Please tell me how to respond to a patent dispute…

Hello. I am a patent specialist attorney at Daeryun Law Firm.

If a criminal complaint has been filed for patent infringement, you should consider that you have entered a stage where you must review not only simple patent dispute response but also the survival of the company's services and the possibility of criminal liability.

However, just because a complaint has been filed does not mean that patent infringement will immediately be recognized or lead to punishment.

For patent infringement to be established, the service or function in question must include the components described in the patent claim scope as is, or even if the components are partially different, must constitute an 'equivalent relationship' where the problem-solving principles and effects are substantially identical.

That is, just because the function appears similar in appearance is insufficient. The key judgment criterion is whether the technology implementation method, operating principle, and information processing structure are also identical.

In the case of mobile services, differences in internal logic such as data collection methods, user input, information processing flow, and automation often become decisive factors in infringement judgment.

Additionally, for criminal liability for patent infringement to become an issue, it is insufficient to merely implement a function similar to the patent. Intent must be recognized in that the patent was implemented while being aware of its existence.

Therefore, at the investigation stage, a response is needed that structurally explains that there was no intentional imitation or infringement awareness through materials referenced when planning the function, internal meeting materials and development history, whether external technology was referenced, and the circumstances and purpose of function improvement.

Indirect infringement claimed by competitors is recognized only when it falls under "items used only for the practice of the patent" as prescribed in the Patent Act, and structures limited to information provision, user convenience functions, and software implementation such as mobile services or app functions often do not meet the indirect infringement requirements premised on manufacturing and production.

Therefore, regarding indirect infringement claims, a strategy is needed that refutes whether legal requirements are met, focusing on whether the function is (1) a configuration premised on the realization of a specific patent and (2) a means with exclusivity that cannot be used for other purposes.

Refutation centered on legal principles regarding infringement and indirect infringement requirements under the Patent Act must be conducted together to correct misunderstandings of investigative agencies and block risks leading to service suspension or criminal liability.

Patent disputes related to mobile services can occur even with minor function updates and can affect business survival depending on the initial response direction.

Our firm provides one-stop response services with related legal experts including patent specialist attorneys and patent attorneys with experience working at the Patent Office.

If you have been notified of a complaint, rather than judging that it is already too late, we recommend organizing your response strategy with the help of a patent specialist attorney who understands both technology and legal principles from the early stages of investigation.