本文介紹了在中國進(jìn)行專利許可的一些注意事項(xiàng)，包括：1. 僅僅約定許可的類型是不足夠的，因?yàn)榉g的問題，各國對(duì)獨(dú)占許可、排他許可和普通許可的理解不同，所以還需要給出許可類型的定義；2. 協(xié)議中約定不質(zhì)疑條款需要慎重，可能會(huì)被認(rèn)定為無效條款，甚至引發(fā)壟斷糾紛；
3. 協(xié)議中無條件地約定所有的改進(jìn)都?xì)w許可人，可能被認(rèn)定為屬于壟斷技術(shù)而無效；
4. 許可協(xié)議在國知局備案可以對(duì)抗第三人；
感謝各位伙伴們的一路陪伴，祝大家新的一年虎嘯風(fēng)生、福星高照、萬事如意！
Licensing considerations for global companies in ChinaIn China, as in other jurisdictions, there have been many cases of foreign companies filing patent infringement claims against third parties, which lead to a so-called 'patent battle’. A common strategy to deal with patent infringement claims is to negotiate to obtain a patent licence. However, there are particular issues other than the common issues one may experience in other jurisdictions, this article raises some red flag issues for global companies signing licensing agreements in China.Type of patent licenceA patent licensing agreement should be formalised in written form. According to the degree of restriction on the licensee from high to low, the agreement can be divided into three categories, namely: exclusive licence, sole licence and general licence (獨(dú)占許可、排他許可and普通許可 in Chinese). The three types of licences have different legal effects, making it crucial that each is used correctly. This is especially the case when a licence is drafted in multiple languages. Quite often, parties mix up sole and exclusive licences. It is thus important to define the nature of the licence, rather than merely naming it as either a sole or exclusive licence, because translation issues or different governing laws may lead to different interpretations.An exclusive licence enables the patentee to license its invention to the licensee only for a specific period of time, and binds the licensor not to share the patent with anyone else. Even the patentee itself is not allowed to exploit the patent. A sole licence allows the patentee to license the patent to the licensee only, but the patentee itself is permitted to exploit the patent. A general or non-exclusive licence does not restrict the patentee to further exploit or license the patent to other parties.In terms of the legal standing required to assert the patent before a Chinese court for a patent infringement case, in practice- an exclusive licensee could unilaterally file a patent infringement lawsuit asserting the licensed patent;
- a sole licensee could file a patent infringement unilaterally under the circumstances that the patentee does not file the patent infringement lawsuit in relation to the licensed patent or assert the patent jointly with the patentee; and
- a general licensee needs to obtain specific authorisation from the patentee to assert the licensed patent, to file a patent infringement lawsuit.
Undertakings in the patent licence agreementTo further protect the patentee’s interests, some patentees may incorporate a no-challenge clause into the patent licence agreement to ensure that the licensee undertakes not to file an invalidation against the subject patent(s). However, there is a risk that the relevant clauses may be regarded as invalid under Chinese law, because they obstruct technological improvements or create a monopoly on technology.Entitlement to improvementsThe Civil Code of People's Republic of China specifies that a technology agreement that illegally monopolises technology or infringes another’s technological achievement is invalid. Therefore, a clause in a licensing agreement stipulating that all the improvements shall unconditionally be owned by the patentee/licensor without fair consideration may be deemed invalid. On the other hand, if the entitlement clause is not sufficiently specific or detailed, the general wording (eg, the improvement belongs to the party who makes a substantial contribution) is not helpful in an actual entitlement dispute in the future.Filing licence agreements at the China National Intellectual Property Office (CNIPA)Although filing the relevant licence agreement shall not affect its effectiveness, it will be useful for the licensee when it comes to enforcing its rights against third parties infringing the relevant patent. CNIPA’s endorsement would also enhance the role of the patentee/licensor.Exiting licence agreementsOne of the more common disputes between licensors and licensees is the early exit from the terms of a licence agreement. Careful thought must be given to the termination clause of a licence agreement – especially from the licensor’s perspective – so that the licensor’s patent will not be trapped in a deal that it has no way of getting out of. A reasonable long fixed term, with flexibility in terminating the agreement when it can, is recommended. All in all, in China – as elsewhere – Iicensing is a recommended route to preventing patent infringement and can be beneficial for both the licensor and licensee. The terms and conditions of the patent licensing agreement should be carefully drafted and reviewed by the legal professionals in all relevant jurisdictions to better protect the party’s rights and interests and avoid potential litigation. For additional insights, see “Crucial Clauses in Global IP Transactions and the Importance of Local Law Advice”.
跨國公司在中國的許可注意事項(xiàng)在中國，與其他司法管轄區(qū)一樣，外國公司向第三方提起專利侵權(quán)訴訟的案例很多，這導(dǎo)致了所謂的“專利戰(zhàn)”。處理專利侵權(quán)索賠的常見策略是通過談判獲得專利許可。然而，除了在其他司法管轄區(qū)可能遇到的常見問題之外，還有一些特殊問題，本文為在中國簽署許可協(xié)議的全球公司提出了一些警示信號(hào)。專利許可協(xié)議應(yīng)以書面形式正式確定。根據(jù)對(duì)被許可人的限制程度從高到低，協(xié)議可分為獨(dú)占許可、排他許可和普通許可三類。這三種許可證具有不同的法律效力，因此正確使用每種許可類型至關(guān)重要。當(dāng)以多種語言起草許可證時(shí)尤其如此。很多時(shí)候，各方混淆了獨(dú)占許可和排他許可。因此，重要的是定義許可的性質(zhì)，而不是僅僅將其命名為獨(dú)占許可或排他許可，因?yàn)榉g問題或不同的適用法律可能導(dǎo)致不同的解釋。獨(dú)占許可使專利權(quán)人僅在特定期限內(nèi)將其發(fā)明許可給被許可人，并約束許可人不得與其他任何人共享專利，甚至專利權(quán)人本身也不得利用該專利。排他許可允許專利權(quán)人僅將專利許可給被許可人，但允許專利權(quán)人自己利用專利。普通或非排他性許可并不限制專利權(quán)人進(jìn)一步利用或許可他人使用該專利。就專利侵權(quán)案件向中國法院主張專利所要求的法律地位而言，在實(shí)踐中獨(dú)占被許可人可以單方面提起專利侵權(quán)訴訟，主張專利被許可； 在專利權(quán)人不就被許可專利提起專利侵權(quán)訴訟或者與專利權(quán)人共同主張專利的情況下，排他被許可人可以單方面提起專利侵權(quán)訴訟；和 普通被許可人需要獲得專利權(quán)人的特定授權(quán)才能主張被許可的專利，才能提起專利侵權(quán)訴訟。
為進(jìn)一步保護(hù)專利權(quán)人的利益，部分專利權(quán)人可能會(huì)在專利許可協(xié)議中加入無異議條款，以確保被許可人承諾不對(duì)標(biāo)的專利提出無效宣告。但是，在中國法律下，相關(guān)條款可能會(huì)被視為無效，因?yàn)樗鼈冏璧K技術(shù)改進(jìn)或造成技術(shù)壟斷。《中華人民共和國民法典》規(guī)定，非法壟斷技術(shù)或者侵犯他人技術(shù)成果的技術(shù)協(xié)議無效。因此，許可協(xié)議中規(guī)定所有改進(jìn)應(yīng)無條件地歸專利權(quán)人/許可人所有且沒有公平考慮的條款可能被視為無效。另一方面，如果權(quán)利條款不夠具體或詳細(xì)，那么籠統(tǒng)的措辭（例如，改進(jìn)屬于做出實(shí)質(zhì)性貢獻(xiàn)的一方）對(duì)未來的實(shí)際權(quán)利爭議沒有幫助。向中國國家知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)局 (CNIPA) 提交許可協(xié)議盡管提交相關(guān)許可協(xié)議不影響其效力，但對(duì)于被許可人在針對(duì)侵犯相關(guān)專利的第三方行使權(quán)利時(shí)將是有用的。CNIPA 的認(rèn)可也將增強(qiáng)專利權(quán)人/許可人的作用。許可人和被許可人之間較常見的爭議之一是提前退出許可協(xié)議條款。必須仔細(xì)考慮許可協(xié)議的終止條款——尤其是從許可人的角度來看——以便許可人的專利不會(huì)陷入無法擺脫的交易中。建議一個(gè)合理的長期固定期限，并在可能的情況下靈活地終止協(xié)議。總而言之，在中國——和其他地方一樣——許可是防止專利侵權(quán)的推薦途徑，對(duì)許可人和被許可人都有利。專利許可協(xié)議的條款和條件應(yīng)由所有相關(guān)司法管轄區(qū)的法律專業(yè)人員仔細(xì)起草和審查，以更好地保護(hù)當(dāng)事人的權(quán)益并避免潛在的訴訟。如需更多見解，請(qǐng)參閱“全球知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)交易中的關(guān)鍵條款和當(dāng)?shù)胤山ㄗh的重要性”。Source:https://www./licensing-considerations-global-companies-in-china?utm_source=IAM%2BWeekly%253A%2BSamsung%2Bsued%2Bby%2Bformer%2BIP%2Bhead&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=IAM%2BWeekly
Each article is copyrighted to their original authors. The news is for informational purposes only and does not provide legal advice.大嶺IP律師團(tuán)隊(duì) 郝政宇律師現(xiàn)為北京觀韜中茂律師事務(wù)所合伙人、律師、專利代理師，郝律師畢業(yè)于西安電子科技大學(xué)，具有雷達(dá)系統(tǒng)軟硬件研發(fā)經(jīng)驗(yàn)，曾在國家知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)局從事多年專利審查和復(fù)審工作，此后在金杜律師事務(wù)所等機(jī)構(gòu)執(zhí)業(yè)多年，擅長處理技術(shù)類知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)案件，代理眾多企業(yè)應(yīng)對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)糾紛，部分案件入選知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)指導(dǎo)案例，擔(dān)任多家企業(yè)法律顧問，主編《專利分析》、《科創(chuàng)板企業(yè)上市知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)指南》等專著，團(tuán)隊(duì)成員全部畢業(yè)于知名院校，具有豐富的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)訴訟經(jīng)驗(yàn)。主要業(yè)務(wù)領(lǐng)域：專利侵權(quán)訴訟，專利無效和行政訴訟，商業(yè)秘密侵權(quán)訴訟，技術(shù)合同糾紛，商標(biāo)、著作權(quán)和不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭訴訟，企業(yè)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)法律顧問、科創(chuàng)板知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)輔導(dǎo)、科技成果轉(zhuǎn)化等。
|
