This is a comparative study on various aspects of the Patent Act, Article 35, “Patents Granted to Unentitled Persons and Protection of Legitimate Right-Holders,”and Article 99-2, “Claim for Transfer of Patents,”both of which are aimed at prote...
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109009100
2024
Korean
KCI등재
학술저널
1-16(16쪽)
0
상세조회0
다운로드다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
This is a comparative study on various aspects of the Patent Act, Article 35, “Patents Granted to Unentitled Persons and Protection of Legitimate Right-Holders,”and Article 99-2, “Claim for Transfer of Patents,”both of which are aimed at prote...
This is a comparative study on various aspects of the Patent Act, Article 35, “Patents Granted to Unentitled Persons and Protection of Legitimate Right-Holders,”and Article 99-2, “Claim for Transfer of Patents,”both of which are aimed at protecting legitimate right-holder(s) against unentitled persons who are granted patents.
Although both articles have similar purposes, they differ in several aspects, particularly concerning the retroactive effects of recovered patent(s). Several precautions should be considered when choosing one of the remedies for protecting the legitimate right-holder(s) or recovering the patent(s).
For instance, if a patent right expires or is transferred during an action to claim the transfer of a patent, it can be highly disadvantageous to the plaintiff, possibly leading to dismissal of the claim. Therefore, filing a provisional injunction prohibiting the transfer or cancellation of patent rights, along with filing a legal action, is desirable.
Furthermore, patent rights transferred through a claim for the transfer of a patent take effect retroactively from the registration date,although not in an invalidation trial. Consequently, the scope of damages from patent infringement in an invalidation trial becomes relatively disadvantageous.
If one of the joint applicants makes an unauthorized application, the transfer of share ownership through a transfer claim is possible. However, invalidating only the shares through an invalidation trial is impossible.
On the other hand, an invalidation trial can be conducted not by the court but by the “Intellectual Property Trial and Appeal Board (IPTAB)”, with the advantage of allowing proceedings even after the expiration of rights and, providing an opportunity to correct the scope of claims after the decision has become final and conclusive.
Based on the above, considering such differences is necessary when choosing a remedy for patents to protect legitimate right-holder(s) or recover the patent(s). Furthermore, legislative consideration regarding the retroactive effect of patent rights registered under Article 35 of the Patent Act will be necessary in the future.
고유성(inherency)에 의한 신규성 부정 여부: 대법원 2021. 12. 30. 선고 2017후1304 판결에 대한 평석
직무발명 보상금 산정요소로서의 사용자의 이익 산정방법의 개선방안 모색: 가상의 실시료율, 독점권 기여율, 직무발명 기여도를 중심으로
프로드러그 물질의 생산·사용·양도등 행위와 특허권의 직접·간접 침해: 이른바 ‘다파글리플로진 포메이트 사건’을 중심으로
부정경쟁방지법 제15조의 개정 필요성 및 개정 방향에 관한 고찰