Research Of Indirect Patent Infringement On 3D Printing

Nowadays science and technology are primary productive forces of society. Science and technology has important strategic significance to a nation, an ethnic and every enterprise also individual person who under competition. For the past two decades, Chinese and overseas enterprises in the international market continue to expand the business, the patent as a core business and personal gain competitiveness increasingly high degree of attention, so that their core technology patent showed a dominant position to individuals and businesses in the competitive strategy of the game and the game becomes more important. The annual patent applications growth of China and the number of licenses also showed that our awareness of patent protection about businesses and individuals are significantly increased, we have to admit that enterprises facing domestic and international patent infringement disputes still year in year on year growth momentum. By years of modifying patent law and legislation on the judicial practice in determining patent infringement case established "the principle of universal coverage", effectively quell the conflict between the parties to resolve the dispute and to some extent, curbed the direct patent infringement cases occurred, it played a significant role. But in judicial practice not directly infringe the patent for the perpetrator, deliberately induced by the objective, aiding, abetting others to harm the interests of the patent owner’s behavior-that indirect patent infringement but not detailed and workable regulation, whether in the legislative or judicial practices are lack of guiding theory and benchmark case. Especially in the 3D printing technology (Three-Dimensional Printing Technology) for nearly 20 years, the rapid development of the manufacturing sector towards "full manufacturing" stage,3D printing involves growing concern indirect infringement of patent rights. If the number of indirect patent infringement cases may occur before by the common law tort liability, then to resolve disputes, the creation of the 3D printer caused great impact, we may call itis the existing laws and regulations related to patent infringement. How to determine indirect patent infringement in 3D printing area, and how to determine the law applicable in judicial practice, is undoubtedly a topic with worthy of study.This paper has been divided into six parts, the first part focuses on the plight faced by patent protection under discussion 3D printing technology background. By using research principles,"the nature of the phenomenon ", from the development of 3D printing technology start by comparing with the traditional patent infringement induction to express the current 3D printing technology patents under the background characteristics and characterize different from traditional tort indirect infringement and now there are legal difficulties arise while facing above violations.The second part shows on the legislation of indirect patent infringement. It breadthwise hackles the system’s establishment and evolution of the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Japan. Through analysis the provisions of different countries, it can delineate the infringement determinant principle and the scope of application which belongs to indirect patent infringement.The third part mainly focuses on describing indirect patent infringement. First of all, I discuss about how to define the patent infringement through sorting out the relationship between direct and indirect patent infringement, that belonging to the Independent Doctrine and Slave Doctrine. The differences is the Slave Doctrine insist about its definition should depend on the exist of direct, but the Independent Doctrine is in contrast. From the legislative practice of states, indirect patent includes about two kinds of behaviors:lure infringement and contributory infringement. Then it talks about content of this two modes of violations by analyzing the legal provisions in America, German, Japan and other countries.The fourth part mainly focuses on dissertation about the indirect patent infringement fact of 3D Printing Technology from may occur and has occurred actions of three subjects.The next section talks about the exception which is "For personal purposes" in indirect patent infringement of 3D Printing Technology. The enact of patent system is to protect the patent owners interests, however the protection of members of society from laws must keep balance between rights holders and the public. Depended on that, many developed countries allowed the existing of "For personal purposes" in patent law. This article insists the exception of Three-Dimensional Printing Technology infringement must be limited to not for profit interest, entertainment of personal or family members.The last paragraph put forward to the improvement of Three-Dimensional Printing Technology patent system. The direct patent infringement and the system of joint torts in Tort Law, nowadays, can not ensure the participant’s equity. The particularities in indirect infringement calls the completion of indirect patent infringement system for better legal profits and keeping balance.