Viewpoint | Analysis of the reliability of patent protection

Published:

2021-12-20

It is generally believed that the value of patent rights includes legal value, technical value and economic value. The reliability of patent protection is an important index to evaluate and analyze the legal value of patent. The so-called reliability of patent protection refers to the reliability of the patentee or patent user in the face of the suspected infringing object, using the current infringement determination rules to determine whether the suspected infringing object falls into the scope of specific patent protection. Through the analysis of the stability of the specific patent itself and the restriction degree of the following patent, the probability of a specific patent winning a patent infringement lawsuit is judged. This paper will start with the writing quality of the claims and instructions to analyze the reliability of patent protection, so it is only applicable to inventions or utility models, not design. The author thinks that the reliability of patent protection can be analyzed comprehensively from the five dimensions of patent category, patent text quality, restriction degree of implementation, restriction degree of following patent and stability, so as to draw a more objective expectation judgment on whether infringement is established in patent infringement litigation. 1. patent category According to China's current patent examination and authorization rules, utility model patents can be authorized only through formal examination, while invention patents can only be authorized after passing formal examination and passing substantive examination. Therefore, the stability of a particular patent can be judged by the type of patent and the nature of the invention, and it is clear that the stability of the invention patent is higher than that of the utility model patent. In addition, starting with the layout of the claims, the independent claim is a product claim and has more subordinate claims, which is better than only one product claim, and then better than only the method claim. 2. patent text quality The consideration of the quality of the patent text should include at least the following three aspects: first, the writing quality of the independent claims; second, the layout and writing quality of the dependent claims; third, the clarity and completeness of the patent specification and the support for the claims. An ideal authorized patent should meet all the following conditions:(1) the patent specification provides a clear and complete description of the invention and creation, and the embodiments are specific, to the extent that can be realized by those skilled in the art in combination with the accompanying drawings;(2) The independent claims are supported by the specification, with clear expressions and appropriate generalizations;(3) The subordinate claims are reasonably arranged and have a considerable number of subordinate claims;(4) There is no case where the amendment provided for in Article 33 of the Patent Law exceeds the scope. Obviously, if a patent deviates more and more negatively from the above conditions, the text quality will be worse. Constraints on 3. implementation The purpose of this indicator is to analyze whether a specific patented technical solution falls within the scope of protection of the prior patent, and if so, the implementation of the specific patent requires the permission of the prior patentee, otherwise the prior patent will be infringed. In the specific judgment method, after searching, compare a particular patent with a closest prior patent, determine the degree of overlap with the prior patent independent claim, and determine whether the two constitute equivalent if there is a difference in technical characteristics. Obviously, if there is a substantial difference between a particular patent and the nearest prior patent, and the technical characteristics of the independent claim are significantly different, then the particular patent can be implemented independently and is not subject to the surviving patent, which is the best. If a particular patent is subject to a prior patent, but the prior patent clearly has a flaw that has been declared invalid or if the particular patent has room to avoid the prior patent, it is an intermediate result. If a particular patent falls within the scope of prior patent protection and lacks substantive characteristics relative to the prior patent, it is a poor result. 4. degree of restriction on following patents This indicator is used to determine the degree of restriction of a particular patent on the implementation of a subsequent follow-up improvement technology, I .e., the probability of a subsequent follow-up technology avoiding a particular patent infringement. In the specific method, compare the specific patent with the following patent, and analyze whether the specific patent can effectively restrict the independent implementation of the following patent relative to the specific patent. Obviously, it is best if the follow-up patent is not retrieved, or if the follow-up patent falls unquestionably within the scope of protection of a particular patent. If, although there are different technical characteristics between the following patent and the specific patent, there is no substantial difference, that is, the following patent has a high probability of falling into the scope of protection of the specific patent, is also a better result. If the follow-up patent does not fall within the scope of protection of the particular patent, I .e. the follow-up patent can be implemented freely without the restriction of the particular patent, then the value of the particular patent will be diminished. 5. stability This indicator is used to determine the possibility of invalidation of a particular patent. Compare the specific patent with the existing technology before the filing date, and determine whether the specific patent has the risk of being declared invalid as stipulated in Article 65 of the Regulations of the Patent Law. Under this index system, the stability of patents with more distinguishing technical features is higher than that of patents with less distinguishing technical features. If a particular patent independent claim has more distinguishing technical features that are materially different from the combination of more than one prior art, then the probability of that particular patent being declared invalid is small and optimal. If a particular patent independent claim has few or no distinguishing technical features that differ materially from a combination of prior art within 3 articles, then the probability that the particular patent will be invalidated is high and is a poor result. If a particular patent independent claim has several distinguishing technical features compared with the combination of 3 or so existing technologies, but it is doubtful whether the distinguishing technical feature is a replacement of customary technical means, then the probability of the particular patent being declared invalid is in the middle. To sum up, according to the relevant provisions of China's Patent Law, Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law and Patent Examination Guidelines, the author takes the quality of patent text as the main line, combines the characteristics of invention or utility model patents, and discusses the reliability of patent protection from five aspects: patent category, patent text quality, restriction degree of patent implementation, restriction degree of patent to follow patent, and stability of patent, the legal restriction effect of specific patented technology on the related technology in the same technical field is given objectively, and the result probability of infringement litigation is expected. It is generally believed that the value of patent rights includes legal value, technical value and economic value. The reliability of patent protection is an important index to evaluate and analyze the legal value of patent. The so-called reliability of patent protection refers to the reliability of the patentee or patent user in the face of the suspected infringing object, using the current infringement determination rules to determine whether the suspected infringing object falls into the scope of specific patent protection. Through the analysis of the stability of the specific patent itself and the restriction degree of the following patent, the probability of a specific patent winning a patent infringement lawsuit is judged. This paper will start with the writing quality of the claims and instructions to analyze the reliability of patent protection, so it is only applicable to inventions or utility models, not design. The author thinks that the reliability of patent protection can be analyzed comprehensively from the five dimensions of patent category, patent text quality, restriction degree of implementation, restriction degree of following patent and stability, so as to draw a more objective expectation judgment on whether infringement is established in patent infringement litigation. 1. patent category According to China's current patent examination and authorization rules, utility model patents can be authorized only through formal examination, while invention patents can only be authorized after passing formal examination and passing substantive examination. Therefore, the stability of a particular patent can be judged by the type of patent and the nature of the invention, and it is clear that the stability of the invention patent is higher than that of the utility model patent. In addition, starting with the layout of the claims, the independent claim is a product claim and has more subordinate claims, which is better than only one product claim, and then better than only the method claim. 2. patent text quality The consideration of the quality of the patent text should include at least the following three aspects: first, the writing quality of the independent claims; second, the layout and writing quality of the dependent claims; third, the clarity and completeness of the patent specification and the support for the claims. An ideal authorized patent should meet all the following conditions:(1) the patent specification provides a clear and complete description of the invention and creation, and the embodiments are specific, to the extent that can be realized by those skilled in the art in combination with the accompanying drawings;(2) The independent claims are supported by the specification, with clear expressions and appropriate generalizations;(3) The subordinate claims are reasonably arranged and have a considerable number of subordinate claims;(4) There is no case where the amendment provided for in Article 33 of the Patent Law exceeds the scope. Obviously, if a patent deviates more and more negatively from the above conditions, the text quality will be worse. Constraints on 3. implementation The purpose of this indicator is to analyze whether a specific patented technical solution falls within the scope of protection of the prior patent, and if so, the implementation of the specific patent requires the permission of the prior patentee, otherwise the prior patent will be infringed. In the specific judgment method, after searching, compare a particular patent with a closest prior patent, determine the degree of overlap with the prior patent independent claim, and determine whether the two constitute equivalent if there is a difference in technical characteristics. Obviously, if there is a substantial difference between a particular patent and the nearest prior patent, and the technical characteristics of the independent claim are significantly different, then the particular patent can be implemented independently and is not subject to the surviving patent, which is the best. If a particular patent is subject to a prior patent, but the prior patent clearly has a flaw that has been declared invalid or if the particular patent has room to avoid the prior patent, it is an intermediate result. If a particular patent falls within the scope of prior patent protection and lacks substantive characteristics relative to the prior patent, it is a poor result. 4. degree of restriction on following patents This indicator is used to determine the degree of restriction of a particular patent on the implementation of a subsequent follow-up improvement technology, I .e., the probability of a subsequent follow-up technology avoiding a particular patent infringement. In the specific method, compare the specific patent with the following patent, and analyze whether the specific patent can effectively restrict the independent implementation of the following patent relative to the specific patent. Obviously, it is best if the follow-up patent is not retrieved, or if the follow-up patent falls unquestionably within the scope of protection of a particular patent. If, although there are different technical characteristics between the following patent and the specific patent, there is no substantial difference, that is, the following patent has a high probability of falling into the scope of protection of the specific patent, is also a better result. If the follow-up patent does not fall within the scope of protection of the particular patent, I .e. the follow-up patent can be implemented freely without the restriction of the particular patent, then the value of the particular patent will be diminished. 5. stability This indicator is used to determine the possibility of invalidation of a particular patent. Compare the specific patent with the existing technology before the filing date, and determine whether the specific patent has the risk of being declared invalid as stipulated in Article 65 of the Regulations of the Patent Law. Under this index system, the stability of patents with more distinguishing technical features is higher than that of patents with less distinguishing technical features. If a particular patent independent claim has more distinguishing technical features that are materially different from the combination of more than one prior art, then the probability of that particular patent being declared invalid is small and optimal. If a particular patent independent claim has few or no distinguishing technical features that differ materially from a combination of prior art within 3 articles, then the probability that the particular patent will be invalidated is high and is a poor result. If a particular patent independent claim has several distinguishing technical features compared with the combination of 3 or so existing technologies, but it is doubtful whether the distinguishing technical feature is a replacement of customary technical means, then the probability of the particular patent being declared invalid is in the middle. To sum up, according to the relevant provisions of China's Patent Law, Detailed Rules for the Implementation of the Patent Law and Patent Examination Guidelines, the author takes the quality of patent text as the main line, combines the characteristics of invention or utility model patents, and discusses the reliability of patent protection from five aspects: patent category, patent text quality, restriction degree of patent implementation, restriction degree of patent to follow patent, and stability of patent, the legal restriction effect of specific patented technology on the related technology in the same technical field is given objectively, and the result probability of infringement litigation is expected.

Key words: