本文主要通過Psc Computer Products, Inc與Foxconn International, Inc. And Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., Ltd一案的爭議，討論捐獻原則(disclosure-dedication)的解釋。
即，若公開且為明確要求保護的技術特征，滿足技術特征特定化以及本領域的普通技術人員可預測，則應當被認定為捐獻給公眾。
本案的涉案專利為“Cam-Type Retainer Clip for Heat Sinks for Electronic Integrated Circuits” 一種用于電子集成電路的散熱器的凸輪型固定夾，其權屬為PSC。
本發(fā)明的權利要求1為
一種安裝在模塊中用于電子半導體器件提供冷卻的散熱器組件，該模塊具有與之固定裝置，并且該散熱器包括水平底表面和導熱部分，所述導熱部分與位于半導體器件上表面，并且上表面上至少有形成一個通道的翅片結構
一種改進實施例，所述散熱器保持夾包括：若干細長的彈性金屬帶，所述金屬帶設置于任一所述通道之中;所述任一金屬帶在的一端設置有與固定裝置連接的接合裝置，所述金屬帶非應力狀態(tài)下，其中心部分在所述散熱器底座的上表面為非接觸狀態(tài);以及凸輪型固定夾，其軸承安裝在金屬帶中心位置……(后略)
In a heat sink assembly providing cooling to an electronic semiconductor device wherein the device is mounted in a module, the module having means for engagement with a retainer clip, and the heat sink having a generally flat bottom surface and heat conducting engagement with the semiconductor device upper surface and a plurality of fins on the upper surface defining at least one channel, the improvement comprising a heat sink retainer clip including:
an elongated, resilient metal strap received in one of the channels of the heat sink having holding means at each end engaging the engagement means on the module, the center portion of the strap spaced a predetermined distance above the upper surface of the heat sink base when the strap is not in tension; and a cam-type latch pivotally mounted in the center portion of the strap and including a cam with a bearing surface……
法院根據(jù)相應的比較，認為彈性金屬帶與凸輪型固定夾為本發(fā)明的核心部分，
即，本案的技術核心在于，通過不同的材料對其進行制造則是區(qū)分產(chǎn)品的關鍵所在。
One way that vendors can differentiate their products is by manufacturing these clip parts out of different materials.
與被控侵權專利(權屬Foxconn)對比后，其差異為：PSC的選用的材料是金屬的，而Foxconn的選用的材料是塑料的。
PSC's clip is made of metal, while Foxconn's clip is made of plastic.
但是Foxconn提出，PSC將塑料這一技術特征作為公開內(nèi)容向公眾提供，F(xiàn)oxconn不構成侵權。
Foxconn, in turn, argued that PSC had dedicated clips with plastic parts to the public, and moved for summary judgment of non-infringement on that ground.
即在說明書中闡述了，“這種彈性金屬帶應當由具有一定彈性應力的金屬制成，包括但不限于不銹鋼等，但是其余金屬也可以被用作該金屬帶的原材料”。以及“其余的現(xiàn)有技術設備采用塑料或者其他金屬部分那就可能會造成更加高昂的成本”。
In reaching that conclusion, the district court noted the specific language in the written description stating that: "the elongated strap is made of a resilient metal such as stainless steel although other resilient materials may be suitable for the strap," '239 patent, col. 4. ll. 49-51 (emphasis added), and that "other prior art devices use molded plastic and/or metal parts that must be cast or forged which again are more expensive metal forming operations." Id., col. 2. ll. 39-41 (emphasis added).
即，權利要求沒有保護“plastic”，而采用了“metal”這一具體的描述。
According to the district court, these passages demonstrate that, at the time that the inventor applied for the '239 patent,he knew that other materials, including plastic, could be used to make "parts" of his invention, and that the inventor asserted the metal design of the '239 patent as an improvement over the prior art.The '239 patent, however, does not claim plastic parts, but instead includes an explicit "metal" limitation. The district court applied Johnson to conclude that the disclosure of unclaimed materials in the '239 patent's written description dedicated those materials to the public. This dedication prevented PSC from using the doctrine of equivalents to extend the scope of its patent claims to include plastic.
通過前述這一點，法院PSC以書面描寫并公開了采用塑料制成的技術特征，但是并未將其納入權利要求的保護范圍，這就意味著其將塑料這一技術特征捐獻給了公眾。因此Foxconn不會被因為使用了使用塑料這一捐獻給公眾的技術，而被視為等同侵權。
The district court here determined that because the written description of the '239 patent disclosed clips made of plastic parts without claiming plastic, it had dedicated plastic clips to the public. Foxconn, therefore, could not infringe the '239 patent by equivalents because its plastic clips used materials in the public domain.
對于這一理論的合理性
專利這一公開換取保護的規(guī)則能夠激勵專利權人去劃定他們認為可專利的最廣泛的權利要求，并將這些廣泛的權利要求提交給專利商標局進行審查。公開這一專利的重要公共通知功能，通過這種機制，公眾了解哪些創(chuàng)新是所要求的發(fā)明的主題，哪些是在公共領域。因此，披露-奉獻規(guī)則既公平又符合公共利益。
捐獻原則滿足以下兩個條件：(1)技術特征特定化，有且只有明確作為某一權利要求聲明保護的化合物或物質(zhì)的替代物在說明書中被特定化披露時，才能視為被捐獻。(2)本領域的普通技術人員可預測，通過說明書就可以理解該技術特征已被披露，并且權利要求書中并未對該技術特征明確保護。
中企檢測認證網(wǎng)提供iso體系認證機構查詢，檢驗檢測、認證認可、資質(zhì)資格、計量校準、知識產(chǎn)權貫標一站式行業(yè)企業(yè)服務平臺。中企檢測認證網(wǎng)為檢測行業(yè)相關檢驗、檢測、認證、計量、校準機構，儀器設備、耗材、配件、試劑、標準品供應商，法規(guī)咨詢、標準服務、實驗室軟件提供商提供包括品牌宣傳、產(chǎn)品展示、技術交流、新品推薦等全方位推廣服務。這個問題就給大家解答到這里了，如還需要了解更多專業(yè)性問題可以撥打中企檢測認證網(wǎng)在線客服13550333441。為您提供全面檢測、認證、商標、專利、知識產(chǎn)權、版權法律法規(guī)知識資訊，包括商標注冊、食品檢測、第三方檢測機構、網(wǎng)絡信息技術檢測、環(huán)境檢測、管理體系認證、服務體系認證、產(chǎn)品認證、版權登記、專利申請、知識產(chǎn)權、檢測法、認證標準等信息，中企檢測認證網(wǎng)為檢測認證商標專利從業(yè)者提供多種檢測、認證、知識產(chǎn)權、版權、商標、專利的轉讓代理查詢法律法規(guī)，咨詢輔導等知識。
本文內(nèi)容整合網(wǎng)站：中國政府網(wǎng)、百度百科、搜狗百科、360百科、最高人民法院、知乎、市場監(jiān)督總局 、國家知識產(chǎn)權局、國家商標局
免責聲明：本文部分內(nèi)容根據(jù)網(wǎng)絡信息整理，文章版權歸原作者所有。向原作者致敬！發(fā)布旨在積善利他，如涉及作品內(nèi)容、版權和其它問題，請跟我們聯(lián)系刪除并致歉！
