Research On The Burden Of Proof Of Punitive Damages For Intellectual Property

Domestic scholars study the punitive damages system of intellectual property,paying more attention to the punitive damages system of intellectual property itself,that is,the historical origin,function,applicable conditions of punitive damages and whether it is suitable for China’s national conditions.They pay less attention to the procedures of punitive damages of intellectual property,such as the object of proof,the burden of proof,the standard of proof,etc.At present,there are still many problems in the judicial application of punitive damages for intellectual property in China,which is incompatible with the requirements of improving the level of intellectual property protection in China.The author wrote four aspects of "Theoretical basis of punitive damages for intellectual property","The basic contents of the burden of proof of punitive damages for intellectual property","Judicial application of the burden of proof of punitive damages for intellectual property" and "Reference to the system of punitive damages for extraterritorial intellectual property ".The author designs the framework,carries out research,and finally puts forward improvement suggestions through the three aspects.The second chapter aims to explore the theoretical basis.The author expounds the origin,development,nature and function of punitive damages for intellectual property,and the necessity and justification of introducing punitive damages in the field of intellectual property.By discussing the development process,nature and function of punitive damages,determining the position and purpose of punitive damages of intellectual property.In the third chapter,the author summarizes the object of proof,the distribution of the burden of proof and the standard of proof.Trying to clarify the burden of proof of punitive damages for intellectual property from three aspects.In the fourth chapter,the author raises questions in three ways: the object of proof,the distribution of the burden of proof and the standard of proof.Specifying the object of proof is not enough,and the identification of intentional and serious circumstances needs to be further refined.It is difficult to determine the base and multiple of the punitive damages;The distribution of the burden of proof is inappropriate,the general distribution principle makes the burden of proof of obligee too heavy,the inversion of the legal burden of proof is narrow,and how to allocate the burden of proof at discretion needs to be determined;The standard of proof is too high,the ability of the right holder to produce evidence is low,and the obligee’s ability to provide evidence does not match.In the fifth chapter,the author gives some enlightenment to China by analyzing the judicial practice of intellectual property punitive damages in the United States,Canada and Germany.In terms of the amount of punitive damages for intellectual property rights,its considerations need to be further refined and the calculation of punitive damages should be refined;In respect of the proof standard of punitive damages amount,the superior proof standard shall be adopted to reduce the burden of proof of the parties concerned;The distribution of the burden of proof can be appropriately measured in terms of interests,which can balance the burden of proof of both parties.Based on the above research,the author believes that the burden of proof of punitive damages for intellectual property in China should be improved from three aspects:clarifying the object of proof,reasonably distributing the burden of proof and appropriately relaxing the standard of proof.Through the implementation of the above suggestions,we can promote the development of the punitive damages system of intellectual property rights and play the best legal and social effects.