【双语播报】获赔535万元，法雷奥车前雾灯发明专利侵权案分析

法雷奥照明比利时公司-涉车前雾灯总成发明专利侵权案分析（王坤哲）.mp3

Recently, the Shanghai Intellectual PropertyCourt (hereinafter referred to as the Shanghai IP Court) made a first instance judgment on a dispute over the infringement of an invention patent for front fog lamp assembly. The plaintiff, in this case, is Valeo Lighting Belgium, a world-famous auto parts manufacturing company. A lamp company in Zhuhai and an automobile sales company in Shanghai were ordered to stop the infringement, with the former compensating the plaintiff for the economic loss of 5 million RMB and a reasonable expenditure of 350,000 RMB.

近日，上海知识产权法院（以下简称上海知产法院）对这起涉车前雾灯总成发明专利侵权纠纷案作出一审判决，判令珠海某车灯公司、上海某汽车销售公司停止侵权，珠海某车灯公司赔偿原告法雷奥公司经济损失500万元及合理开支35万元。本案的原告为世界知名汽车配件制造公司法雷奥照明比利时公司。

The Shanghai IP Court affirmed that the technical solution used by the alleged infringing product fell within the protection scope of the patent right involved, and both defendants shall bear civil liability for ceasing the infringement and compensating for losses in accordance with the law. In this case, the plaintiff claimed to calculate the damages based on the defendant's profits. Because the defendant, a lamp company in Zhuhai, sells a large number of products and there is no evidence to prove that the company is engaged in infringement, the business profit shall be taken into account when determining the amount of compensation. Since the evidence on file cannot reflect the business profit of the alleged infringing product, the infringing profit of the lamp company in Zhuhai could not be directly calculated. According to the relevant provisions of the patent law, the shanghai IP Court adopted a legal compensation method to determine the amount of compensation, in this case, comprehensively considering the situation of the involved patent, the sales quantity, and sales amount of the alleged infringing products, the gross profit margin and business profit of the defendant company, the gross profit margin of the products of companies in the same industry, the contribution rate of the patent involved in the alleged infringing products, and the period of time during which the infringement took place, etc.

上海知产法院认定被诉侵权产品使用的技术方案落入涉案专利权的保护范围，两被告依法均应承担停止侵权、赔偿损失的民事责任。原告在本案中主张以被告获利计算损害赔偿，因被告珠海某车灯公司销售产品众多，且并无证据证明被告珠海某车灯公司系以侵权为业，故在确定赔偿数额时应以营业利润作为考量因素。由于在案证据并不能反映被诉侵权产品的营业利润，故不能直接计算被告珠海某车灯公司的侵权获利。根据专利法的相关规定，上海知产法院采用法定赔偿方法确定本案的赔偿数额，综合考虑涉案专利情况、被诉侵权产品销售数量及销售金额、被告公司毛利率及营业利润、同行业公司产品毛利率、涉案专利在被诉侵权产品中的贡献率、被告的侵权期间等，酌定本案的赔偿数额。

In the trial of the first instance, the shanghai IP Court ruled that the defendants, a lamp company in Zhuhai and an automobile sales company in Shanghai, shall stop the infringement. The lamp company in Zhuhai was sentenced to compensate the plaintiff, Valeo LightingBelgium, 5 million RMB for the economic loss and 350,000 RMB for reasonable expenses such as lawyer fees, notarization fees, and product purchase fees.

The new patent law, which came into effect on June 1, 2021, raised the upper limit of legal compensation for patent infringement damages from 1 million RMB to 5 million RMB. This case is the first case in which the Shanghai IP Court applied for the maximum compensation after the implementation of the new patent law, which shows that the Chinese government has further strengthened the protection of the IP rights of foreign enterprises.

感谢各位的聆听!

本期双语播报员：三友-王坤哲