Case Analysis Of Patent Infringement Cases Of Shenzhen Tangen Technology Co.,Ltd. V. Yang Mou

The three points of contention in the study case,how to determine the scope of protection of patent rights,whether the defendant’s legitimate source defense can be established,and how to determine the amount of damages,are not uncommon in patent infringement litigation,but there is still room for discussion and improvement in theory and practice.First of all,for how to determine the scope of protection of patent rights,the principle of compromise interpretation gives the description the legal effect as a formal patent interpretation document,and in judicial practice,due to the consideration of the balance of interests,corresponding interpretation rules have developed from different angles,these rules have their own emphases,and their effects are also different,depending on the actual situation of the individual case when applying the rules,but the basis of the rules is to clarify the legal nature of the description when interpreting the patent claims.The legal nature of the description mainly emphasizes three aspects:first,the description cannot encroach on the validity of the claims to define the scope of protection,secondly,the description belongs to the internal evidence of the interpretation of the claims,which has priority effect compared with external evidence,and finally the priority effect between the internal evidence reflected in the description with the advantages of content and applicability.As for the defense of legitimate sources,as a strong guarantee for protecting the interests of good faith and trust and maintaining market order,it is difficult to fully exert its effectiveness in judicial practice because of the rules of proof.In judicial adjudication,the court should take into account the actual situation of the parties and the development of the industry in each specific case,especially recognizing the natural deficiency of a large number of small and medium-sized business operators in the ability to adduce evidence,and ensure the fairness and reasonableness of the case on the basis of a unified judicial adjudication benchmark.For the last point of contention,in the study case,the court finally adopted the calculation rule of damages for infringement profits to determine the amount of compensation,which has great research significance in the judicial environment where statutory compensation is excessive,especially in the study case,the court finally quantified the factor of technical contribution.The degree of technological contribution stems from the theory of technology apportionment in patent law,which aims to determine the fair and reasonable scope of infringement liability,and the theoretical basis behind it corresponds to the principle of corresponding liability and behavior.However,in specific judicial adjudications,the degree of technical contribution has not been uniformly recognized,and its root cause lies in the lack of the current status of this theoretical research and the limitations of various practical factors.The quantitative methods developed in real judicial adjudication also have their own emphases and flaws,but the most important thing is that this theory needs to be paid attention to in practice in order to be further improved in exploration and research.