Improvement Of Expert Assistant System In Chinese Intellectual Property Lawsuits

Considering the specialty and technicality of issues in intellectual property lawsuits,and the weight of these issues on final decisions,it is of crucial importance to involve expert opinions to assist parties and fact-finders who lack specialized knowledge or skills to understand and ascertain these issues.As a traditional civil law country,China has long been applying the �identification expert system�.However,judicial practice has shown and proved many defects in the system,and reform within the system itself over the last few years was far from satisfactory.Against this background,the paper suggests we take a deep look into and draw lessons from the �expert witness system� in common law countries,based on which to improve our �expert assistant system� that adapts to the demands of Chinese intellectual property lawsuits.Experts' expertise or experience will effectively make up fact-finders' insufficient knowledge or skills in specialized areas.In this regard,the paper proposes complementary coexistence of �identification experts� and �expert assistants�,aimed at achieving check and balance between them,and assisting fact-finders in figuring out the most reliable identification opinions or expert assistant opinions,so as to ascertain factual issues and make fair determinations.In terms of how to improve Chinese expert assistant system,the paper points out the significance of clarifying key issues first,only then can we ensure the system's feasibility and good function in judicial practice.In the first chapter,the paper starts with discussion on the application of experts dealing with specialized technical issues in intellectual property lawsuits,and the problems arising in judicial practice.Firstly,the paper points out the necessity of applying experts in intellectual property lawsuits.Secondly,it reveals defects in the current identification expert system,such as too much reliance on identification opinions and no clear defining the scope of items for identification.The second chapter indicates the approaches to improving the expert system in Chinese intellectual property lawsuits.Upon research and analysis,it turns out unsuitable to either merely reform the identification expert system itself or simply replace it with the expert witness system.Instead,the paper proposes we keep remedying the defects in the current identification expert system,and improve Chinese expert assistant system through experience and lessons learnt from the expert witness system in common law countries.The third chapter conducts a comprehensive and deep analysis on the application of expert witnesses in the United States and the United Kingdom.First and foremost,the paper introduces a legislative overview of the system in the U.S.and the U.K.and its variance.The paper then discusses the specific use of expert witnesses in intellectual property infringement proceedings,infringement of copyright,registered trademarks and invention patents in particular.Based on the study above,the paper proposes in its final chapter an approach to improving Chinese expert assistant system in intellectual property lawsuits,so as to achieve check and balance between,and complementary coexistence of identification experts and expert assistants.The paper specifically focuses on analyzing the litigation status and function,basic classification,qualification of expert assistants,pretrial discovery of expert assistant opinions,direct and cross-examination on expert assistant opinions,and examination on identification opinions by expert assistants.The paper also puts forward ideas on how to draw the line between legal and factual parts of some specialized technical issues in intellectual property lawsuits,and suggests the admissibility standard of expert assistant opinions.Basically,the paper adopts a comparative approach to carry out its legal analysis.On the one hand,identifying variances of the expert witness system in common law countries by comparing its application in the U.S.and the U.K.On the other hand,disclosing defects in the current identification expert system in China through comparison with the expert witness system in common law countries.In addition,the paper provides arguments based on cases and data from judicial practice.