作者ides13 (鬼)
看板Patent
标题[问题] 英文“may”的法律意思？
时间Thu Apr 5 16:41:16 2012
请教各位先进：
35 U.S.C. 287中：“may” give notice to the public
英文中的“may”是什麽意思？和中文的“应”是一样的吗？
中文法律用语中的“得”和“应”分别是什麽意思？有差别吗？
专 利法第 79条前段规定：「发明专利权人应在专利物品或其包装上标示专利证书号码，
并得要求被授权人或特许实施权人为之；其未附加标示者，不得请求损害赔偿。但侵 权
人明知或有事实足证其可得而知为专利物品者，不在此限。」
35 U.S.C. 287 Limitation on damages and other remedies; marking and notice.
(a) Patentees, and persons making, offering for sale, or selling within the
United States any patented article for or under them, or importing any
patented article into the United States, may give notice to the public that
the same is patented, either by fixing thereon the word "patent" or the
abbreviation "pat.", together with the number of the patent, or when, from
the character of the article, this cannot be done, by fixing to it, or to the
package wherein one or more of them is contained, a label containing a like
notice. In the event of failure so to mark, no damages shall be recovered by
the patentee in any action for infringement, except on proof that the
infringer was notified of the infringement and continued to infringe
thereafter, in which event damages may be recovered only for infringement
occurring after such notice. Filing of an action for infringement shall
constitute such notice.
--
※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 220.134.238.126
1F：→ VanDeLord:没记错: should "应", may"得" 04/05 16:43
2F：→ piglauhk:can, may = 得 = 可 = 选择性地 04/05 16:43
3F：→ piglauhk:shall, should = 应 = 必然地 04/05 16:44
4F：→ piglauhk:参酌看看 04/05 16:46
5F：推 piglauhk:专§79系用於规范故意侵权的部份 印象中100.年新法有对 04/05 17:00
6F：→ piglauhk:此进行更明确的规范 应该是100条上下 参酌看看 ^_^ 04/05 17:01
7F：→ ides13:如果解释成“可”或“选择性地”的话，那为什麽要规定？ 04/05 22:54
8F：→ ides13:“可”的用字是有或没有皆行，这样的法律有什麽意义？ 04/05 22:54
9F：→ forcomet:怎麽会没意义？你有去看过法条吗？ 04/05 23:26
10F：推 piglauhk:"未提及" 跟 "予许其选择" 差在哪? 这比较像是国文问题XD 04/06 09:05
11F：→ ides13:後来想想，“得”应该是指最低限度的负任。 04/06 22:29
12F：推 priorart:may跟"得"在两国专利法中其实起相同作用 即请求damage的 04/06 23:23
13F：→ priorart:前提 只是台湾某些实务又认专利公报本身即具notice效果故 04/06 23:24
14F：→ priorart:较紊乱 美国则清楚 所以我们会特别看asserted claim是否 04/06 23:26
15F：→ priorart:只有device claim来评估damage威胁性 04/06 23:27
16F：→ ides13:谢p大指点，不过最後两句还不是很清楚，能否再明示？谢谢。 04/06 23:31
17F：推 priorart:起诉本身亦具notice效果 亦即广义notice共包括marking, 04/06 23:45
18F：→ priorart:oral/written notice,litigation三种形式 04/06 23:47