论文部分内容阅读
由于知识产权诉讼特殊性,使同一案件中常常出现既有举证责任倒置又有举证责任转移的情况,在实践中有效地区分两者,具有重要意义。侵犯知识产权有不同于侵犯有形物权或人身权的特殊性,因此在知识产权诉讼中应当考虑原告举证上的困难。但具体诉讼中的实际情况又不可能随时修改法律来弥补,因此,笔者认为,在未来的《民事诉讼法》的修改中应明确举证责任的正置规则,同时规定除正置规则外的其余情况均可以倒置。这样,便可以使法官在具体的知识产权案件中,合理地分配举证责任,以保证诉讼的公平。
Due to the particularity of the lawsuit of intellectual property, it is often of great importance to effectively distinguish between the two cases where both the burden of proof and the burden of proof are reversed in the same case. The infringement of intellectual property rights is different from the infringement of the tangible property rights or personal rights of the particularity, so the plaintiff should take into account the burden of proof in intellectual property litigation. However, the actual situation in a specific litigation can not be amended at any time to make up for the law. Therefore, I believe that in the future revision of the Code of Civil Procedure, a positive rule of burden of proof should be clearly stipulated and the rest The situation can be reversed. In this way, judges can be reasonably assigned the burden of proof in specific intellectual property cases to ensure the fairness of the litigation.