본문 바로가기

추천 검색어

실시간 인기 검색어

학술논문

특허청구범위와 균등성

이용수 64

영문명
Patent Claim and Equivalency under The Doctrine of Equivalents
발행기관
한국재산법학회
저자명
정진옥(Jeong Jin-ok)
간행물 정보
『재산법연구』재산법연구 제22권 제2호, 355~387쪽, 전체 33쪽
주제분류
법학 > 법학
파일형태
PDF
발행일자
2005.10.01
6,760

구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.

1:1 문의
논문 표지

국문 초록

영문 초록

A patent claim has been interpreted by a court. An accused product or process can be found to infringe a patent claim in one of two ways: either literally or under the “doctrine of equivalents”. Literal infringement will be found if an accused product or process meets each and every limitation of a properly interpreted claim. Under the doctrine of equivalents, infringement may also be found even if each claim limitation is not literally met, so long as the differences between the accused product or process and the claimed invention, with respect to each claim limitation, are insubstantial as determined by the Judge. The doctrine of equivalents is designed to protect inventors from those who might otherwise make unimportant and insubstantial changes and substitutions in a patent. This doctrine involves Patent Court tripartite test under which infringement may be found if the claimed and accused devices perform substantially the same overall function, in substantially the same way, to achieve substantially the same overall result. Unlike claim interpretation questions, however, the relevant inquiry for a doctrine of equivalents infringement analysis consists of a factual determination of whether the differences between the claimed invention and accused product or process are insubstantial. The doctrine of equivalents thus represents a separate and distinct inquiry that is independent of claim interpretation per se. Recently Supreme Court provides guidance on the requirement for equivalency under the doctrine of equivalents in the case of patent infringement. There is a little difference between guidances that Supreme Court and Patent Court provide. I argue against a little guidance on the requirement for equivalency that Supreme Court provides. Most of the discussion concerns the claim interpretation and the equivalency under the doctrine of equivalents.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 특허청구범위의 해석과 균등성
Ⅲ. 균등성의 요건
Ⅳ. 균등성의 배제사유
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract

키워드

해당간행물 수록 논문

참고문헌

교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!

신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.

바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!

교보e캐시 1,000원
TOP
인용하기
APA

정진옥(Jeong Jin-ok). (2005).특허청구범위와 균등성. 재산법연구, 22 (2), 355-387

MLA

정진옥(Jeong Jin-ok). "특허청구범위와 균등성." 재산법연구, 22.2(2005): 355-387

결제완료
e캐시 원 결제 계속 하시겠습니까?
교보 e캐시 간편 결제