论文部分内容阅读
美国联邦最高法院在著名的商业秘密案件lear V.adkins案中给予的判决理由是值得商榷的,法院认为在专利许可合同期间,被许可人可以挑战专利权人的专利合法性。尽管专利被许可人对专利权合法性的挑战,法院很少给予支持,但本案可能导致原本可以在合同领域内进行调整的大量纠纷直接被联邦专利法所替代。另外,此案很可能导致的另一结果是中小型公司今后很有可能将专利权捏在自己手中,从此不再给予专利许可服务,以避免诉诸专利诉讼的风险。
The reasons given by the Supreme Court of the United States Supreme Court in the famous case of lear Vinad in the case of trade secrets are debatable. The court held that the licensee could challenge the patentee’s patent validity during the period of the patent licensing contract. Although the patent licensee’s challenge to the legality of patent rights seldom supports the court, the case may lead to a large number of disputes that could otherwise be adjusted in the area of contract, directly replaced by federal patent law. In addition, another possible result of this case is that small and medium-sized companies are likely to pin their patent rights in the future and will no longer grant patent licensing services to avoid the risk of resorting to patent litigation.