LED companies were investigated by the US 337, which allegedly infringed the patent rights of US LED companies. This situation shows that the patent problem of the LED industry is becoming more and more prominent. In fact, due to the rapid development of the LED industry, more and more enterprises are optimistic about it and try to speed up the development. This will easily lead to friction and conflict between enterprises, the most prominent of which is the dispute over technology patents. The lawsuit between Japan's Nichia Chemical Co., Ltd. and Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. has been continuously, and Chinese LED companies have been investigated by the US 337, and patent infringement cases have emerged one after another. In China, due to the large number of small LED enterprises, in the process of development, a small number of enterprises inevitably infringe the patents of large enterprises for profit. As the largest LED lighting company in Asia, Heshan Yinyu Lighting Co., Ltd. has been plagued by patent infringement and has to hold high legal weapons to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests and has achieved a series of results.
On September 18, Yinyu received the civil judgment of the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court (Case No. (2008) Suizhong Famin Sanchuzi No. 83), which determined: “The defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory It is argued that the alleged infringing product is produced according to its own patent, but the patent application date is May 24, 2005, and the plaintiff's patent application date is March 31, 2004. The plaintiff's patent belongs to the prior acquisition. Right, according to the principle that the right after the rights can not resist the prior patent, the defense of the defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory could not be established.........The defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory was not authorized by the plaintiff for production and operation. The purpose is that the products produced, sold and promised to be sold without authorization fall into the protection scope of the plaintiff's patent and constitute patent infringement. The court sentenced the defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of RMB 100,000. According to the judgment of the case, Liangli has no longer been able to produce and sell LED flexible neon lights. The previous production and sales activities were not legally authorized. Silver Rain has been fighting for more than two years of patent rights and finally got the law affirmed.
According to authoritative sources, Yin Yu v. Liang Lide’s patent infringement case, even if the other party appealed, the possibility of being rejected is almost 100%, because the Guangdong Higher People’s Court against the similar silver rain v. Shenzhen Hengguan Technology Co., Ltd. patent infringement The case has a final trial decision.
Yinyu accused Liang Li's LED flexible neon patent infringement case has caused widespread concern in the industry. Although the patent infringement case of Yinyu and Lianglide has come to an end, some of the problems are worth noting.
In the market, many dealers are often heard that certain manufacturers also have patents, and selling their products is not afraid of patents that infringe on silver rain. Why is Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory owning patents and still being infringed by the court? Through the content of the judgment of the case, it is not difficult to understand that the law protects the application for the prior patent. Since the LED flexible neon products involved in the case were pioneered by Yinyu, Yinyu Company had applied for a series of patent protections until the product was granted on January 17, 2007. For LED products of this type, the patents applied by others can be said to have been applied after Yinyu Company. The other patents can be authorized, mainly because the technical characteristics of different patents are different. The utility model and appearance patents are not subject to substantive examination, and the authorization is relatively easy, but the stability of patents is not high. If it is determined whether the infringement should be technically compared with the patent with the first application, the alleged infringing product falls within the scope of patent protection, which constitutes patent infringement.
Since 2006, Yinyu has filed a patent infringement lawsuit until September 18, 2008, which lasted two years. During this period, the patent invalidation procedure was experienced, and the core technology of Yinyu’s invention patent was maintained by the National Patent Reexamination Board. However, the patented product market has not had any positive impact on rights holders. Chen Xiangrong, an investor of Liangli De, was engaged in the business, technology and patent management of Yinyu Company for many years. During the litigation period, he did not stop the production and sales of alleged infringing products. It can be imagined that the economic loss of Yinyu Company is huge. Therefore, the protection of patents by law still needs to be further strengthened in order to maximize the protection of the rights and interests of patent owners.
The State Council has made decisions on building an innovative country, and enterprises should enhance their independent innovation capabilities. China is gradually approaching international practice in the protection of intellectual property laws and is increasing its protection. In Europe and the United States, patent infringement, whether it is a seller, a manufacturer, or a user, is very dangerous to the company once it is sued, and will bear expensive lawyer fees and huge compensation (with punitive), and will bring The loss of goodwill, even a lawsuit dragged down the enterprise. They generally do not dare to sell infringing products. In recent years, the law has gradually improved the patent protection system. Large enterprises and rights-conscious enterprises are increasingly using patent administrative complaints and judicial protection methods to crack down on infringers’ low-price dumping of patented products. The days will never last long.
The person in charge of the legal department of Yinyu Company said that in order to effectively stop the infringement, they will expand the scope of the sale to the sales, promise sales (advertising), use of infringing products, increase the amount of the claim, apply for evidence preservation, temporary injunction and other legal measures, Let the infringer lose huge losses once lost. "In the case of a precedent, the speed of future court decisions will be greatly accelerated. Within 20 years of the validity of the patent, we will sue the infringer to the bankruptcy." The person in charge said very seriously.
On September 18, Yinyu received the civil judgment of the Guangzhou Intermediate People's Court (Case No. (2008) Suizhong Famin Sanchuzi No. 83), which determined: “The defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory It is argued that the alleged infringing product is produced according to its own patent, but the patent application date is May 24, 2005, and the plaintiff's patent application date is March 31, 2004. The plaintiff's patent belongs to the prior acquisition. Right, according to the principle that the right after the rights can not resist the prior patent, the defense of the defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory could not be established.........The defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory was not authorized by the plaintiff for production and operation. The purpose is that the products produced, sold and promised to be sold without authorization fall into the protection scope of the plaintiff's patent and constitute patent infringement. The court sentenced the defendant Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory to compensate the plaintiff for economic losses of RMB 100,000. According to the judgment of the case, Liangli has no longer been able to produce and sell LED flexible neon lights. The previous production and sales activities were not legally authorized. Silver Rain has been fighting for more than two years of patent rights and finally got the law affirmed.
According to authoritative sources, Yin Yu v. Liang Lide’s patent infringement case, even if the other party appealed, the possibility of being rejected is almost 100%, because the Guangdong Higher People’s Court against the similar silver rain v. Shenzhen Hengguan Technology Co., Ltd. patent infringement The case has a final trial decision.
Yinyu accused Liang Li's LED flexible neon patent infringement case has caused widespread concern in the industry. Although the patent infringement case of Yinyu and Lianglide has come to an end, some of the problems are worth noting.
In the market, many dealers are often heard that certain manufacturers also have patents, and selling their products is not afraid of patents that infringe on silver rain. Why is Guangzhou Tianhe Liangli Electronic Lighting Factory owning patents and still being infringed by the court? Through the content of the judgment of the case, it is not difficult to understand that the law protects the application for the prior patent. Since the LED flexible neon products involved in the case were pioneered by Yinyu, Yinyu Company had applied for a series of patent protections until the product was granted on January 17, 2007. For LED products of this type, the patents applied by others can be said to have been applied after Yinyu Company. The other patents can be authorized, mainly because the technical characteristics of different patents are different. The utility model and appearance patents are not subject to substantive examination, and the authorization is relatively easy, but the stability of patents is not high. If it is determined whether the infringement should be technically compared with the patent with the first application, the alleged infringing product falls within the scope of patent protection, which constitutes patent infringement.
Since 2006, Yinyu has filed a patent infringement lawsuit until September 18, 2008, which lasted two years. During this period, the patent invalidation procedure was experienced, and the core technology of Yinyu’s invention patent was maintained by the National Patent Reexamination Board. However, the patented product market has not had any positive impact on rights holders. Chen Xiangrong, an investor of Liangli De, was engaged in the business, technology and patent management of Yinyu Company for many years. During the litigation period, he did not stop the production and sales of alleged infringing products. It can be imagined that the economic loss of Yinyu Company is huge. Therefore, the protection of patents by law still needs to be further strengthened in order to maximize the protection of the rights and interests of patent owners.
The State Council has made decisions on building an innovative country, and enterprises should enhance their independent innovation capabilities. China is gradually approaching international practice in the protection of intellectual property laws and is increasing its protection. In Europe and the United States, patent infringement, whether it is a seller, a manufacturer, or a user, is very dangerous to the company once it is sued, and will bear expensive lawyer fees and huge compensation (with punitive), and will bring The loss of goodwill, even a lawsuit dragged down the enterprise. They generally do not dare to sell infringing products. In recent years, the law has gradually improved the patent protection system. Large enterprises and rights-conscious enterprises are increasingly using patent administrative complaints and judicial protection methods to crack down on infringers’ low-price dumping of patented products. The days will never last long.
The person in charge of the legal department of Yinyu Company said that in order to effectively stop the infringement, they will expand the scope of the sale to the sales, promise sales (advertising), use of infringing products, increase the amount of the claim, apply for evidence preservation, temporary injunction and other legal measures, Let the infringer lose huge losses once lost. "In the case of a precedent, the speed of future court decisions will be greatly accelerated. Within 20 years of the validity of the patent, we will sue the infringer to the bankruptcy." The person in charge said very seriously.
Car Fuse Box,Fuse Box 12V,Fuse Box Fuse,Anl Fuse Holder
Dongguan Andu Electronic Co., Ltd. , https://www.idoconnector.com