The Determination Of The Validity Of "Notarization" In Intellectual Property Infringement Dispute

Until today,intellectual property infringement disputes become more and more frequent,after the case of Beijing University Founder v.High technology,the use of notarized evidence to preserve the way to trap the evidence of fixed infringement is much favored by the parties.However,at present,China's legislation and related judicial interpretation are still not clearly defined in the evidence of the trap and the use of the notary evidence,which is the cause that leads the court to the trap of evidence and the formation of notarized instruments,effectiveness of their own views.Therefore,the author believes that the study of trap evidence theory can not only explain the legal scope of trap evidence collection,but also further guide the real operation of notarization evidence preservation.This paper intends to explore the relevant theories and systems of trap forensics on the basis of the case of the company,and put forward some suggestions on the trap evidence collection and related system construction.I'm going to illustrate from the following five parts:In the first part I will present a controversial case,Peking University Founder v.V.Technology companies trap evidence case.Including the basic information of the case,the court referee opinion and disagreement,the controversial focus of the problem,and I will summarize the focus of the dispute.The second part is the trap of evidence of the property,including classification,definition and more in-depth legal analysis.The Founder of the trap evidence for qualitative analysis,at the same time,clear the Founder of the trap of evidence whether it is a crime-induced trap or evidence-based trap.In addition,the introduction of evidence to preserve the notary attribute,the evidence preservation notarization of the concept,meaning,characteristics,requirements and legal effect of a comprehensive analysis.The third part is the qualitative and proof of the above controversial cases,especially for the necessity of evidence from the evidence,forensic behavior of the legal exclusion analysis and comprehensive evaluation of the legitimacy of the law enforcement or not Whether or not to judge the standard.At the same time,through the analysis of the notarized applicant and the preservation of the interests of the matter,notarized security law,the trap of evidence in the recognition of the effectiveness of notary evidence,notarization to the legitimate doubt onthe positive aspects of the four aspects of the identification of the case The validity and normative evaluation of the fixed evidence of the certificate.The fourth part is the introduction of the significance of this study.One is similar to the trap of evidence of the way,the other is the trap of forensic evidence of the affirmative,another one is a similar case to guide the significance of the summary.At the same time,the author also from the legislative,judicial,notary three-tier level of the relevant system to build some suggestions.The fifth part is the systematic summary of the content of the article,emphasizing the application of "trap notarization" about the advantages and necessity.