網頁

2016年12月7日 星期三

美國聯邦最高法院改變了設計專利的損害賠償計算方法

Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc. (US Supreme Court, December 6, 2016)

U.S. Supreme Court backs Samsung in smartphone fight with Apple (Reuters, December 6, 2016)

之前Fairsky Patent Memo的相關文章


Apple跟Samsung的專利訴訟打得如火如荼,花大錢一路打上美國聯邦最高法院。現在判決文終於出爐,只有九頁,全部大法官一致通過。突然之間,這個價值三億九千萬美金的問題,好像變得......很簡單。

直接講重點:

美國聯邦最高法院推翻了下級法院關於設計專利的損害賠償的計算方法,認為法條中所謂的 "article of manufacture" ,可以是產品中的零組件,"total profit" 則可以是該零組件的利潤。

本案爭點在美國專利法第289條第一段應如何解釋。該條規定,未經設計專利權人授權,而將專利設計應用於欲銷售的製造物者,應賠償其所有利潤

Whoever during the term of a patent for a design, without license of the owner, (1) applies the patented design, or any colorable imitation thereof, to any article of manufacture for the purpose of sale, or (2) sells or exposes for sale any article of manufacture to which such design or colorable imitation has been applied shall be liable to the owner to the extent of his total profit, but not less than $250, recoverable in any United States district court having jurisdiction of the parties.

Apple訴Samsung侵害其美國第D593,087D618,677、以及D604,305號設計專利。聯邦地方法院認定Samsung侵權,並依 "整台智慧型手機的全部利潤" 計算損害賠償。也就是說,法條中的 "article of manufacture" 是整台手機,"total profit" 則是整台手機的利潤。這個計算的方法,受到聯邦巡迴上訴法院的支持。

現在美國聯邦最高法院推翻了這個計算方法。美國聯邦最高法院認為,所謂的 "article of manufacture" ,可以是產品中的零組件,"total profit" 則可以是該零組件的利潤。

首先,聯邦最高法院把設計專利的損害賠償計算,分成兩個步驟:先找出專利設計所應用的 "article of manufacture",然後計算侵權人就該 "article of manufacture" 的全部利潤:

Arriving at a damages award under §289 thus involves two steps. First, identify the “article of manufacture” to which the infringed design has been applied. Second, calculate the infringer’s total profit made on that article of manufacture.

(判決文第5頁)

關於第一步,美國聯邦最高法院認為,法條文字本身就解決了爭議:289條中的 "article of manufacture" 涵蓋賣給消費者的產品,以及該產品的零組件:

The text resolves this case. The term “article of manufacture,” as used in §289, encompasses both a product sold to a consumer and a component of that product. 

(判決文第6頁)

只是,在本案中,那個零組件到底是什麼呢?怎麼決定呢?對此,聯邦最高法院基於 "雙方當事人沒有送書狀上來" 拒絕回答,並發回給下級法院去處理:

We decline to lay out a test for the first step of the §289 damages inquiry in the absence of adequate briefing by the parties. Doing so is not necessary to resolve the question presented in this case, and the Federal Circuit may address any remaining issues on remand. 

(判決文第8頁)

然後......這個判決文就結束了。大法官就法條文字,做了文義解釋跟體系解釋,有興趣者可以參考。到下級法院重算之後,損害賠償應該會大幅降低了吧。

沒有留言:

張貼留言

注意:只有此網誌的成員可以留言。