JUST ABOUT EQUIVALENT: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE DOCTRINES OF EQUIVALENTS IN THE UNITED STATES AND INTERNATIONAL JURISDICTIONS SHOWS THAT THE VARYING DOCTRINES ARE STRIKINGLY SIMILAR

摘要

In implementing the doctrine of equivalents, each jurisdiction seeks a rule that fairly balances the competing interests of the patentee and the public, and seeks to draft that rule in a way that provides public notice as to the metes and bounds of the patentee's right to exclude. Although the jurisdictions have developed facially distinct doctrines of equivalents, a comparative analysis shows that the combination of the way that a jurisdiction defines "equivalent" and the limitations placed on the available equivalents result in doctrines that are remarkably similar.