The Case of Zhang Zhongyi v. Hainan Changdalai Property Management Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Shunyitong Information Technology Co., Ltd. for Invention Patent Infringement
The Case of Zhang Zhongyi v. Hainan Changdalai Property Management Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Shunyitong Information Technology Co., Ltd. for Invention Patent Infringement
[Keywords]
Civil case, intellectual property, invention patent right, equivalent features
[Key points]
In the judgement of patent infringement, equivalent features are decided from the aspects of technical means employed, functions performed, technical effects achieved and the involvement of inventive work by technical staff skilled in the art.
[Applicable laws]
The Patent Law of the People’s Republic of China, Article 64 (1), the Interpretations of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Applications of Laws in the Trial of Patent Infringement Dispute Cases, Article 1 (1) & 7, Several Stipulations of the Supreme People’s Court on the Application of Laws in the Trial of Patent Dispute Cases, Article 13 (2).
[Basic facts]
Zhang Zhongyi is the owner of the invention patent “Barrier-Free Vehicle Toll Collection System and Method” (patent no. ZL201110288822.0). He accused that the parking system used in the carpark involved in this case infringed upon his patent. It has been verified that, with the patent involved in the case, the parking and tolling steps are as follows: (1) the computer system collects vehicle information, or, in case the system failed to read the license plate, the driver collects a parking card at the card dispenser, and the access barrier rises to let in the vehicle; (2) for vehicles of which the license plates are read successfully, the computer will upload their license plate and entrance information onto the server; (3) the driver logs in the cell phone app, and, if the license plate is already bound, a message will pop up, and the driver decides according to the message whether to authorize the deduction of toll fees. This toll deduction authorization is then sent to the server via the cell phone app, and the controller computer obtains on real-time basis the driver’s toll deduction authorization; (4) vehicles without toll deduction authorization are switched to manual toll collection. This process requires that the cell phone remains on throughout the app operation to ensure vehicle data comparison between app and server. The parking and tolling steps of the carpark involved: (1) for incoming vehicles of which the license plate is readable but not bound to jParking account, the driver enters jParking public account, inputs license plate number in “Short-Term Parking” menu, and pays toll fees by WeChat; or, the driver, upon entering the carpark, binds the license plate to jParking account, logs in jParking public account to enter license plate number in “Short-Term Parking” menu, and pays the toll fees by WeChat; or, the driver binds his license plate to jParking account before entering the carpark, logs in jParking public account after entering the carpark, and opens “Short-Term Parking” menu to pay the toll fees by WeChat. In this process, the driver having paid the toll fees in the carpark may turn off his cell phone, and he can still have his license plate recognized at the exit, and drive out of the carpark successfully; (2) for vehicles of which the license plates are unreadable, the driver may scan by WeChat the QR code at the entrance to obtain a virtual license plate and enter the carpark, and when he wants to leave the carpark, the driver scans again the QR code at the exit to display the toll fees and makes the payment on WeChat; or, he may log in jParking public account in the carpark, and input the virtual license plate number in “Short-Term Parking” menu, and make the payment on WeChat. When he arrives at the exit, he scans the QR code again to confirm payment.
[Judgement]
Hainan Free Trade Port Intellectual Property Court (“Hainan FTP IP Court”) made out the (2021) Qiong 73 Zhi Min Chu No. 7 Judgement: The claim of Zhang Zhongyi is rejected. After the judgement was announced, neither party lodged an appeal.
[Rationale]
Hainan FTP IP Court considers that the core differences of the two parking and tolling systems lie in two aspects: system hardware equipment and system program for the collection of toll fees. First, the differences in hardware equipment. Both systems monitor vehicle entry and exit and use it as tolling basis, but the technical means employed to realize the function above are different. Principal differences of the two systems: the patent system requires a parking card dispenser at entrance and a card reader at exit, and the carpark involved in the case uses a QR code. With the patent involved in the case, the driver collects a parking card at entrance and swipes it at exit, while the accused carpark allows the driver to complete the operation on cell phone app. The parking card mode and the QR code scanning mode are different in identification design. With parking card mode, the vehicle identity is stored in card, and has to be input into the carpark management system in advance. With the QR code scanning mode, the vehicle identity is associated to the WeChat account or any other app that is used to scan QR code, and no advance input of such information into the system is required. Meanwhile, the number of vehicle identities at a given moment of time, with the parking card mode, equals to the number of available parking cards, and is relatively fixed. With the QR code scanning mode, any WeChat account may be used for the identification of the parked vehicle, therefore, the number of identities that may be used at a given moment is not fixed. The two systems are not identical or equivalent in hardware equipment; second, differences in system program for the collection of toll fees. With the patent involved in this case, vehicles of which the license plate is no read successfully or is missing are directly switched to manual payment, and the driver swipes the parking card to make payment. The accused carpark does not have a manual payment design, and drivers of incoming and outgoing vehicles all use their cell phone apps to scan the QR code, and open payment app to make the payment instantly. In toll payment steps, the carpark is different from the patent in Step (7) as cited in Claim 3 and Claim 1. Based on the analysis above, the two system programs are different in payment method, therefore, the two technical schemes are neither identical nor equivalent.
