. By comparing the different criterion by which American Courts applied permanent injunctions before and after eBay，this paper analyses the background factors and deep reasons why American courts raised the standard of applying permanent injunctions in
6、patent cases and concludes the development trend of patent protection in America. On this basis，this paper combines the distinguished features of Chinese existing patent system and the results of the third amendment of the patent law of China so as to put forward some ideas and proposals to improve
7、the application of the civil liability of ceasing infringements in Chinese patent cases. This paper falls into three parts，that is，preface，main body and concluding remarks.In the part of preface，it illuminates the purport of this paper. That is to say it expects to summarize and put forward some pro
8、posals to improve the application of the civil liability of ceasing infringements in Chinese patent cases by researching on the application of the permanent injunctions in American patent cases.The main body has 4 chapters.The first chapter is “Permanent Injunctions in American Patent Cases”. The ch
9、apter studies the basic theory on the permanent injunction that is an important remedy in equity law. And it introduces two criteria: “Four-factor Test” applied in American IItraditional civil litigations and “Automatic Injunction Rule” applied specially in American patent litigations. “Automatic In
10、junction Rule” truly has some benefits，however all kinds of disadvantages emerge in endlessly with the emergence of “Patent Trolls” and the application of “Automatic Injunction Rule”. The author analyzes the phenomenon of “Patent Trolls” by introducing 2 typical cases.The second chapter is “eBay and
11、 Permanent Injunctions”. The chapter discusses the case of eBay V. MercExchange the judgment of which finally changed the criterion that had been applied in American patent cases for more than twenty years. In eBay，the Supreme Court held that permanent injunctions in patent cases should be determine
12、d by using the same four-factor test that courts have historically used in other contexts when deciding whether to issue a permanent injunction. The author further predicts and summarizes the follow-up questions that American district courts will face during the trial of patent cases after eBay.The
13、third chapter is “the Trend of Patent Protection in America by eBay”. The chapter reviews American courts application of the eBay decision on patent holders requests for permanent injunctions and analyzes the development trend of patent protection in American patent cases. The author also summarizes
14、 the background factors and deep reasons why American courts raised the standard of applying permanent injunctions in patent cases.The fourth chapter is “Improve the Application of the Civil Liability of Ceasing Infringements in Chinese Patent Cases”. Permanent injunction is virtually similar to the
15、 Civil Liability of Ceasing Infringements in the patent law of China. Applying the remedy IIIof ceasing infringements is in a considerable rate in judicial practice in China. By analyzing the reasons to this situation，summarizing the judicial precedents of American patent cases including eBay and le
16、arning from the results of the third amendment of the patent law of China，the author puts forward some ideas and proposals to improve the application of the civil liability of ceasing infringements in Chinese patent cases.At last，the concluding remarks looks back on the whole paper and gives a brief
17、 summary.Key Words Patent Infringement Case; Permanent Injunction; Cession of Infringement; Automatic Injunction Rule; Four-factor Test; Patent TrollI目 录导 言.1第一章 美国专利诉讼中的永久禁令 .2第一节 永久禁令及其概述.2第二节 永久禁令的适用规则.2一、传统衡平原则 “四要素检验标准” .2二、专利诉讼特别适用“ 自动签发规则 ”.3第三节 适用“自动签发规则”的优点.4一、提高对专利权人的保护力度.4二、有利于保护小型经济实体.4第
18、四节 适用“自动签发规则”的漏洞.5一、 “专利渔夫”层出不穷.5二、有关“专利渔夫”的典型案例.6第二章 eBay 案与永久禁令 .9第一节 eBay 案的背景.9第二节 eBay 案的审理过程.10一、地方法院拒绝签发永久禁令.10二、上诉法院撤销地方法院的判决.11三、最高法院的最终判决及大法官意见.12第三节 eBay 案的后续问题.13一、地方法院适用“四要素检验标准”的尺度不一 .14二、削弱了对小型经济实体的专利保护力度.14三、应对判决后仍然存续的侵权行为.15第三章 从 eBay案看美国对专利的保护趋势 .18第一节 eBay 案后美国专利诉讼中适用永久禁令的趋向.18一、法
19、院签发永久禁令的案例.18二、法院拒绝签发永久禁令的案例.19II三、评析 eBay 案后美国专利诉讼中永久禁令的适用 .20第二节 美国提高永久禁令适用标准的背景.21一、符合现代科技创新的规律.21二、重塑专利制度的平衡机制.22第三节 美国提高永久禁令适用标准的深层原因.23一、美国专利政策的倾向发生变化.23二、利益集团之间的角力.25第四章 完善我国专利诉讼中停 止侵害民事责任的适用 .28第一节 eBay 案对我国专利法修订的启示.28一、美国的立法经验与教训.28二、中美专利制度存在差异.29第二节 目前我国专利诉讼中停止侵害民事责任的适用.30一、停止侵害的适用依据和条件.30二、不适用停止侵害责任的情形.31三、我国专利诉讼中的司法实践.32四、我国法院把适用停止侵害民事责任当然化的原因.35第三节 完善立法和司法解释的一些建议.36一、提高专利侵权法定赔偿限额.36二、适时建立惩罚性赔偿制度.37三、明确不适用停止侵害的条件.38四、进一步完善强制许可制度.39结 论 .41参考文 献 .42
