Study Of The Indirect Patent Infringement On3D Printing

After the civilization of3D printing, the manufacturing industry will enter astage of “entire population manufacturing” and the intellectual property issues relatedwill occur. In this thesis, subjects of3D printing were regarded as study objects fordiscussing the legal issues of indirect patent infringement. Considering the richexperience and important status of the United States in intellectual property lawpractice, this thesis has identified the constitutive requirements, legal application andother aspects of indirect patent infringement on3D printing with the Patent Law inUnited States. Upon that, suggestions for perfecting the system of indirect patentinfringement of China were come up with by combining with characteristics of newinfringement disputes under the new technology environment like3D printing.Hence, this thesis is consisting of four chapters:Chapter one is focusing on the types of behaviors of3D printing involved inindirect patent infringement were introduced. After that, the fact that directinfringement is the precondition of indirect patent infringement according to thePatent Law of the United States was determined; direct infringement becomes validwhen one uses3D printing devices to produce products under patent protection.Meanwhile, the possible indirect patent infringement behaviors in three types ofsubjects of3D printing were concluded and their features were summarized.Chapter two is focusing on the analysis of factors for judging indirect patentinfringement involved in3D printing. The four types of behaviors by three types of subjects of3D printing were analyzed one by one by regarding provisions b, c and fof clause271in the Patent Law of the United States. A conclusion that indirectinfringement is only valid when a vendor of3D printing devices is proved to hastaken the initiative to practice enticing behaviors and promised to sell or sold CADdata under current laws through analyzing whether the indirect infringementbehaviors are existing or not, whether such behaviors have resulted in directinfringement or not and whether the vendor has violated knowingly.Chapter three is focusing on the discussion on the legal application of indirectpatent infringement involved in3D printing. The indirect patent infringement of3Dprinting was further clarified through analyzing the possible ground for defenseproposed by the subjects of infringement. Meanwhile, it was suggested that thebehavior of spreading patent data be included into the scope of indict patentinfringement and a Digital Millennium Patent Law be formulated to deal withinfringement disputes after the digitalization of patent technologies in the future.Chapter four is focusing on suggestions for perfecting the indirect patentinfringement system of China. The necessity of clarifying the indirect patentinfringement system of China was elaborated through stating that the currentlypracticed direct infringement system and joint infringement system are inadequate tocoordinate the interests of the obligee and the public in patent infringement disputes.Upon that, firstly, it was suggested that the precondition of “being oriented byproduction an operation” for constituting direct infringement be deleted for definingnew-type patent infringement disputes and better facilitating social and technologicalinnovation; secondly, it was suggested that the existence of indirect infringementbehaviors, along with direct association between the behaviors and the happening ofdirect infringement and the intention of violating knowingly, be regarded aspreconditions for constituting indirect patent infringement; thirdly, it was suggestedthat the infringement defense system and technical measures be perfected for furtherguaranteeing a balance between the interests of the obligee and those of the public.