台灣廠商與美國大廠專利訴訟之因應─3M控告中國砂輪公司案件為例

• Main Author: 楊謹瑋
• Other Authors: 劉江彬
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2007
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/51324320475399837636

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 科技管理研究所 === 95 === Taiwan corporations have always been at a disadvantage behind foreign companies when it comes to the protection of intellectual property rights. The media repeats the stereotype that most cases of patent infringements between foreign companies and Taiwan corporations end up with costly settlements from Taiwan corporations. Moreover, patent violations are widely regarded as problems exclusive to the high-tech industry and have nothing to do with traditional industries. The Kinik Company, one of the traditional industries, surprisingly prevailed in a patent litigation dispute with the world renown, 3M Corporation. Not only did the Kinik Company successfully claim a settlement fee from its opponent, but also that it garnered commercial benefits and recognition for challenging a foreign company on equal grounds. This research begins with the patent quality and the position of an industry in the industry value chain. This thesis will involve with domestic and international theories, secondary data, published studies and case interviews, analyzing what strategy the Kinik Company adopted in its patent litigation suit against the world renowned 3M Corporation. The study will provide useful reference for Taiwan corporations of similar situations. The major findings are as follows: 1. The higher quality of the patents an industry possesses, the more leverage the industry will possess in a patent litigation. However, a good Claim Interpretation can supplement patent quality inadequacies and gain grounds during patent litigation, thereby winning a favorable judgment. 2. The industry’s positions in the value chain closely correspomd to its inclination to proceed with the patent litigation. The higher position it is situated in the industry value chain, the greater the downstream corporations depend on its survival and the more support it will garner to proceed with patent litigation. 3. A corporation’s ultimate goal is to maximize profits, and so a corporation weighs more on commercial profits than social justice. When the cost of litigation falls below expected benefits, the corporation will pursue litigation. On the other hand, when the costs of litigation exceed expected benefits, corporations will forgo litigation. 4. Since the ultimate goal of a patent litigation is to fight for bargaining chips, the defendant must react immediately (putting forth counter claims, forming a strategic alliance, immediately switching production techniques, invalidating the opponent’s patent etc.) when being sued for patent violations, even if it believed that there was no violation at all. Never wait for judgments to react. 5. Choosing a favorable location and approach for a patent litigation will increase the odds as well as bargaining chips over commercial benefits. 6. A favorable judgment from a patent litigation improves an industry’s market share, share price and other financial indicators, especially for smaller companies. This research offers the following suggestions for the industries: 1. When small and medium enterprises are involved in patent litigations initiated by multinational corporations, they must make certain whether they did the violation in the first place, and whether they possess any patent that can be used for a counter claim. 2. Always choose professional and experienced lawyers and expert witnesses for patent litigations. Do not risk losing big over cost considerations. 3. Small and medium enterprises should also develop problem-solving skills for their customers. The only way to fight against a multinational patent litigation is to become indispensable within the industry value chain and to be backed by a powerful alliance. 4. React immediately to any patent litigation: to make settlements, to proceed with a counter claim, to invalidate the opponents’ patent, to switch production techniques, or form commercial alliances. Never wait for judgments. 5. Evaluate all patent litigations based on costs and benefits. Once the expected benefits become less than the costs of litigation, the decision makers must ponder whether to pursue litigation or not.