U.S. PATENTS IN THE WAKE OF CHANGES TO THE DOCTRINE OF EQUIVALENTS

摘要

In considering a balance between the notice function of patents (the need to fully disclose inventions to the public) and the doctrine of equivalents protection of patents (the need to reward such disclosure by preventing copyists from making insubstantial changes to avoid patents), the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly favored the latter. The U.S. Supreme Court believes the value of patents must not be diminished by copyists even if the cost is that the public will not have absolute certainty as to what is covered by a patent. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, on the other hand, in recent cases including its Festo Ⅰ decision, has attempted to elevate the notice function by effectively eliminating the doctrine of equivalents. The resulting uproar in the patent community and by some inventors has recently been quieted by the U.S. Supreme Court's Festo Ⅱ decision this year overturning aspects of Festo Ⅰ. The history of the doctrine of equivalents through Festo Ⅰ and the Supreme Court's Festo Ⅱ decision and its practical ramifications, are the subject of this paper.