论文部分内容阅读
谁也没有料到,一场索赔额高达数百万元的专利侵权案,竟会在细枝末节的企业科研管理细节中打得难解难分。解剖这一案例具有深刻的现实意义,它揭示了当前我国企业遭受侵权的一个重要原因:企业内部知识产权管理疏漏,职务发明的外延界定与认知有误区。 北京民营施工技术研究所聘用的一名科研设计部副主任戈田功不辞而别,在离职后不到两个月的时间里,先后申请了与原单位专利技术具有相同的实质性特点的两项实用新型专利技术。一审判决认定该两项专利为原单位的职务发明。判决一经作出,被告戈田功表示难以接受,认为这两项专利是个人利用公知技术进行的非职务发明,申请专利的权利应属发明者本人。 我国专利法实施细则规定:退职退休或者调动工作后一年内作出的、与其在原单位承担的本职工作或者原单位分配的任务有关的发明创造,属于职务发明。职务发明创造,申请专利的权利属于该单位;只有非职务发明创造,申请专利的权利才属于发明人或者设计人。
No one expected that a case of patent infringement with a claimed amount of up to several million dollars would have played a daunting part in the management details of the enterprise's scientific research. Anatomy of this case has profound practical significance. It reveals an important reason why enterprises in our country suffer infringement at present: omission of management of intellectual property within enterprises, extension of definition of service invention, and misunderstanding of cognition. Beijing Private Construction Technology Research Institute hired a deputy director of research and design department Goethe farewell, less than two months after leaving the job, has applied for the patent with the original unit has the same substantive features of the two practical New patented technology. The first instance verdict found that the two patents were the inventions of the original unit. When the verdict was made, the defendant, Goto, said it was unacceptable to think that the two patents are non-service inventions made by individuals using well-known technologies. The right to apply for a patent shall belong to the inventor himself. China's implementation of the provisions of the Patent Law provides that: retired or retired after retirement or transfer of work made within one year, with its original unit of work or the original task assigned by the original task of inventions, belong to the invention. Duty creation, the right to apply for a patent belongs to the unit; only non-service inventions, the right to apply for a patent belongs to the inventor or designer.