专利销毁请求权之适用对象( kb) - 经济部智慧财产局.docVIP

專利銷燬請求權之適用對象 判決字號： 判決日期：100年月日 系爭專利：相關法條： 判決要旨： 專利權人對於侵害專利權之物品或從事侵害行為之原料或器具，固得請求銷燬或為其他必要之處置。然專利權人行使權利必須具備合理正當性及善意第三人應保護之原則，專利權人僅得向惡意第三人行使銷燬請求權，其不得對善意第三人行使銷燬請求權，以禁止其濫用專利權，並避免善意第三人蒙受不可預期之損失，徒增無謂之社會成本。 【判決摘錄】 （一）原告主張 「CD-SEN」、「IN SEECTION」、「IN- LINE SCANNER (DUV)」 （二）被告主張 二、本案爭點 (一) 三、判決理由 亞○○○區○○○路667 號之12吋晶圓廠房內，就所有其上置有「CD-SEN」、「IN SEECTION」、「IN- LINE SCANNER (DUV)」機 四、判決結果 TRIPS第46條規定（Other Remedies）：「In order to create an effective deterrent to infringement, the judicial authorities shall have the authority to order that goods that they have found to be infringing be, without compensation of any sort, disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner as to avoid any harm caused to the right holder, or, unless this would be contrary to existing constitutional requirements, destroyed. The judicial authorities shall also have the authority to order that materials and implements the predominant use of which has been in the creation of the infringing goods be, without compensation of any sort, disposed of outside the channels of commerce in such a manner as to minimize the risks of further infringements. In considering such requests, the need for proportionality between the seriousness of the infringement and the remedies ordered as well as the interests of third parties shall be taken into account. In regard to counterfeit trademark goods, the simple removal of the trademark unlawfully affixed shall not be sufficient, other than in exceptional cases, to permit release of the goods into the channels of commerce.」TRIPS第46條賦予各會員國智慧財產權人於司法機關認定侵權物品時，對於因侵害行為所導致之持續侵害或侵害狀態仍不能除去者，得依本條規定所賦予之「其他救濟方法」除去侵害，該「其他救濟方法」即係最直接積極之手段-銷燬請求權，其行使客體除認定侵權物品外，更及於製造侵權物品之原料及器具。 銷燬請求權，分別規定於我國著作權法第88條之1：「依第八十四條或前條第一項請求時，對於侵害行為作成之物或主要供侵害所用之物，得請求銷燬或為其他必要之處置。」100年6月29日總統公布之商標法第69條第2項規定：「商標權人依前項規定為請求時，得請求銷毀侵害商標權之物品及從事侵害行為之原料或器具。但法院審酌侵害之程度及第三人利益後，得為其他必要之處置。」修法理由並載明對於侵害行為，商標權人固得請求銷毀侵害商標權之物品及從事侵害行為之原料或器具，惟如得以對相對人及第三人權益侵害較小之手段而能同樣達成保障商標權人利益者，法院即應採取其他較小侵害手段以代替銷毀，