A Research Of Exisiting Technology Defense System

27December,2008," Patent Law of People’s Republic of China " Third Amendment considered and adopted by the National People’s Congress, and since October1,2009the formal implementation. The revised " Patent Law " Article22provides for the existing technology as the examination of patent applications novelty, inventiveness comparison criteria,"Patent Law" Article62provides for the principle of prior art defense. Produced prior art defense system is a major advancement of patent institutional, not only has a positive significance to study the theory of patent infringement, will be an important guiding significance for the judicial practice.This thesis is divided into four parts. The first part is an overview of the existing defense technology, introduces the concept of prior art defense system, designed for the purpose and role of art and the historical development of the defense, the defense of the existing system has a full range of technical knowledge. From the provisions of Article62of the "Patent Law " can be seen in our country "Patent Law" only made the principled defense of the existing technical regulations, can not accurately apply. Prior art defense system designed to restore the original intention or action lawsuit against the principle of equality of the two sides, is entirely reflect the concept of legal justice. History prior art defense system introduces the history and current development in Germany, the USA, Japan, several countries, each country because of differences in national conditions, the prior art defense systems have their own understanding, will prompt us to our present studies have art defense system should be based on national conditions, draw a favorable outcome to improve our prior art defense system.The second part, of the standard of comparison and contrast rules prior art defense applications have to face to discuss, explain controversial art defense system in practical applications. Born prior art defense system to China’s Patent Law will write patent law prior art defense, indeed after a long process. We understand the prior art defense system or literally, the problems of the prior art defense applications involves many complex. There is no specific legal provisions apply different standards together, the results varied, affecting the efficiency of the judiciary and judicial authority. Contrast standard prior art defense as much as the big controversy reflects academic contending, but also disorganized performance. Uniform standards as soon as possible contrast imminent judicial efficiency and social effects of direct effect.The third part describes the shortcomings of the current situation and the prior art defense system, we can see the existence of prior art defense system difficulties in the application of our current stage. Court applied prior art defense is no uniform standard; in case constitutes infringement of the same patent, the applicable conditions of the prior art defense seemed wavering, the patent is invalid because the application process time-consuming; well prior art defense against judges very demanding, no professional background knowledge, it is difficult for the defense of existing technology for effective determination. Applicable prior art defense system in the process of emerging issues, should arouse our attention and focus.The last part of the basic text on the front, through the lack of analysis of the prior art defense, in order to put forward specific proposals to solve the problem. A system to produce any inadequacies will exist more or less, and make it less painstaking research predecessors young man who is excited to-struggle to solve the purpose. And scholars point of view, hope the scope of the prior art defense has been expanded to apply to the same patent infringement. The comparison standard to have a uniform standard to be applied to determine the reduction in trouble. There can play in the comparative review of the resources and technological advantages of the patent administrative department of the allegedly infringing technology to identify whether they are existing technologies, I believe that these still quite necessary.