Research On The Burden Of Proof Of Compensation For Patent Infringement Damages

Compensation for patent infringement damages,as the ultimate claim of the right holder in most patent litigation cases,faces the dilemma of "difficult to prove and low compensation" in judicial practice.The Patent Law which has been amended four times,and the trial guides updated by courts constantly have made certain provisions for compensation for patent infringement damages in the field of substantive law or in the field of procedural law in specific situations.However,due to the special nature of patent rights,the general procedural law does not work well,especially our regulations on burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages are more general The main content of this article is to summarize the problems of burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages in China by analyzing the characteristics of patent infringement cases through empirical analysis,and combines the experience of extraterritorial law in burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages to try to solve the above-mentioned practical problems of compensation for patent infringement damages from the perspective of burden of proof.The first part is the empirical analysis part.This article selects the patent infringement cases judged by Jinan Intermediate Court in first instance as the samples,analyzes the patent type of the case,the parties of the case,the calculation method of compensation,the comparison of the plaintiffs request with the court's decision,and the impact of the parties' evidence on compensation through data analysis,and summarizes the enlightenment of constructing burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages.The second part analyzes burden of proof in detail on the basis of the data analysis of the first part by combining specific typical cases to further summarize the idea of establishing burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages in China for different proof objects.This part discusses the problem of unclear burden of proof of causality under actual loss of the right holder;and discusses burden of proof of sales volume,profits,and the proportion of patent profits under the infringer's infringement profits;and discusses burden of proof of the authenticity and relevance of license fees under reasonable license fees;and discusses the issue of statutory compensation abuse from the perspective of burden of proof;and discusses the burden of proof of intentions under punitive damages.The third part is extraterritorial investigation of burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages.This part discusses the "if not" principle and the four requirements of Panduit under the actual loss of the right holder;and discusses the court's presumption under the infringer's infringement profits;and discusses "abstract license fees" under reasonable license fees;and discusses the criteria of the Seagate case and the Halo case under punitive damages.The fourth part proposes the idea of establishing the burden of proof of compensation for patent infringement damages in China.This part applies the presumption of facts through the "if not" standard to clarify burden of proof under the actual loss of the right holder;and sets reasonable certification standards for sales volume,profit,and technology sharing under the infringer's infringement profits to optimize the burden of proof;and introduces an evaluation of the license fee in terms of "authenticity" and a certificate of "relevance" by the infringer at a reasonable license fee to establish the burden of proof;and divides the "intentional" of the infringer in more detail under punitive compensation to build a reasonable burden of proof.