15件！最高法發布第四批種業知識產權司法保護典型案例
為充(chong)分發(fa)(fa)揮典(dian)型案(an)例指引(yin)作用，加強(qiang)種(zhong)業(ye)知識產權保(bao)護(hu)，以高水平司(si)法(fa)推(tui)動(dong)種(zhong)業(ye)創新和(he)高質量(liang)發(fa)(fa)展，為加快推(tui)進種(zhong)業(ye)振興(xing)和(he)維護(hu)國家(jia)糧(liang)食安全提供(gong)更加有力(li)司(si)法(fa)服(fu)務和(he)保(bao)障，最高人民法(fa)院(yuan)(yuan)從全國法(fa)院(yuan)(yuan)過(guo)去(qu)一年審結案(an)件中評選出第四批人民法(fa)院(yuan)(yuan)種(zhong)業(ye)知識產權司(si)法(fa)保(bao)護(hu)典(dian)型案(an)例15件，現予發(fa)(fa)布。
本次發布的典型案例具有如下三個特點：一是案例類型較為全面。涉及種業知識產權保護中民事、行政和刑事三大類案件，其中民事侵權及合同案例13件，品種權授權行政案例1件，刑事案例1件。二是品種類型較為廣泛。所涉植物品種涵蓋面較廣，既有小麥、水稻、玉米等主要糧食作物，也有辣椒、甜瓜、大豆等經濟作物(wu)。三是訴爭利益較大。案(an)件所涉(she)品種的(de)經濟價值(zhi)較大，8件案(an)例訴爭標的(de)額超過百萬元(yuan)，個別(bie)案(an)件更是高達數億元(yuan)，受到(dao)業內廣泛關注。
本次發布(bu)的(de)典型案(an)例體現了如下司法導向：
一是堅持嚴格保護。加大刑事司法保護力度，提高法律威懾力。在涉“沃玉3號”玉米品種父母本侵犯商業秘密罪案中，對違反保密約定對外銷售雜交種親本繁殖材料的行為以侵犯商業秘密罪定罪量刑并處罰金，加大涉種子犯罪懲治力度。積極依法適用懲罰性賠償制度，切實提高侵權代價。2件案例適用懲罰性賠償。在“丹玉405號”玉米植物新品種侵權案中，明確懲罰性賠償基數難以精確計算時可以基于在案證據裁量確定，二審據此全額支持權利人300 萬元賠償訴訟請求。用足用好法律手段和裁量空間，確保品種權人利益得到充分保障。在“利合328”玉米植物新品種侵權案中，對明知特定親本組合系用于生產雜交種授權品種仍予以銷售的行為認定為幫助侵害雜交種品種權，有效延伸雜交種品種權的維權環節。在“登海605”玉米植物新品種侵權案中判令將公司作為(wei)(wei)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)工(gong)具的(de)公(gong)司實際控制(zhi)人與公(gong)司承擔連帶責任，在(zai)“萬糯2000”玉米(mi)植物(wu)新品種(zhong)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)案中(zhong)判(pan)令組(zu)織(zhi)主(zhu)導多人生(sheng)產、繁殖的(de)組(zu)織(zhi)者(zhe)(zhe)對(dui)被組(zu)織(zhi)者(zhe)(zhe)實施的(de)全(quan)部被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行為(wei)(wei)承擔相應責任，最大(da)限度保(bao)障權(quan)(quan)利(li)人利(li)益。在(zai)“奧黛(dai)麗”辣(la)椒植物(wu)新品種(zhong)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)案中(zhong)，以(yi)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)人與品種(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人之間(jian)的(de)事前約定(ding)作為(wei)(wei)確定(ding)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)賠償的(de)重要參(can)考(kao)，破解侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)賠償舉證(zheng)難題(ti)。在(zai)以(yi)判(pan)決結(jie)案的(de)11件(jian)(jian)侵(qin)害品種(zhong)權(quan)(quan)民事案件(jian)(jian)中(zhong)，4件(jian)(jian)賠償請求(qiu)得(de)到全(quan)額(e)支持，4件(jian)(jian)獲賠數(shu)額(e)超百萬元。
二是(shi)堅持能動履職(zhi)。活用(yong)善用(yong)調(diao)解和(he)(he)解手段解決糾紛，實(shi)現(xian)雙贏(ying)多(duo)贏(ying)共(gong)贏(ying)。在“五山(shan)絲(si)苗”水稻植物新品(pin)種(zhong)實(shi)施許可合同(tong)及侵權兩案(an)中，涉案(an)企(qi)業均為種(zhong)業頭部(bu)企(qi)業且(qie)有長期合作基(ji)礎，審理(li)法院努力促成雙方當事人(ren)和(he)(he)解，徹底(di)解決宿怨(yuan)，實(shi)現(xian)共(gong)贏(ying)發展。
三是堅持協(xie)同提(ti)升(sheng)。積極推進民事(shi)司法(fa)保(bao)(bao)護和(he)(he)行(xing)(xing)政執法(fa)保(bao)(bao)護協(xie)同，提(ti)升(sheng)整體(ti)保(bao)(bao)護效果(guo)。在“遠(yuan)科105”玉米植(zhi)物新(xin)品(pin)(pin)種侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)案中(zhong)，基于當地(di)農(nong)業(ye)行(xing)(xing)政部門對種子(zi)的抽樣、送檢和(he)(he)現場勘驗記(ji)錄，依(yi)法(fa)認定侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)人“真假混賣”逃避監管的事(shi)實，據此加(jia)大判賠(pei)力度。在“菏(he)豆33號”大豆植(zhi)物新(xin)品(pin)(pin)種侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)案中(zhong)，基于種子(zi)生(sheng)產經營者(zhe)辦理(li)《產地(di)檢疫合(he)格證(zheng)》記(ji)載的產量(liang)推算侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)規模，確(que)保(bao)(bao)權(quan)(quan)利人得到(dao)足額(e)賠(pei)償。監督支(zhi)持品(pin)(pin)種權(quan)(quan)授權(quan)(quan)確(que)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為，促進提(ti)高授權(quan)(quan)質量(liang)。在“農(nong)麥168”小麥植(zhi)物新(xin)品(pin)(pin)種授權(quan)(quan)案中(zhong)，明(ming)確(que)授權(quan)(quan)程序(xu)中(zhong)DUS測試地(di)點的確(que)定應當根據說明(ming)書(shu)中(zhong)對品(pin)(pin)種適于生(sheng)長的區域、環境等的記(ji)載，結合(he)品(pin)(pin)種類型及育種過程和(he)(he)方法(fa)綜合(he)作出認定，以(yi)能夠保(bao)(bao)證(zheng)品(pin)(pin)種的性狀得到(dao)充分表達為標準，為相關(guan)授權(quan)(quan)程序(xu)作出明(ming)確(que)司法(fa)指引。
《人民法院種業知識產權司法保護典型案例（第四批）》目錄
案例1.“五山絲苗”水稻植物新品種實施許可合同、侵權兩案【某農業高科技股(gu)份有限公司(si)與(yu)安徽某種業股(gu)份有限公司(si)植(zhi)物新品種權(quan)(quan)實施許可(ke)合同、侵害(hai)植(zhi)物新品種權(quan)(quan)糾(jiu)紛兩(liang)案】
案例2.“丹(dan)玉405號”玉米(mi)植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品種(zhong)侵(qin)權案【遼寧某(mou)種(zhong)業科技(ji)公(gong)司與凌(ling)海某(mou)種(zhong)業科技(ji)公(gong)司、青島某(mou)農技(ji)公(gong)司侵(qin)害植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品種(zhong)權糾紛】
案例3.“奧(ao)黛麗”辣(la)椒(jiao)植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種侵(qin)權案【某種苗北京公(gong)司(si)(si)與赤峰某農業科(ke)技公(gong)司(si)(si)、盤山縣某農資經銷店侵(qin)害(hai)植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種權糾(jiu)紛】
案(an)(an)例4.“菏(he)豆(dou)33號”大豆(dou)植物(wu)新品種(zhong)侵權案(an)(an)【山東某種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)科(ke)技公司與河南(nan)某種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公司、舞鋼某農(nong)業(ye)(ye)科(ke)技公司、永城市某農(nong)貿銷售部侵害植物(wu)新品種(zhong)權糾紛(fen)】
案例5.“利合(he)328”玉米植物新品種(zhong)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)案【恒基利某(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)公司與(yu)內蒙(meng)古瑞某(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)公司、翁牛特旗(qi)某(mou)種(zhong)子門(men)市侵(qin)害植物新品種(zhong)權(quan)(quan)糾(jiu)紛】
案(an)例(li)6.“登海605”玉米植物新(xin)(xin)品種(zhong)侵權案(an)【山(shan)東某種(zhong)業(ye)股份(fen)有(you)限公司(si)與河(he)南某農(nong)業(ye)科技(ji)有(you)限公司(si)、劉某堂侵害植物新(xin)(xin)品種(zhong)權糾紛(fen)】
案例7.“萬(wan)糯(nuo)2000”玉(yu)米(mi)植物(wu)新品(pin)種侵權案【河北(bei)某(mou)種業有限公司與(yu)安某(mou)成侵害植物(wu)新品(pin)種權糾(jiu)紛】
案例8.“遠(yuan)科105”玉米植物新品種侵權案【三某(mou)種業公司與新疆九某(mou)農業發(fa)展公司等侵害植物新品種權糾紛】
案(an)例(li)9.“先玉335”玉米(mi)植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品種侵權案(an)【敦煌某(mou)良種公司與吉林某(mou)種業公司、樺甸某(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)店侵害植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品種權糾紛】
案(an)例(li)10.“中科(ke)發5號”水稻植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)(xin)品種侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)案(an)【五常某種業(ye)公司與前(qian)郭縣某種業(ye)公司、前(qian)郭縣某農(nong)資商店(dian)侵(qin)害(hai)植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)(xin)品種權(quan)(quan)糾紛】
案例11.“博洋(yang)9”甜瓜植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)侵(qin)權(quan)案【天津(jin)某種(zhong)(zhong)業公司與(yu)壽光市(shi)某種(zhong)(zhong)苗公司、劉某勝(sheng)植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)臨時保護期使用(yong)費糾紛(fen)及侵(qin)害植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)糾紛(fen)】
案例12.“澳(ao)甜糯75”玉米(mi)植物新品(pin)種侵權(quan)案【天津市(shi)某澳(ao)種子有限(xian)公司(si)與重慶優某升農(nong)業(ye)發展(zhan)有限(xian)公司(si)、南京某田(tian)種業(ye)有限(xian)公司(si)、合川區某輝(hui)農(nong)資(zi)經(jing)營(ying)部侵害植物新品(pin)種權(quan)糾紛】
案例13.“濟麥(mai)22”小麥(mai)植(zhi)物新(xin)品(pin)種合同糾紛案【山東某良種有限公司(si)(si)與聊城某種業有限公司(si)(si)植(zhi)物新(xin)品(pin)種實施許可合同糾紛】
案例14.“農麥168”小麥植物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)授權案【江蘇神(shen)某種(zhong)(zhong)業科技(ji)公司與農業農村部(bu)植物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)復(fu)審(shen)委員會(hui)植物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)申請(qing)駁回復(fu)審(shen)行政糾紛】
案(an)例15.涉(she)“沃(wo)玉3號(hao)”玉米(mi)品種父母(mu)本侵犯商業秘密罪(zui)案(an)
案例一
“五山絲苗”水稻植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)實(shi)施(shi)許可合同(tong)、侵權(quan)兩案【某(mou)農(nong)業高科技股份有(you)限(xian)公司與(yu)安徽某(mou)種(zhong)業股份有(you)限(xian)公司植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)實(shi)施(shi)許可合同(tong)、侵害植(zhi)物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)糾紛兩案】
一審：安徽省高(gao)級人民法院（2022）皖(wan)民初2號(hao)、（2022）皖(wan)民初3號(hao)
【基本案情】
廣東(dong)某(mou)(mou)(mou)水(shui)(shui)稻研究所系(xi)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”水(shui)(shui)稻植(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)人(ren)。2011年(nian)10月(yue)(yue)24日，廣東(dong)某(mou)(mou)(mou)水(shui)(shui)稻研究所授(shou)予安徽某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”水(shui)(shui)稻植(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)除廣東(dong)省區(qu)域外的(de)(de)(de)(de)獨家實施許可(ke)權(quan)。2016年(nian)4月(yue)(yue)，安徽某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)與某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)高(gao)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)簽訂《使(shi)用(yong)水(shui)(shui)稻常規品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”配(pei)(pei)組協議》，授(shou)權(quan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)高(gao)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)及(ji)其(qi)子(zi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)湖南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)使(shi)用(yong)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”與其(qi)自(zi)(zi)身擁(yong)有(you)(you)知識產(chan)(chan)權(quan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)水(shui)(shui)稻不育系(xi)測配(pei)(pei)組合。自(zi)(zi)2018年(nian)后，雙方(fang)(fang)在協議履行(xing)中(zhong)發(fa)(fa)生(sheng)(sheng)爭議，安徽某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)認(ren)為(wei)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)高(gao)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)及(ji)其(qi)子(zi)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)未(wei)經(jing)授(shou)權(quan)私自(zi)(zi)繁(fan)殖(zhi)生(sheng)(sheng)產(chan)(chan)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”繁(fan)殖(zhi)材料，并重復使(shi)用(yong)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”作為(wei)親本生(sheng)(sheng)產(chan)(chan)諸多雜(za)交(jiao)水(shui)(shui)稻品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，系(xi)侵權(quan)行(xing)為(wei)；某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)高(gao)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)則稱其(qi)已按協議約定向安徽某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)全(quan)額支付了“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)使(shi)用(yong)費，對自(zi)(zi)己研發(fa)(fa)配(pei)(pei)組的(de)(de)(de)(de)15個新的(de)(de)(de)(de)雜(za)交(jiao)水(shui)(shui)稻品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)享有(you)(you)包括(kuo)自(zi)(zi)繁(fan)“五(wu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)(shan)絲(si)苗(miao)”的(de)(de)(de)(de)完全(quan)生(sheng)(sheng)產(chan)(chan)經(jing)營權(quan)。安徽某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)以某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)高(gao)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)及(ji)湖南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)侵害其(qi)植(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)為(wei)由(you)(you)提起賠償3億元(yuan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)侵權(quan)訴訟(song)，某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)高(gao)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)以安徽某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)(fen)(fen)(fen)有(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)單方(fang)(fang)違(wei)約為(wei)由(you)(you)提起繼(ji)續(xu)履行(xing)植(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)實施許可(ke)合同的(de)(de)(de)(de)違(wei)約訴訟(song)。
【裁判結果】
安(an)徽省(sheng)高級人民法(fa)院(yuan)依法(fa)提級審理兩案，以實質性化解爭議(yi)為目標，深入分析研判案情，耐(nai)心(xin)細致進行調解，最終促成雙(shuang)方在法(fa)院(yuan)主持下(xia)簽訂和解協議(yi)。該(gai)院(yuan)于2023年11月27日作出(chu)裁定，準許雙(shuang)方當事人分別撤訴。
【典型意義】
本案(an)被(bei)業(ye)界稱為“中(zhong)國種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)知識(shi)(shi)產(chan)權第一大案(an)”，訴訟雙(shuang)方均是種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)頭部企業(ye)，案(an)情復(fu)雜，爭議巨大，社會關注度較高。人民法(fa)院(yuan)充分發揮審判職(zhi)能作用(yong)，踐行司法(fa)為民宗旨，秉(bing)持“雙(shuang)贏(ying)多贏(ying)共贏(ying)”“案(an)結事了政通人和(he)”的新時代(dai)公正司法(fa)理念，牢(lao)固樹(shu)立“如(ru)我在(zai)訴”意識(shi)(shi)，努(nu)力促成雙(shuang)方和(he)解撤訴，徹(che)底解決宿(su)怨，實現(xian)共贏(ying)發展。
案例二
“丹(dan)玉405號(hao)”玉米植物新品種侵權(quan)案(an)【遼寧某(mou)種業科技(ji)公(gong)司(si)與凌海某(mou)種業科技(ji)公(gong)司(si)、青島某(mou)農技(ji)公(gong)司(si)侵害植物新品種權(quan)糾紛(fen)】
二審：最高(gao)人民法院（2022）最高(gao)法知民終2907號
【基本案情】
遼(liao)寧某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)系“丹玉(yu)405號”玉(yu)米(mi)植(zhi)物新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)的(de)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)(quan)人。凌海某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)未經授(shou)權(quan)(quan)(quan)，在(zai)“丹玉(yu)405號”品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)獲得授(shou)權(quan)(quan)(quan)后(hou)(hou)即以“紫(zi)光4號”名稱套牌(pai)侵(qin)害(hai)“丹玉(yu)405號”品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)(quan)，并(bing)于(yu)2015年被法(fa)(fa)院判(pan)決(jue)認定構成侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)；此后(hou)(hou)，又于(yu)2019年、2020年分別以“錦玉(yu)118”“安(an)玉(yu)13”“丹玉(yu)606號”名稱繼續實施套牌(pai)生(sheng)產、銷售“丹玉(yu)405號”品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)的(de)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為。凌海某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)不(bu)(bu)僅存在(zai)以非法(fa)(fa)獲取(qu)的(de)原種(zhong)(zhong)進行(xing)(xing)生(sheng)產的(de)行(xing)(xing)為，還在(zai)與遼(liao)寧某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)簽(qian)訂協(xie)議后(hou)(hou)，不(bu)(bu)履行(xing)(xing)協(xie)議，繼續以多個名稱套牌(pai)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)，委托他人無證(zheng)生(sheng)產“丹玉(yu)405號”，并(bing)且在(zai)法(fa)(fa)院已(yi)經認定構成侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)后(hou)(hou)重復(fu)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)。青島某(mou)農(nong)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)是(shi)被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)子的(de)銷售商。遼(liao)寧某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)提起(qi)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)訴訟，請求判(pan)令凌海某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、青島某(mou)農(nong)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)停止(zhi)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)，共(gong)同賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)(chang)經濟損失和合(he)理(li)開支共(gong)計300萬(wan)元(yuan)（以150萬(wan)元(yuan)為賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)(chang)基數(shu)，以1倍(bei)計算(suan)懲罰性賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)(chang)）。一(yi)審法(fa)(fa)院認為本案(an)無法(fa)(fa)確定懲罰性賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)(chang)的(de)計算(suan)基數(shu)，適用法(fa)(fa)定賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)(chang)判(pan)決(jue)凌海某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)停止(zhi)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)(quan)并(bing)賠(pei)償(chang)(chang)(chang)經濟損失及合(he)理(li)開支共(gong)100萬(wan)元(yuan)。
【裁判結果】
最(zui)高(gao)人民(min)法院二審認為，凌海某(mou)種(zhong)業科技公司(si)的侵權(quan)行為時間長、地域廣(guang)、規(gui)模(mo)大，且多次實施套牌侵權(quan)、重復侵權(quan)，侵權(quan)行為屢禁不止(zhi)，侵權(quan)故意(yi)明顯，侵權(quan)情節惡劣，應當(dang)承擔懲罰(fa)性(xing)賠(pei)(pei)償(chang)責任。凌海某(mou)種(zhong)業科技公司(si)自(zi)認2019年(nian)(nian)非法使用2000斤“丹玉(yu)405號”原(yuan)種(zhong)；2019年(nian)(nian)繁育400畝，參考400畝能夠收獲的“丹玉(yu)405號”種(zhong)子數量及銷售(shou)毛利，已(yi)基(ji)本(ben)滿(man)足遼寧(ning)某(mou)種(zhong)業科技公司(si)主張的150萬(wan)元的賠(pei)(pei)償(chang)基(ji)數。一審判決以無法確定賠(pei)(pei)償(chang)基(ji)數為由對(dui)遼寧(ning)某(mou)種(zhong)業科技公司(si)的懲罰(fa)性(xing)賠(pei)(pei)償(chang)請求(qiu)(qiu)不予(yu)支持(chi)，適用法律不當(dang)。遂(sui)改判全額(e)支持(chi)遼寧(ning)某(mou)種(zhong)業科技公司(si)300萬(wan)元的賠(pei)(pei)償(chang)請求(qiu)(qiu)。
【典型意義】
本案明確懲(cheng)罰性(xing)賠(pei)償(chang)基數可以基于在案證據裁量確定，而不(bu)能簡單以難以精(jing)確計(ji)算即適(shi)用法(fa)(fa)定賠(pei)償(chang)。本案裁判體現了(le)人民法(fa)(fa)院全面(mian)落實懲(cheng)罰性(xing)賠(pei)償(chang)制度的(de)努(nu)力，依法(fa)(fa)降低了(le)權(quan)利(li)人的(de)維權(quan)難度，有效發揮出(chu)懲(cheng)罰性(xing)賠(pei)償(chang)的(de)威懾力，切實讓侵權(quan)人付出(chu)沉重(zhong)代(dai)價(jia)。
案例三
“奧(ao)黛麗”辣(la)椒植物(wu)新(xin)品種侵權案(an)【某(mou)種苗北京公司與赤峰某(mou)農(nong)業科技公司、盤山縣某(mou)農(nong)資經銷店侵害植物(wu)新(xin)品種權糾紛(fen)】
二審：最(zui)高(gao)人民法(fa)院（2023）最(zui)高(gao)法(fa)知民終12號
【基本案情】
某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)系“奧黛(dai)麗(li)(li)”辣椒植物新品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權人。2020年3月(yue)，該(gai)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)公(gong)(gong)(gong)證購買(mai)了2包“青(qing)椒3756”種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)，包裝標識顯示生(sheng)產(chan)商為“赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)”。某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)將“青(qing)椒3756”種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)與“奧黛(dai)麗(li)(li)”授權品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)進行委托鑒(jian)定(ding)，結論(lun)為近似品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。2020年6月(yue)28日(ri)，赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)與某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)、壽(shou)光某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)有限公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)簽(qian)訂《協(xie)議》，約定(ding)：“赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)承(cheng)諾自(zi)2021年1月(yue)1日(ri)起，不再(zai)使(shi)用、生(sheng)產(chan)、銷(xiao)(xiao)售‘奧黛(dai)麗(li)(li)’品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)和(he)(he)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)……如果發生(sheng)赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)違(wei)反本協(xie)議下(xia)其所作的(de)承(cheng)諾和(he)(he)義務，應向某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)支(zhi)付(fu)違(wei)約金(jin)200萬(wan)元(yuan)。”2021年4月(yue)23日(ri)，某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)公(gong)(gong)(gong)證保全其向盤山(shan)縣某(mou)農(nong)(nong)資(zi)經(jing)(jing)銷(xiao)(xiao)店預訂“青(qing)椒3756”的(de)過程，以(yi)及(ji)赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)在其官方網(wang)(wang)站、搜狐網(wang)(wang)站以(yi)及(ji)名(ming)稱為“和(he)(he)潤種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)”的(de)微(wei)信(xin)公(gong)(gong)(gong)眾號發布的(de)宣傳文(wen)章數篇。某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)提起侵(qin)權訴訟(song)，請(qing)求判令赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)和(he)(he)盤山(shan)縣某(mou)農(nong)(nong)資(zi)經(jing)(jing)銷(xiao)(xiao)店停止侵(qin)權，并共(gong)同賠償(chang)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)北(bei)京(jing)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)經(jing)(jing)濟(ji)損失以(yi)及(ji)合(he)(he)理開(kai)支(zhi)總計220萬(wan)元(yuan)。一審法院(yuan)判決赤(chi)(chi)峰(feng)(feng)(feng)某(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)科(ke)(ke)技(ji)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)和(he)(he)盤山(shan)縣某(mou)農(nong)(nong)資(zi)經(jing)(jing)銷(xiao)(xiao)店停止侵(qin)權并賠償(chang)經(jing)(jing)濟(ji)損失及(ji)合(he)(he)理開(kai)支(zhi)共(gong)20萬(wan)元(yuan)。
【裁判結果】
最(zui)高人民法院二審認為(wei)，涉案(an)《協(xie)(xie)議》約(yue)定了赤(chi)峰(feng)某(mou)農業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)公(gong)司(si)再次侵(qin)權時其應當(dang)承擔(dan)的(de)(de)責任。《協(xie)(xie)議》簽訂后，赤(chi)峰(feng)某(mou)農業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)公(gong)司(si)不僅沒有停止(zhi)已(yi)發生的(de)(de)侵(qin)權行為(wei)，還實施了新的(de)(de)侵(qin)權行為(wei)，明(ming)顯具有侵(qin)權故意。根據查明(ming)的(de)(de)事實，可以推算赤(chi)峰(feng)某(mou)農業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)公(gong)司(si)侵(qin)權獲利已(yi)超過某(mou)種苗(miao)北京公(gong)司(si)主(zhu)張的(de)(de)經濟損失200萬(wan)元，應當(dang)將雙方(fang)在協(xie)(xie)議中約(yue)定的(de)(de)200萬(wan)元作為(wei)確定賠(pei)償數額的(de)(de)重要參考。遂(sui)改判(pan)赤(chi)峰(feng)某(mou)農業(ye)科(ke)技(ji)公(gong)司(si)賠(pei)償某(mou)種苗(miao)北京公(gong)司(si)經濟損失200萬(wan)元，合理開支1萬(wan)元，盤山縣(xian)某(mou)農資(zi)經銷店對(dui)其中的(de)(de)20萬(wan)元承擔(dan)連帶責任。
【典型意義】
本案明確(que)侵(qin)(qin)權(quan)(quan)人與品種權(quan)(quan)人就未來可能發生的侵(qin)(qin)權(quan)(quan)的損害賠(pei)償(chang)達成事前約(yue)定，在(zai)后續侵(qin)(qin)權(quan)(quan)糾紛中(zhong)可以作為確(que)定侵(qin)(qin)權(quan)(quan)賠(pei)償(chang)數額(e)的重要參(can)考。這一裁判規則，不僅有利(li)于破解侵(qin)(qin)權(quan)(quan)賠(pei)償(chang)舉(ju)證(zheng)難題，切(qie)實加大對權(quan)(quan)利(li)人合法權(quan)(quan)益的保護(hu)，而且(qie)有利(li)于促(cu)進種子企業誠信經營和善意履約(yue)。
案例四
“菏豆33號”大豆植(zhi)物新(xin)(xin)品種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)侵權(quan)案【山(shan)東某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)科(ke)技公(gong)司(si)與河南某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司(si)、舞(wu)鋼某(mou)農業(ye)科(ke)技公(gong)司(si)、永城市某(mou)農貿銷售(shou)部(bu)侵害(hai)植(zhi)物新(xin)(xin)品種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)糾(jiu)紛】
一審：河(he)南(nan)省鄭(zheng)州市中級人民法院（2021）豫(yu)01知民初(chu)1078號
二審(shen)：最(zui)高人民法院（2021）最(zui)高法知民終2410號(hao)
【基本案情】
山(shan)東(dong)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)科技(ji)(ji)(ji)公(gong)司(si)(si)系“菏豆(dou)33號(hao)”大(da)豆(dou)植(zhi)物新品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)獨占實施許可合同的(de)被許可人，其(qi)從永城(cheng)(cheng)市(shi)(shi)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)貿銷(xiao)(xiao)售部(bu)公(gong)證(zheng)購(gou)買到(dao)包(bao)裝袋(dai)標注有(you)“鄭9805”“經營公(gong)司(si)(si)：河(he)南某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)”“生產(chan)(chan)公(gong)司(si)(si)：舞(wu)鋼(gang)(gang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)科技(ji)(ji)(ji)公(gong)司(si)(si)”等字樣的(de)大(da)豆(dou)種(zhong)子。使用手機微信(xin)掃描被訴(su)(su)種(zhong)子包(bao)裝袋(dai)上的(de)“產(chan)(chan)品(pin)(pin)信(xin)息追溯碼”，顯示有(you)“品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)名稱：鄭9805”“生產(chan)(chan)經營者(zhe)：河(he)南某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)”等信(xin)息。舞(wu)鋼(gang)(gang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)科技(ji)(ji)(ji)公(gong)司(si)(si)的(de)2020年(nian)“鄭9805”大(da)豆(dou)種(zhong)子《產(chan)(chan)地檢疫合格證(zheng)》載明：種(zhong)植(zhi)面積2000畝，總產(chan)(chan)量60萬千克，種(zhong)植(zhi)地點河(he)南省平頂山(shan)市(shi)(shi)舞(wu)鋼(gang)(gang)市(shi)(shi)。經鑒定，被訴(su)(su)侵權(quan)種(zhong)子與授權(quan)品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)“菏豆(dou)33號(hao)”為極近似或相(xiang)同品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)。山(shan)東(dong)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)科技(ji)(ji)(ji)公(gong)司(si)(si)提起侵權(quan)訴(su)(su)訟，請求判令(ling)河(he)南某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)、舞(wu)鋼(gang)(gang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)科技(ji)(ji)(ji)公(gong)司(si)(si)、永城(cheng)(cheng)市(shi)(shi)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)貿銷(xiao)(xiao)售部(bu)停止侵權(quan)，共同賠(pei)(pei)償損(sun)失305萬元(yuan)。一審法院(yuan)判決河(he)南某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)、舞(wu)鋼(gang)(gang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)科技(ji)(ji)(ji)公(gong)司(si)(si)賠(pei)(pei)償經濟(ji)損(sun)失100萬元(yuan)；永城(cheng)(cheng)市(shi)(shi)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)(nong)(nong)貿銷(xiao)(xiao)售部(bu)賠(pei)(pei)償經濟(ji)損(sun)失1萬元(yuan)。
【裁判結果】
最(zui)高人民法院二審認為，被(bei)訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)包裝標注(zhu)信息、防(fang)偽驗(yan)證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)情(qing)況與河(he)南(nan)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司、舞(wu)鋼(gang)某(mou)農(nong)業(ye)科(ke)技公(gong)司的(de)(de)包裝袋完全一(yi)致，應(ying)認定(ding)(ding)兩公(gong)司存在(zai)(zai)共同(tong)實(shi)(shi)(shi)施侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行為。根據(ju)《中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)華人民共和國植(zhi)物(wu)檢(jian)疫條(tiao)例》第十八條(tiao)的(de)(de)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)，未(wei)依照(zhao)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)辦理植(zhi)物(wu)檢(jian)疫證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)書(shu)或者(zhe)在(zai)(zai)報檢(jian)過程中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)弄虛作假的(de)(de)，應(ying)當(dang)承(cheng)擔行政甚至刑事責任。舞(wu)鋼(gang)某(mou)農(nong)業(ye)科(ke)技公(gong)司作為專業(ye)經(jing)營種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)的(de)(de)經(jing)營者(zhe)，在(zai)(zai)辦理《產地(di)檢(jian)疫合(he)格(ge)證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)》過程中(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)應(ying)當(dang)遵守上述(shu)規(gui)定(ding)(ding)。在(zai)(zai)無相反證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)據(ju)的(de)(de)情(qing)況下，應(ying)當(dang)認定(ding)(ding)《產地(di)檢(jian)疫合(he)格(ge)證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)》記(ji)載(zai)內容的(de)(de)真實(shi)(shi)(shi)性；同(tong)時，即使《產地(di)檢(jian)疫合(he)格(ge)證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)》所載(zai)明產量(liang)為預估產量(liang)，也是基于種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)植(zhi)面(mian)積及相關(guan)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)畝產量(liang)所作的(de)(de)合(he)理估算(suan)(suan)，以(yi)記(ji)載(zai)的(de)(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)植(zhi)面(mian)積、總產量(liang)推(tui)算(suan)(suan)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)數量(liang)具有合(he)理性。一(yi)審法院結合(he)《產地(di)檢(jian)疫合(he)格(ge)證(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)(zheng)》載(zai)明的(de)(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)植(zhi)面(mian)積、總產量(liang)，推(tui)算(suan)(suan)出(chu)舞(wu)鋼(gang)某(mou)農(nong)業(ye)科(ke)技公(gong)司繁育的(de)(de)被(bei)訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)達60萬(wan)千克；參考(kao)“菏豆(dou)33號”品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)實(shi)(shi)(shi)施許可(ke)的(de)(de)時間、范圍、種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)類，被(bei)訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)的(de)(de)銷售價格(ge)等因素，酌(zhuo)定(ding)(ding)河(he)南(nan)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司、舞(wu)鋼(gang)某(mou)農(nong)業(ye)科(ke)技公(gong)司賠(pei)償(chang)經(jing)濟(ji)損失(shi)100萬(wan)元，永城市某(mou)農(nong)貿銷售部賠(pei)償(chang)經(jing)濟(ji)損失(shi)1萬(wan)元，并無不當(dang)。二審判決駁(bo)回上訴，維持原判。
【典型意義】
本案明確(que)在無反駁證據(ju)的(de)情況下(xia)，可以基于侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)的(de)《產(chan)地檢疫(yi)合(he)(he)(he)格證》的(de)記載，合(he)(he)(he)理(li)(li)估算(suan)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)數(shu)量，進而合(he)(he)(he)理(li)(li)確(que)定(ding)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)賠(pei)償(chang)數(shu)額(e)(e)。判決彰(zhang)顯出人(ren)民法(fa)(fa)院強化種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)行政管理(li)(li)和(he)(he)執法(fa)(fa)過(guo)程中(zhong)形成的(de)證據(ju)的(de)運用，積極采用具(ju)有(you)合(he)(he)(he)理(li)(li)性的(de)證據(ju)和(he)(he)計算(suan)方法(fa)(fa)確(que)定(ding)賠(pei)償(chang)數(shu)額(e)(e)，確(que)保權(quan)(quan)利人(ren)得到足額(e)(e)賠(pei)償(chang)，切實維護(hu)權(quan)(quan)利人(ren)合(he)(he)(he)法(fa)(fa)權(quan)(quan)益(yi)。
案例五
“利合328”玉米(mi)植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)侵(qin)權案(an)【恒基利某種(zhong)業公司(si)與內(nei)蒙古(gu)瑞(rui)某種(zhong)業公司(si)、翁牛特旗(qi)某種(zhong)子(zi)門市(shi)侵(qin)害植物(wu)新(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)權糾(jiu)紛】
二審：最高人民法院(yuan)（2022）最高法知(zhi)民終(zhong)1336號
【基本案情】
恒(heng)基(ji)利(li)某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)是“利(li)合(he)(he)328”玉米植物新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)實施許(xu)可合(he)(he)同的(de)(de)被許(xu)可人(ren)，并獲授權(quan)(quan)以(yi)自(zi)己名義提起訴訟。恒(heng)基(ji)利(li)某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)起訴主張，內蒙(meng)古瑞某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)生產(chan)、銷售(shou)名為(wei)“華(hua)瑞638”實為(wei)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”的(de)(de)種(zhong)(zhong)子侵(qin)害(hai)其(qi)植物新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)，請求判令內蒙(meng)古瑞某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)停(ting)止侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)，賠償經(jing)濟損失及(ji)維權(quan)(quan)合(he)(he)理開(kai)支(zhi)共計100萬元(yuan)(yuan)。在上訴期間，恒(heng)基(ji)利(li)某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)補充(chong)主張，內蒙(meng)古瑞某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)在一(yi)(yi)審判決后還大量(liang)銷售(shou)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”雜交種(zhong)(zhong)特定親(qin)本組合(he)(he)的(de)(de)繁殖(zhi)材(cai)料，繼(ji)續侵(qin)害(hai)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”的(de)(de)植物新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)，請求在二審中一(yi)(yi)并予以(yi)考慮。一(yi)(yi)審法院(yuan)判決內蒙(meng)古瑞某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)賠償經(jing)濟損失及(ji)合(he)(he)理開(kai)支(zhi)共20萬元(yuan)(yuan)。
【裁判結果】
最高人(ren)(ren)民法院二審(shen)認為(wei)，雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)授權(quan)(quan)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)繁(fan)(fan)殖(zhi)材(cai)料是指(zhi)能夠繁(fan)(fan)殖(zhi)出(chu)與(yu)該(gai)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)相同特(te)征、特(te)性的(de)(de)(de)(de)植(zhi)物體(ti)，通常是該(gai)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)生(sheng)產(chan)而(er)來(lai)的(de)(de)(de)(de)F1代，而(er)不(bu)包括生(sheng)產(chan)該(gai)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)。“利(li)合(he)(he)328”是特(te)定的(de)(de)(de)(de)親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)“NP01185×NP01154”繁(fan)(fan)育而(er)來(lai)的(de)(de)(de)(de)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)授權(quan)(quan)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，其(qi)繁(fan)(fan)殖(zhi)材(cai)料是指(zhi)與(yu)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)特(te)征、特(te)性相同的(de)(de)(de)(de)植(zhi)物體(ti)，而(er)不(bu)是指(zhi)用于生(sheng)產(chan)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”的(de)(de)(de)(de)特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)本身。生(sheng)產(chan)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)必定需要(yao)重復(fu)使用其(qi)特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)，被(bei)訴侵權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)明知特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)系用于生(sheng)產(chan)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，仍銷售(shou)該(gai)特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)，積極追求他人(ren)(ren)生(sheng)產(chan)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)后(hou)果，屬于幫助他人(ren)(ren)實(shi)施侵害雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)行為(wei)，應當與(yu)生(sheng)產(chan)該(gai)雜(za)(za)交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)繁(fan)(fan)殖(zhi)材(cai)料的(de)(de)(de)(de)行為(wei)人(ren)(ren)承擔連(lian)帶責任。內(nei)蒙(meng)古瑞某種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)司在(zai)一審(shen)判決作出(chu)后(hou)以銷售(shou)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”特(te)定親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本組(zu)(zu)合(he)(he)的(de)(de)(de)(de)方式幫助他人(ren)(ren)生(sheng)產(chan)“利(li)合(he)(he)328”，構成侵權(quan)(quan)且(qie)數量較(jiao)大，綜合(he)(he)考慮其(qi)存在(zai)套(tao)牌侵權(quan)(quan)、持續侵權(quan)(quan)等(deng)侵權(quan)(quan)情節，對恒(heng)基利(li)某種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)司100萬元的(de)(de)(de)(de)賠償請求予以全(quan)額(e)支持。
【典型意義】
本案明(ming)確(que)對于(yu)明(ming)知特(te)定親本組合系用(yong)于(yu)生產授權(quan)雜交種(zhong)仍(reng)予以銷售的，屬于(yu)幫助他人(ren)實(shi)施侵害(hai)雜交種(zhong)品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)的行為，應當承擔侵權(quan)連帶(dai)責任。判決向前延伸了雜交種(zhong)品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)的維(wei)權(quan)環節，體現(xian)了人(ren)民法院全鏈條保護(hu)植(zhi)物新品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)、切實(shi)加大保護(hu)力(li)度的司法態(tai)度。
案例六
“登(deng)海605”玉米植物新(xin)品種(zhong)(zhong)侵權(quan)案【山(shan)東某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)股(gu)份有限公司與河南某(mou)農業(ye)科技有限公司、劉(liu)某(mou)堂侵害植物新(xin)品種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)糾紛】
二審：最高人民法院（2022）最高法知民終293號
【基本案情】
山東某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業股(gu)份有限公(gong)(gong)司(si)系“登海605”玉米植(zhi)物新品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)人(ren)。劉某(mou)(mou)堂(tang)于2015年底開始生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)，購買用(yong)白皮袋(dai)包(bao)裝(zhuang)的(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)后，使用(yong)并不真實存在的(de)品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)名稱對(dui)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)重新進(jin)行包(bao)裝(zhuang)并對(dui)外銷售。2018年，劉某(mou)(mou)堂(tang)成(cheng)立河南(nan)某(mou)(mou)農業科技(ji)有限公(gong)(gong)司(si)，以(yi)其配偶作(zuo)為一人(ren)股(gu)東和(he)法(fa)定(ding)代(dai)表人(ren)。公(gong)(gong)司(si)成(cheng)立后未辦理(li)農作(zuo)物種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)許可證，生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)活動主(zhu)(zhu)要由劉某(mou)(mou)堂(tang)實際(ji)控制。（2021）豫1122刑(xing)初185號刑(xing)事判決認(ren)定(ding)，劉某(mou)(mou)堂(tang)采取標簽與種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)不符的(de)方法(fa)將種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)銷售到河南(nan)、山東等地(di)，銷售金額達(da)112040元，其行為構(gou)成(cheng)生(sheng)產(chan)、銷售偽劣(lie)產(chan)品(pin)(pin)罪。山東某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業股(gu)份有限公(gong)(gong)司(si)提起民事侵權(quan)訴(su)訟，主(zhu)(zhu)張(zhang)劉某(mou)(mou)堂(tang)和(he)其實際(ji)控制的(de)河南(nan)某(mou)(mou)農業科技(ji)有限公(gong)(gong)司(si)共(gong)同侵害了(le)涉案品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)植(zhi)物新品(pin)(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)，請(qing)求判令立即停止侵權(quan)并連帶承(cheng)擔三倍懲罰性賠償(chang)責任共(gong)計60萬(wan)元。一審法(fa)院判決劉某(mou)(mou)堂(tang)賠償(chang)經(jing)(jing)濟損失及合理(li)開支共(gong)7萬(wan)元。
【裁判結果】
最高人(ren)(ren)民法(fa)院二審認(ren)為(wei)(wei)(wei)，劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)為(wei)(wei)(wei)河(he)(he)(he)南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)科(ke)技有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)實際(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)控制人(ren)(ren)，該公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)是劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)為(wei)(wei)(wei)了(le)實施侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)而專門設立的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)，公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)成(cheng)立后劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)作為(wei)(wei)(wei)實際(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)控制人(ren)(ren)實施被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)，既體現了(le)河(he)(he)(he)南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)科(ke)技有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)意志(zhi)，也體現了(le)劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)個人(ren)(ren)意志(zhi)，該公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)已(yi)經成(cheng)為(wei)(wei)(wei)劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)實施被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)工具；公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)成(cheng)立后受劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)實際(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)控制主要從(cong)事侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)，構成(cheng)以(yi)侵(qin)害(hai)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)為(wei)(wei)(wei)業(ye)(ye)(ye)。劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)與河(he)(he)(he)南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)科(ke)技有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)構成(cheng)共同(tong)侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)，依法(fa)應(ying)當承擔相(xiang)應(ying)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)法(fa)律責任。同(tong)時，該公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)還存(cun)在(zai)(zai)未取得農(nong)(nong)作物種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)生(sheng)(sheng)產經營(ying)許可(ke)證(zheng)即生(sheng)(sheng)產經營(ying)玉米種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)情節；劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)還存(cun)在(zai)(zai)假(jia)冒其他(ta)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)名(ming)義，使用不存(cun)在(zai)(zai)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)名(ming)稱銷售種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)，被判處生(sheng)(sheng)產、銷售偽劣產品(pin)罪，可(ke)見其侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)情節惡劣。山(shan)東某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)主張河(he)(he)(he)南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)科(ke)技有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)侵(qin)害(hai)“登海(hai)605”品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)數量(liang)為(wei)(wei)(wei)5噸，并未明(ming)顯(xian)超出(chu)已(yi)經查明(ming)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)(xing)為(wei)(wei)(wei)規(gui)模，根據在(zai)(zai)案證(zheng)據可(ke)合理推(tui)定銷售“登海(hai)605”的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)利潤為(wei)(wei)(wei)每(mei)公(gong)(gong)(gong)斤27元(yuan)，據此計(ji)算品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)實際(ji)(ji)(ji)(ji)損失為(wei)(wei)(wei)13.5萬元(yuan)；以(yi)此作為(wei)(wei)(wei)賠(pei)償(chang)基(ji)數，支持(chi)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)(ren)關(guan)于三倍懲罰性賠(pei)償(chang)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)訴訟主張，并確定合理開支為(wei)(wei)(wei)6萬元(yuan)。遂(sui)改判全額支持(chi)山(shan)東某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)股(gu)份(fen)有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)經濟損失及合理支出(chu)共計(ji)60萬元(yuan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)(de)賠(pei)償(chang)請求(qiu)，劉(liu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)堂(tang)(tang)(tang)與河(he)(he)(he)南(nan)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)科(ke)技有(you)(you)(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)承擔連(lian)帶責任。
【典型意義】
本案重點闡釋了實際控制人(ren)與法人(ren)構成(cheng)共同侵權(quan)并(bing)應承(cheng)擔連帶賠償責任的問題，強化(hua)對(dui)侵權(quan)企(qi)業(ye)實際控制人(ren)的法律(lv)責任追究，切(qie)實提高(gao)侵權(quan)代(dai)價，有力促進凈化(hua)種業(ye)市場環境。
案例七
“萬糯2000”玉米植物(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)侵權(quan)案(an)【河北(bei)某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)有限公司與安(an)某成(cheng)侵害(hai)植物(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)糾紛】
二審：最高(gao)人民法院（2021）最高(gao)法知民終2166號
【基本案情】
河(he)北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)限(xian)(xian)公司(si)(si)系“萬(wan)(wan)糯(nuo)2000”玉(yu)米(mi)(mi)植物新品種(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)品種(zhong)權(quan)人(ren)。安(an)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)等八人(ren)租賃(lin)(lin)了(le)馬某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)山等四(si)戶農戶承(cheng)包的(de)(de)(de)共140多畝(mu)土(tu)地，安(an)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)在(zai)其中決定種(zhong)植的(de)(de)(de)品種(zhong)，聯系、提(ti)(ti)供親本，向農戶支付土(tu)地流轉(zhuan)費(fei)等，并個人(ren)租賃(lin)(lin)土(tu)地18.7畝(mu)。經檢測，租賃(lin)(lin)土(tu)地上種(zhong)植的(de)(de)(de)玉(yu)米(mi)(mi)種(zhong)子與“萬(wan)(wan)糯(nuo)2000”品種(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)標準樣品為極(ji)近似或相同品種(zhong)。河(he)北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)限(xian)(xian)公司(si)(si)提(ti)(ti)起侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)訴(su)訟，主張(zhang)安(an)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)組織、主導包括自(zi)(zi)己在(zai)內的(de)(de)(de)八人(ren)在(zai)各自(zi)(zi)租賃(lin)(lin)的(de)(de)(de)土(tu)地上擅自(zi)(zi)非法生產、繁殖(zhi)“萬(wan)(wan)糯(nuo)2000”玉(yu)米(mi)(mi)種(zhong)子，構成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)，請(qing)求判令(ling)安(an)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)立即(ji)停(ting)止侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)并賠(pei)償河(he)北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)限(xian)(xian)公司(si)(si)損失50萬(wan)(wan)元。河(he)北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)限(xian)(xian)公司(si)(si)未針對安(an)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)之(zhi)外的(de)(de)(de)其他七人(ren)提(ti)(ti)起訴(su)訟。一審法院僅判令(ling)安(an)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)成(cheng)(cheng)(cheng)對其在(zai)個人(ren)承(cheng)包的(de)(de)(de)土(tu)地上擅自(zi)(zi)非法生產、繁殖(zhi)“萬(wan)(wan)糯(nuo)2000”的(de)(de)(de)行為承(cheng)擔侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)責任。
【裁判結果】
最高人(ren)民(min)法院(yuan)二審認(ren)為(wei)，在多人(ren)生產、繁殖被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)子的(de)(de)(de)群體行(xing)(xing)為(wei)中(zhong)起到組織(zhi)、主導(dao)作(zuo)用的(de)(de)(de)組織(zhi)者(zhe)，應對(dui)被組織(zhi)者(zhe)直接實施的(de)(de)(de)全部被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)承擔相(xiang)應責任(ren)。因安某(mou)(mou)成在八(ba)人(ren)承包的(de)(de)(de)土地(di)上進行(xing)(xing)制種(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)中(zhong)起到組織(zhi)和主導(dao)作(zuo)用，該八(ba)人(ren)的(de)(de)(de)被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)造成的(de)(de)(de)全部損失(shi)沒有(you)(you)超(chao)出(chu)(chu)(chu)安某(mou)(mou)成的(de)(de)(de)主觀預見范圍，故安某(mou)(mou)成不僅應對(dui)自己(ji)承包的(de)(de)(de)土地(di)承擔責任(ren)，還應對(dui)其余(yu)七人(ren)所承包土地(di)的(de)(de)(de)被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)承擔相(xiang)應責任(ren)。河北(bei)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)(you)限(xian)公司(si)(si)主張(zhang)的(de)(de)(de)每畝平均產量(liang)沒有(you)(you)明顯超(chao)出(chu)(chu)(chu)甘肅省河西(xi)地(di)區玉(yu)米制種(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)一般平均產量(liang)，且有(you)(you)證據支(zhi)持，可以采信。在確定種(zhong)植(zhi)面積的(de)(de)(de)基礎上，河北(bei)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)(you)限(xian)公司(si)(si)因被訴侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為(wei)遭受(shou)的(de)(de)(de)實際損失(shi)已經超(chao)出(chu)(chu)(chu)了(le)50萬元。遂改判全額支(zhi)持河北(bei)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業有(you)(you)限(xian)公司(si)(si)的(de)(de)(de)賠(pei)償請(qing)求。
【典型意義】
本案判令組(zu)織者對被組(zu)織的(de)全(quan)部植物新(xin)品種侵權(quan)(quan)行(xing)為承擔侵權(quan)(quan)責(ze)任，讓侵權(quan)(quan)組(zu)織者、主導者付出(chu)更重代價，體現了行(xing)為危害性與法律(lv)責(ze)任相(xiang)適(shi)應的(de)法律(lv)精(jing)神，有利于精(jing)準(zhun)有效制裁侵權(quan)(quan)行(xing)為。
案例八
“遠(yuan)科105”玉米植(zhi)(zhi)物新(xin)品種(zhong)侵(qin)權案(an)【三(san)某種(zhong)業公司(si)與(yu)新(xin)疆九某農業發展(zhan)公司(si)等(deng)侵(qin)害植(zhi)(zhi)物新(xin)品種(zhong)權糾紛(fen)】
一審(shen)：新疆維吾(wu)爾(er)自治(zhi)區烏魯木(mu)齊市中級人民法(fa)院（2022）新01知民初7號(hao)
二審：最高(gao)人民法院（2023）最高(gao)法知民終1484號(hao)
【基本案情】
三某種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)是“遠科(ke)105”玉(yu)米植物新(xin)(xin)品種(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)品種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)人。其(qi)(qi)(qi)提起訴訟，主張新(xin)(xin)疆(jiang)九某農(nong)業(ye)發(fa)(fa)展公司(si)以“永玉(yu)3號(hao)(hao)”為名侵害“遠科(ke)105”植物新(xin)(xin)品種(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)，請求判(pan)令新(xin)(xin)疆(jiang)九某農(nong)業(ye)發(fa)(fa)展公司(si)停(ting)止侵權(quan)，賠(pei)償經(jing)(jing)濟損失(shi)及維權(quan)合(he)理開支共計300萬(wan)余(yu)元(yuan)。新(xin)(xin)疆(jiang)九某農(nong)業(ye)發(fa)(fa)展公司(si)對外(wai)銷售的(de)(de)“永玉(yu)3號(hao)(hao)”玉(yu)米種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)中既存在(zai)(zai)真實的(de)(de)“永玉(yu)3號(hao)(hao)”玉(yu)米種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)，也存在(zai)(zai)與“遠科(ke)105”具有同(tong)一(yi)性(xing)的(de)(de)侵權(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)，其(qi)(qi)(qi)通過在(zai)(zai)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)包(bao)裝袋(dai)上加以三顆紅色五角(jiao)星“★★★”和“精品專(zhuan)供(gong)”字樣對其(qi)(qi)(qi)侵權(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)進(jin)行管控。一(yi)審法院判(pan)決新(xin)(xin)疆(jiang)九某農(nong)業(ye)發(fa)(fa)展公司(si)賠(pei)償經(jing)(jing)濟損失(shi)及維權(quan)合(he)理開支共50萬(wan)余(yu)元(yuan)。
【裁判結果】
最高人(ren)民法院二審認為，新疆九某農業發展(zhan)公(gong)司以“真假混賣”的方式實(shi)施套牌侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)行(xing)(xing)為，手(shou)段隱蔽(bi)，逃避種(zhong)子行(xing)(xing)政監管和法律制裁的主觀意圖明顯，給(gei)品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)維權(quan)(quan)舉證帶來更(geng)大困難和成本，侵(qin)權(quan)(quan)惡意明顯，在確定(ding)賠(pei)償數額(e)時應當將此情節予以重點考量并加大賠(pei)償力度。一審判決確定(ding)的損害(hai)賠(pei)償數額(e)及維權(quan)(quan)合理開(kai)支具有事實(shi)和法律依據。遂判決駁(bo)回上訴，維持原判。
【典型意義】
本案系侵(qin)權人(ren)(ren)以“真(zhen)假混賣”的方式實施套(tao)牌侵(qin)權，行為極具迷(mi)惑(huo)性，逃避侵(qin)權制裁的主觀意圖(tu)明顯。本案強(qiang)調在確定賠償(chang)(chang)數(shu)額時(shi)應(ying)當將類似情節予以重點考(kao)量以加大賠償(chang)(chang)力(li)度(du)，切實維護品種權人(ren)(ren)的合法權益。
案例九
“先玉335”玉米植物(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)侵(qin)權案【敦煌某良種(zhong)公司與(yu)吉林某種(zhong)業公司、樺(hua)甸(dian)某農資商店(dian)侵(qin)害植物(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)權糾(jiu)紛(fen)】
二(er)審(shen)：最(zui)(zui)高(gao)人民法院（2022）最(zui)(zui)高(gao)法知民終2719號
【基本案情】
敦(dun)煌(huang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)良種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)公(gong)司經(jing)(jing)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)人授權(quan)生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)銷(xiao)“先(xian)玉(yu)335”玉(yu)米(mi)植(zhi)物(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，并有(you)權(quan)以自(zi)己名(ming)義維(wei)(wei)權(quan)。其(qi)在(zai)樺(hua)甸某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商店(dian)處公(gong)證購(gou)買(mai)了外包(bao)裝標識為(wei)吉(ji)林(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司生(sheng)產(chan)的“嶺單86”玉(yu)米(mi)雜交(jiao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，并將其(qi)送至北京玉(yu)米(mi)檢測中心進(jin)行檢驗，結(jie)論為(wei)與“先(xian)玉(yu)335”授權(quan)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)為(wei)極近似或(huo)相同品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。敦(dun)煌(huang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)良種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)公(gong)司起訴主(zhu)張，吉(ji)林(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司、樺(hua)甸某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商店(dian)的生(sheng)產(chan)、銷(xiao)售(shou)行為(wei)侵犯了敦(dun)煌(huang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)良種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)公(gong)司的合法(fa)權(quan)益(yi)，請(qing)求判令二(er)者停止侵權(quan)并賠(pei)償經(jing)(jing)濟損失(shi)及(ji)維(wei)(wei)權(quan)合理開支共100萬(wan)元(yuan)。訴訟(song)過程中，吉(ji)林(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司辯(bian)稱，其(qi)基(ji)于自(zi)己合法(fa)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的真(zhen)實交(jiao)易(yi)向樺(hua)甸某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商店(dian)提供(gong)10個(ge)替換包(bao)裝袋防止原有(you)包(bao)裝袋破損，并不存在(zai)侵權(quan)行為(wei)；樺(hua)甸某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商店(dian)則(ze)自(zi)認(ren)被訴侵權(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子系(xi)其(qi)擅自(zi)使用(yong)吉(ji)林(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)司包(bao)裝袋，套(tao)裝其(qi)他(ta)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子后進(jin)行銷(xiao)售(shou)。一(yi)審法(fa)院判決(jue)樺(hua)甸某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商店(dian)賠(pei)償經(jing)(jing)濟損失(shi)20萬(wan)元(yuan)。
【裁判結果】
最高(gao)人民法(fa)(fa)院二審認為(wei)，涉案被訴(su)侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)的(de)(de)(de)包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)袋正面(mian)及背面(mian)印有“吉(ji)(ji)(ji)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)”標(biao)識，包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)袋底部(bu)標(biao)注(zhu)及微信(xin)二維碼(ma)掃描結果顯示，生(sheng)產經(jing)營者為(wei)“吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司”。吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司并無(wu)(wu)證(zheng)(zheng)據(ju)證(zheng)(zheng)明樺甸(dian)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)(shang)店以吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司的(de)(de)(de)包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)袋包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)、銷售(shou)的(de)(de)(de)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)并非來自吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司，應(ying)當認定吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司為(wei)被訴(su)侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)的(de)(de)(de)生(sheng)產者。即(ji)便(bian)吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司向樺甸(dian)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)(shang)店提(ti)供包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)袋的(de)(de)(de)行為(wei)真實(shi)(shi)，吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司明知樺甸(dian)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)(shang)店沒有種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)生(sheng)產經(jing)營許可證(zheng)(zheng)，無(wu)(wu)分裝(zhuang)散裝(zhuang)種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)進行銷售(shou)的(de)(de)(de)資(zi)質，依(yi)然向其提(ti)供包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)袋，其對包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)袋的(de)(de)(de)使用未履行任(ren)何監管義(yi)務，對套裝(zhuang)其他種(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)的(de)(de)(de)侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)行為(wei)實(shi)(shi)際上持放任(ren)態度，客(ke)觀上導致(zhi)損害結果發生(sheng)，亦應(ying)當就此承擔(dan)相應(ying)法(fa)(fa)律責任(ren)。結合樺甸(dian)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)(shang)店自認其存在套牌侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)的(de)(de)(de)事實(shi)(shi)，應(ying)認定吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司與樺甸(dian)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)(shang)店共(gong)同實(shi)(shi)施了被訴(su)侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)行為(wei)。遂改判(pan)吉(ji)(ji)(ji)林(lin)(lin)省某(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司、樺甸(dian)某(mou)(mou)(mou)農(nong)資(zi)商(shang)(shang)店停止侵(qin)(qin)(qin)權(quan)并共(gong)同賠償敦煌某(mou)(mou)(mou)良種(zhong)(zhong)公(gong)(gong)司經(jing)濟損失及合理開支共(gong)20萬元。
【典型意義】
本案二審判(pan)決強調，種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)包(bao)裝(zhuang)袋是生產(chan)經營管(guan)理(li)中的重(zhong)要環節，種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)生產(chan)企業(ye)理(li)應(ying)對其(qi)嚴(yan)(yan)格管(guan)控(kong)，對包(bao)裝(zhuang)袋上標(biao)(biao)注(zhu)內容的真實性和(he)包(bao)裝(zhuang)內種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)的質量負責。二審判(pan)決明確，一般情況下可以(yi)(yi)依據種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)包(bao)裝(zhuang)袋標(biao)(biao)注(zhu)的信息認定種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)生產(chan)者；人民(min)法(fa)院對于(yu)種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)生產(chan)者以(yi)(yi)防止(zhi)破(po)損為(wei)(wei)由(you)向銷(xiao)售商(shang)提供空包(bao)裝(zhuang)袋、沒有參與(yu)侵權行為(wei)(wei)的辯稱(cheng)不應(ying)輕易采信，更不能(neng)簡單以(yi)(yi)此為(wei)(wei)由(you)免除其(qi)侵權責任。本案判(pan)決對于(yu)嚴(yan)(yan)格規(gui)范種(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)包(bao)裝(zhuang)、標(biao)(biao)簽(qian)管(guan)理(li)、凈化種(zhong)業(ye)市場，具有參考(kao)價值。
案例十
“中科發5號(hao)”水稻植物新品種侵(qin)權案(an)【五常某(mou)種業公司與(yu)前郭縣某(mou)種業公司、前郭縣某(mou)農(nong)資商店侵(qin)害植物新品種權糾(jiu)紛(fen)】
一審：吉林省長春市(shi)中(zhong)級人民法院(yuan)（2022）吉01知民初21號
【基本案情】
五常某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)系(xi)“中(zhong)科發(fa)5號”水稻植物(wu)新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的獨占實施被許(xu)可人。前郭(guo)縣(xian)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)的實際控制人為王(wang)某(mou)(mou)，該公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)取得的農作物(wu)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子生產(chan)經(jing)營許(xu)可證的生產(chan)經(jing)營范圍不包括“中(zhong)科發(fa)5號”水稻品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。前郭(guo)縣(xian)某(mou)(mou)農資商(shang)店系(xi)由王(wang)某(mou)(mou)經(jing)營的個(ge)體(ti)工商(shang)戶，系(xi)前郭(guo)縣(xian)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)的指定銷售商(shang)。五常某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)從前郭(guo)縣(xian)某(mou)(mou)農資商(shang)店購得“中(zhong)發(fa)5”種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子50斤(jin)，經(jing)鑒(jian)定與“中(zhong)科發(fa)5號”為極近似或相(xiang)同(tong)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。五常某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)起訴(su)主張(zhang)，前郭(guo)縣(xian)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)、前郭(guo)縣(xian)某(mou)(mou)農資商(shang)店侵害“中(zhong)科發(fa)5號”品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)，請求(qiu)判(pan)令二者停(ting)止侵權(quan)并連帶賠(pei)償經(jing)濟損失(shi)90萬(wan)元。
【裁判結果】
吉林省長春市中級(ji)人(ren)民法院一審(shen)認為，前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)未(wei)經許可，生(sheng)產(chan)“中科發(fa)(fa)5號”水(shui)稻種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子，構成侵犯植物新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)，依(yi)法應當(dang)(dang)承擔侵權(quan)(quan)責(ze)任。王某(mou)系前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)的(de)實際控制人(ren)和(he)前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)農資商店的(de)實際經營者(zhe)(zhe)，在接受當(dang)(dang)地公(gong)(gong)安(an)部門訊問時(shi)供述，被訴(su)侵權(quan)(quan)“中發(fa)(fa)5”水(shui)稻種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子系由其自行(xing)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)植獲取(qu)，該種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子的(de)生(sheng)產(chan)基地、加工設備(bei)、儲存庫(ku)房等均(jun)系前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)所有。被訴(su)侵權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子由前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)指定的(de)銷售商前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)農資商店對外銷售。前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)和(he)前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)農資商店一個進行(xing)生(sheng)產(chan)、一個進行(xing)銷售，兩(liang)者(zhe)(zhe)分工合作，相互配(pei)合存在共同侵權(quan)(quan)的(de)故意(yi)，故二者(zhe)(zhe)依(yi)法應當(dang)(dang)承擔連帶責(ze)任。綜合考慮涉案植物新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)的(de)類型，侵權(quan)(quan)經營規模、銷售價格、侵權(quan)(quan)行(xing)為性(xing)質(zhi)、情節以(yi)及品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)維權(quan)(quan)合理支出等因素，酌情確定前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)、前(qian)(qian)郭縣(xian)(xian)某(mou)農資商店共同賠償五常某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業公(gong)(gong)司(si)15萬(wan)元(yuan)。一審(shen)宣判后，當(dang)(dang)事人(ren)均(jun)未(wei)提起上(shang)訴(su)。
【典型意義】
本案判決指(zhi)出(chu)，不(bu)同(tong)主(zhu)體在(zai)生產(chan)、銷(xiao)售(shou)授權(quan)品種繁殖材料(liao)過程中分工明確、互相配(pei)合，應(ying)當認定有關(guan)主(zhu)體構(gou)成(cheng)共同(tong)侵權(quan)。人民法院(yuan)依據(ju)事實認定生產(chan)商和(he)銷(xiao)售(shou)商存在(zai)共同(tong)故意(yi)并判令承擔連帶責任，為品種權(quan)人提供了更充分的法律保障。
案例十一
“博(bo)洋(yang)9”甜瓜植(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新(xin)品種侵權案【天津某(mou)種業公司與壽光市(shi)某(mou)種苗公司、劉某(mou)勝植(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新(xin)品種臨(lin)時(shi)保護期使用費糾紛(fen)及(ji)侵害(hai)植(zhi)(zhi)(zhi)物(wu)(wu)新(xin)品種權糾紛(fen)】
一審：山東(dong)省(sheng)青島市中級人民法院（2022）魯(lu)02知民初160號
二(er)審(shen)：最高人民法院（2023）最高法知民終478號
【基本案情】
天津(jin)某(mou)(mou)種業(ye)公司(si)(si)(si)為(wei)“博洋(yang)9”甜(tian)瓜植物新(xin)品種的品種權(quan)(quan)人。其(qi)主張壽光市(shi)某(mou)(mou)種苗公司(si)(si)(si)未經(jing)授權(quan)(quan)銷售名稱為(wei)“博洋(yang)9”的甜(tian)瓜種苗，劉某(mou)(mou)勝(sheng)(sheng)是壽光市(shi)某(mou)(mou)種苗公司(si)(si)(si)的唯一(yi)股東和(he)實際控制人，應(ying)對(dui)(dui)該(gai)公司(si)(si)(si)的侵權(quan)(quan)行為(wei)承擔連帶(dai)責任(ren)，請求判令壽光市(shi)某(mou)(mou)種苗公司(si)(si)(si)、劉某(mou)(mou)勝(sheng)(sheng)立即停止侵權(quan)(quan)，并支(zhi)付(fu)臨時保(bao)護期(qi)使用費(fei)50萬(wan)元(yuan)、侵權(quan)(quan)經(jing)濟(ji)損失100萬(wan)元(yuan)、合(he)理開(kai)(kai)支(zhi)4.29萬(wan)元(yuan)。一(yi)審法院判決壽光市(shi)某(mou)(mou)種苗公司(si)(si)(si)支(zhi)付(fu)天津(jin)某(mou)(mou)種業(ye)公司(si)(si)(si)臨時保(bao)護期(qi)使用費(fei)3萬(wan)元(yuan)，賠償經(jing)濟(ji)損失12萬(wan)元(yuan)及(ji)合(he)理開(kai)(kai)支(zhi)2.69萬(wan)元(yuan)，劉某(mou)(mou)勝(sheng)(sheng)對(dui)(dui)此承擔連帶(dai)責任(ren)。
【裁判結果】
最高人(ren)民法(fa)院二審認為(wei)，購買(mai)者(zhe)從品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)或經其(qi)許可的(de)人(ren)合(he)法(fa)獲(huo)得(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子后，將(jiang)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子培育成(cheng)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)后進行(xing)銷(xiao)售，并非侵權(quan)(quan)行(xing)為(wei)；但(dan)是，如果用(yong)來培育種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)的(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子無證據證明(ming)來源(yuan)于品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)人(ren)，將(jiang)來源(yuan)非法(fa)的(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子培育成(cheng)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)的(de)相關生產、繁(fan)殖和銷(xiao)售行(xing)為(wei)則構(gou)成(cheng)侵權(quan)(quan)。雖然查(cha)明(ming)壽(shou)光(guang)市(shi)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)公司(si)、劉某(mou)勝從天(tian)津某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)公司(si)的(de)合(he)法(fa)經銷(xiao)商(shang)處購買(mai)了共計6萬粒“博洋(yang)9”甜瓜(gua)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子，但(dan)其(qi)對外宣傳稱，一年銷(xiao)售三四(si)十萬株“博洋(yang)9”種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)，明(ming)顯已經超出(chu)其(qi)合(he)法(fa)購買(mai)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子的(de)數量，故一審判(pan)決認定壽(shou)光(guang)市(shi)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)公司(si)、劉某(mou)勝存在侵害“博洋(yang)9”品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權(quan)(quan)的(de)生產、銷(xiao)售、許諾銷(xiao)售行(xing)為(wei)，結(jie)論并無不當；判(pan)決其(qi)連帶承擔(dan)支付臨時保護期(qi)使用(yong)費(fei)、賠(pei)償侵權(quan)(quan)損失及制止(zhi)侵權(quan)(quan)的(de)合(he)理開支共計17.69萬元，數額亦無不妥。遂(sui)判(pan)決駁回上訴(su)，維持原判(pan)。
【典型意義】
本案判(pan)決(jue)對于(yu)銷(xiao)售(shou)蔬菜瓜(gua)果種(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)的(de)經(jing)營主體將購買的(de)種(zhong)子培育成種(zhong)苗(miao)(miao)進行銷(xiao)售(shou)是否(fou)構成權利用盡的(de)問題予(yu)以(yi)了明確。同時認定，當銷(xiao)售(shou)數(shu)(shu)(shu)量(liang)遠超適用權利用盡的(de)范圍(wei)時，仍然構成侵(qin)權，并可以(yi)被訴侵(qin)權人(ren)宣傳(chuan)銷(xiao)售(shou)的(de)數(shu)(shu)(shu)量(liang)作為(wei)確定賠償數(shu)(shu)(shu)額的(de)依據。這一判(pan)決(jue)有利于(yu)加強對品種(zhong)權人(ren)的(de)司(si)法保護和促進市場(chang)經(jing)營者誠信(xin)規范經(jing)營。
案例十二
案例12:“澳(ao)甜(tian)糯75”玉米植(zhi)物新品種侵權案【天津(jin)市某(mou)(mou)澳(ao)種子有限公司與(yu)重慶優某(mou)(mou)升農業(ye)發展(zhan)有限公司、南京某(mou)(mou)田種業(ye)有限公司、合川區某(mou)(mou)輝農資經營部侵害植(zhi)物新品種權糾紛(fen)】
一(yi)審：江蘇(su)省南(nan)京市中級人民法院（2022）蘇(su)01民初(chu)3881號(hao)
【基本案情】
天(tian)津市某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)澳(ao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)系“澳(ao)甜(tian)(tian)糯(nuo)(nuo)75”玉(yu)米(mi)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的普通(tong)實施許(xu)可被許(xu)可人(ren)，并獲授權(quan)(quan)以(yi)自己的名義提起侵權(quan)(quan)訴(su)(su)訟。該公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)從(cong)合(he)(he)川區(qu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)輝(hui)農(nong)資(zi)經營部公(gong)(gong)(gong)證購買“優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)”牌(pai)(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)3袋，上述(shu)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)包裝(zhuang)袋顯示南(nan)京(jing)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)田種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)為(wei)生(sheng)產(chan)商(shang)，重慶(qing)(qing)(qing)(qing)優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)發(fa)展(zhan)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)為(wei)分裝(zhuang)銷(xiao)售商(shang)，上述(shu)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)經鑒定為(wei)“澳(ao)甜(tian)(tian)糯(nuo)(nuo)75”授權(quan)(quan)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。天(tian)津市某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)澳(ao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)提起侵權(quan)(quan)訴(su)(su)訟，請求判(pan)令重慶(qing)(qing)(qing)(qing)優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)發(fa)展(zhan)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)、南(nan)京(jing)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)田種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)、合(he)(he)川區(qu)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)輝(hui)農(nong)資(zi)經營部停止侵權(quan)(quan)并賠償經濟損失(shi)及(ji)合(he)(he)理開支(zhi)50萬元。重慶(qing)(qing)(qing)(qing)優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)發(fa)展(zhan)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)以(yi)被訴(su)(su)侵權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)是其將南(nan)京(jing)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)田種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)生(sheng)產(chan)的“六朝”牌(pai)(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”原包裝(zhuang)更(geng)換(huan)為(wei)被訴(su)(su)侵權(quan)(quan)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)包裝(zhuang)進行銷(xiao)售為(wei)由，抗(kang)辯其不構成侵權(quan)(quan)。南(nan)京(jing)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)田種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)認可曾(ceng)向重慶(qing)(qing)(qing)(qing)優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)發(fa)展(zhan)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)銷(xiao)售“六朝”牌(pai)(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)，同(tong)(tong)時辯稱(cheng)重慶(qing)(qing)(qing)(qing)優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)發(fa)展(zhan)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)(gong)(gong)司(si)(si)(si)更(geng)換(huan)包裝(zhuang)銷(xiao)售“優(you)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)升(sheng)”牌(pai)(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)并未征(zheng)得其同(tong)(tong)意，且“六朝”牌(pai)(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子(zi)(zi)(zi)與“澳(ao)甜(tian)(tian)糯(nuo)(nuo)75”授權(quan)(quan)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)屬于不同(tong)(tong)品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。
【裁判結果】
江(jiang)蘇(su)省南(nan)京市中級人民(min)法(fa)院一審認(ren)為(wei)，重慶優某(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業發(fa)展(zhan)(zhan)有(you)(you)限(xian)公(gong)司(si)所稱(cheng)其將南(nan)京某(mou)田種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業有(you)(you)限(xian)公(gong)司(si)“六朝”牌(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)原(yuan)包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)更(geng)換為(wei)“優某(mou)升(sheng)”牌(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”包(bao)(bao)裝(zhuang)的行為(wei)，并不(bu)(bu)屬于(yu)(yu)法(fa)律(lv)規定的可以分裝(zhuang)情形(xing)，屬于(yu)(yu)生產經營假(jia)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子。現有(you)(you)證(zheng)據(ju)不(bu)(bu)能(neng)證(zheng)明(ming)重慶優某(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業發(fa)展(zhan)(zhan)有(you)(you)限(xian)公(gong)司(si)涉(she)案(an)“優某(mou)升(sheng)”牌(pai)(pai)玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子系來源于(yu)(yu)南(nan)京某(mou)田種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業有(you)(you)限(xian)公(gong)司(si)，且“六朝”牌(pai)(pai)“甜(tian)(tian)加(jia)(jia)糯(nuo)(nuo)968”玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子與(yu)“澳(ao)(ao)甜(tian)(tian)糯(nuo)(nuo)75”玉(yu)米(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子差異(yi)性明(ming)顯，系不(bu)(bu)同品種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)。遂判決重慶優某(mou)升(sheng)農(nong)業發(fa)展(zhan)(zhan)有(you)(you)限(xian)公(gong)司(si)停(ting)止侵權，并賠償(chang)天津市某(mou)澳(ao)(ao)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子有(you)(you)限(xian)公(gong)司(si)經濟(ji)損(sun)失及維權合理開支共12萬元。一審宣判后，各方當事人均(jun)未(wei)提起上訴。
【典型意義】
本案判決將被訴侵權人(ren)抗辯(bian)所謂分裝(zhuang)銷售(shou)他人(ren)生產的種(zhong)子但不能證明種(zhong)子真實來(lai)源(yuan)的行為(wei)認定為(wei)被訴侵權人(ren)的生產經營行為(wei)，對于打擊非(fei)法分裝(zhuang)和掩飾侵權的行為(wei)，促進市場規范(fan)經營具有參考意義(yi)。
案例十三
“濟麥(mai)22”小麥(mai)植(zhi)物新(xin)品種權(quan)合(he)同(tong)糾紛案(an)【山東(dong)某良(liang)種有(you)限(xian)公司(si)與聊城某種業有(you)限(xian)公司(si)植(zhi)物新(xin)品種實(shi)施許可(ke)合(he)同(tong)糾紛】
一審：山東省濟南市中級人民(min)法院（2022）魯(lu)01知民(min)初271號(hao)
二審(shen)：山東省高級人民(min)(min)法院（2022）魯民(min)(min)終2117號
【基本案情】
山(shan)(shan)(shan)東省某(mou)(mou)研究所與山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)簽訂(ding)(ding)《植物新品(pin)種(zhong)委托(tuo)開發(fa)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)(ying)(ying)協(xie)(xie)議》，將(jiang)“濟(ji)(ji)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)22”品(pin)種(zhong)權(quan)以(yi)(yi)獨占許(xu)(xu)可方式(shi)授予山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)行使，并同意山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)再(zai)許(xu)(xu)可或(huo)以(yi)(yi)其他形式(shi)允許(xu)(xu)他人生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)(ying)(ying)。此后，山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)與聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)簽訂(ding)(ding)協(xie)(xie)議，授權(quan)后者生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)(ying)(ying)“濟(ji)(ji)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)22”等(deng)小(xiao)(xiao)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)種(zhong)子(zi)，并約(yue)(yue)(yue)定(ding)后者生(sheng)產(chan)的“濟(ji)(ji)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)22”小(xiao)(xiao)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)大田用種(zhong)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)(ying)(ying)范圍為(wei)(wei)冠(guan)(guan)縣，經(jing)(jing)營(ying)(ying)(ying)方式(shi)為(wei)(wei)小(xiao)(xiao)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)統一(yi)(yi)供(gong)種(zhong)項目(mu)(mu)的供(gong)種(zhong)到戶模式(shi)，如后者擅自將(jiang)小(xiao)(xiao)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)統一(yi)(yi)供(gong)種(zhong)項目(mu)(mu)用種(zhong)子(zi)以(yi)(yi)市(shi)場(chang)銷(xiao)售(shou)(shou)渠道銷(xiao)售(shou)(shou)、或(huo)者在(zai)冠(guan)(guan)縣小(xiao)(xiao)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)統一(yi)(yi)供(gong)種(zhong)項目(mu)(mu)終止(zhi)(zhi)后繼續銷(xiao)售(shou)(shou)等(deng)，山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)有(you)權(quan)單方解(jie)除(chu)協(xie)(xie)議，已(yi)經(jing)(jing)收取的農技推廣費、履(lv)(lv)(lv)約(yue)(yue)(yue)保(bao)證金(jin)(jin)(jin)等(deng)不(bu)予退(tui)還(huan)，聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)還(huan)應支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)違(wei)(wei)約(yue)(yue)(yue)金(jin)(jin)(jin)50萬(wan)(wan)元至300萬(wan)(wan)元。合同履(lv)(lv)(lv)行中，山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)分別在(zai)冠(guan)(guan)縣之(zhi)外(wai)的多地購(gou)買到聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)生(sheng)產(chan)的“濟(ji)(ji)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)22”。山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)以(yi)(yi)聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)違(wei)(wei)約(yue)(yue)(yue)為(wei)(wei)由提(ti)起訴訟，請求判(pan)令解(jie)除(chu)涉案協(xie)(xie)議，聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)停止(zhi)(zhi)生(sheng)產(chan)經(jing)(jing)營(ying)(ying)(ying)、繁殖、銷(xiao)售(shou)(shou)“濟(ji)(ji)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)22”小(xiao)(xiao)麥(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)(mai)品(pin)種(zhong)，并支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)違(wei)(wei)約(yue)(yue)(yue)金(jin)(jin)(jin)及合理(li)開支(zhi)共計(ji)150 萬(wan)(wan)元，聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)繳納的履(lv)(lv)(lv)約(yue)(yue)(yue)保(bao)證金(jin)(jin)(jin)3萬(wan)(wan)元不(bu)予退(tui)還(huan)。一(yi)(yi)審法院判(pan)決解(jie)除(chu)涉案協(xie)(xie)議，聊(liao)城(cheng)某(mou)(mou)種(zhong)業(ye)(ye)(ye)(ye)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)支(zhi)付(fu)(fu)山(shan)(shan)(shan)東某(mou)(mou)良(liang)種(zhong)有(you)限(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)(xian)公(gong)司(si)(si)(si)(si)(si)違(wei)(wei)約(yue)(yue)(yue)金(jin)(jin)(jin)50萬(wan)(wan)元，履(lv)(lv)(lv)約(yue)(yue)(yue)保(bao)證金(jin)(jin)(jin)3萬(wan)(wan)元不(bu)予退(tui)還(huan)。
【裁判結果】
山東(dong)省高級人民法(fa)院二審認為(wei)(wei)，涉(she)案協議約(yue)定(ding)聊城某(mou)種業有(you)(you)(you)限公司(si)生(sheng)產的“濟(ji)麥(mai)22”小(xiao)麥(mai)大田用種經營(ying)范圍及經營(ying)方式，并(bing)約(yue)定(ding)山東(dong)某(mou)良種有(you)(you)(you)限公司(si)具有(you)(you)(you)特定(ding)條件下(xia)的合同解(jie)除(chu)權。山東(dong)某(mou)良種有(you)(you)(you)限公司(si)在冠縣之外通過市(shi)場渠道購買到(dao)“濟(ji)麥(mai)22”小(xiao)麥(mai)種子，雖然聊城某(mou)種業有(you)(you)(you)限公司(si)辯(bian)稱系其他經銷(xiao)商(shang)購種后銷(xiao)售至(zhi)冠縣之外，但(dan)缺乏證據(ju)且協議明確約(yue)定(ding)上(shang)(shang)述行為(wei)(wei)為(wei)(wei)違約(yue)行為(wei)(wei)，其不構成違約(yue)的主張不能成立，應(ying)(ying)承擔相應(ying)(ying)違約(yue)責任，山東(dong)某(mou)良種有(you)(you)(you)限公司(si)有(you)(you)(you)權要(yao)求解(jie)除(chu)協議。遂判決駁回上(shang)(shang)訴(su)，維(wei)持原判。
【典型意義】
本(ben)案通過準確界定品種權人與被(bei)許可(ke)人的(de)權利義(yi)務范圍，對(dui)品種權人要(yao)求被(bei)許可(ke)人承擔(dan)違約責任的(de)訴求依(yi)法予以支(zhi)持(chi)，體(ti)現了(le)從合(he)同法角(jiao)度對(dui)品種權的(de)有效保(bao)護。
案例十四
“農麥(mai)168”小麥(mai)植(zhi)(zhi)物新(xin)品種授權(quan)案【江蘇神某種業科技(ji)公司與農業農村部植(zhi)(zhi)物新(xin)品種復審委員會植(zhi)(zhi)物新(xin)品種申請駁回復審行(xing)政糾(jiu)紛】
二(er)審：最(zui)高人(ren)民(min)法院（2023）最(zui)高法知(zhi)行終95號
【基本案情】
江蘇(su)神(shen)(shen)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業科(ke)技(ji)公司(si)系名(ming)稱為“農麥(mai)168”的(de)小麥(mai)植物(wu)(wu)新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)申請(qing)的(de)申請(qing)人(ren)。針對該(gai)申請(qing)，植物(wu)(wu)新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)復(fu)審(shen)委員(yuan)(yuan)會(hui)維持關于駁回品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)申請(qing)的(de)決(jue)(jue)定。江蘇(su)神(shen)(shen)某(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)業科(ke)技(ji)公司(si)不服，提起行政訴(su)訟，主要理(li)由是(shi)植物(wu)(wu)新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)測(ce)(ce)試（南京）分中心（以下簡稱南京分中心）出(chu)具的(de)植物(wu)(wu)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)DUS測(ce)(ce)試報告選擇南京作(zuo)為測(ce)(ce)試地點錯誤。一審(shen)法院判(pan)決(jue)(jue)撤(che)銷被訴(su)決(jue)(jue)定，由植物(wu)(wu)新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)復(fu)審(shen)委員(yuan)(yuan)會(hui)重新(xin)(xin)作(zuo)出(chu)決(jue)(jue)定。植物(wu)(wu)新(xin)(xin)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)復(fu)審(shen)委員(yuan)(yuan)會(hui)不服，提起上訴(su)。
【裁判結果】
最(zui)高(gao)人(ren)民法院二審認為(wei)，DUS測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)地點(dian)的(de)(de)(de)(de)確定(ding)(ding)應當根據申(shen)請(qing)人(ren)在說(shuo)明書(shu)中(zhong)(zhong)對品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)適于生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)長(chang)(chang)(chang)的(de)(de)(de)(de)區域、環境等的(de)(de)(de)(de)記(ji)載，結合(he)(he)(he)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)類型(xing)及育(yu)(yu)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)過(guo)(guo)程和方法綜合(he)(he)(he)作出認定(ding)(ding)，以(yi)能(neng)夠(gou)保(bao)證(zheng)(zheng)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)性狀得(de)到(dao)充(chong)分(fen)(fen)表(biao)(biao)達(da)為(wei)標準(zhun)。綜合(he)(he)(he)涉案申(shen)請(qing)的(de)(de)(de)(de)請(qing)求書(shu)和說(shuo)明書(shu)的(de)(de)(de)(de)記(ji)載，“農(nong)麥(mai)168”適于生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)長(chang)(chang)(chang)的(de)(de)(de)(de)區域或(huo)環境包(bao)括江蘇(su)(su)(su)省淮(huai)河以(yi)北(bei)的(de)(de)(de)(de)部(bu)分(fen)(fen)地區；基(ji)于其(qi)培育(yu)(yu)地的(de)(de)(de)(de)記(ji)載，能(neng)夠(gou)表(biao)(biao)達(da)該品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)特征特性的(de)(de)(de)(de)區域也(ye)不排除淮(huai)河以(yi)南(nan)的(de)(de)(de)(de)江蘇(su)(su)(su)省鹽城(cheng)市建湖(hu)縣。當測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)機(ji)(ji)構(gou)存(cun)在多個選擇時，在保(bao)證(zheng)(zheng)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)性狀充(chong)分(fen)(fen)表(biao)(biao)達(da)的(de)(de)(de)(de)情況下(xia)，可綜合(he)(he)(he)考慮(lv)行政(zheng)效率、測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)便利等因素集中(zhong)(zhong)、就近(jin)統籌確定(ding)(ding)測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)地點(dian)。選擇南(nan)京(jing)分(fen)(fen)中(zhong)(zhong)心(xin)作為(wei)測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)機(ji)(ji)構(gou)是(shi)否能(neng)夠(gou)保(bao)證(zheng)(zheng)“農(nong)麥(mai)168”的(de)(de)(de)(de)性狀得(de)到(dao)充(chong)分(fen)(fen)表(biao)(biao)達(da)，可以(yi)通過(guo)(guo)其(qi)與近(jin)似(si)(si)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)的(de)(de)(de)(de)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)植表(biao)(biao)現(xian)進(jin)(jin)一步佐證(zheng)(zheng)。近(jin)似(si)(si)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)“淮(huai)麥(mai)21”在南(nan)京(jing)分(fen)(fen)中(zhong)(zhong)心(xin)經過(guo)(guo)了兩個完整生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)長(chang)(chang)(chang)周(zhou)期的(de)(de)(de)(de)測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)，各生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)長(chang)(chang)(chang)發育(yu)(yu)階(jie)段(duan)正常，性狀描述表(biao)(biao)顯(xian)示36個基(ji)本性狀均(jun)(jun)能(neng)夠(gou)在合(he)(he)(he)理(li)范圍進(jin)(jin)行表(biao)(biao)達(da)，在兩個生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)長(chang)(chang)(chang)周(zhou)期測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)性狀的(de)(de)(de)(de)表(biao)(biao)現(xian)一致。“農(nong)麥(mai)168”與“淮(huai)麥(mai)21”生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)長(chang)(chang)(chang)生(sheng)(sheng)(sheng)育(yu)(yu)過(guo)(guo)程表(biao)(biao)達(da)的(de)(de)(de)(de)性狀均(jun)(jun)未出現(xian)受(shou)測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)地點(dian)影響的(de)(de)(de)(de)情況，均(jun)(jun)得(de)到(dao)了充(chong)分(fen)(fen)表(biao)(biao)達(da)，進(jin)(jin)一步說(shuo)明確定(ding)(ding)南(nan)京(jing)分(fen)(fen)中(zhong)(zhong)心(xin)作為(wei)測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)機(ji)(ji)構(gou)，測(ce)試(shi)(shi)(shi)(shi)地點(dian)的(de)(de)(de)(de)確定(ding)(ding)，并無不當。遂判決(jue)撤銷一審判決(jue)，駁(bo)回江蘇(su)(su)(su)神(shen)某種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業科技公司的(de)(de)(de)(de)訴(su)訟請(qing)求。
【典型意義】
該案(an)是最高人民法院審理的首例涉(she)及植(zhi)物新品(pin)種授(shou)權程序中DUS測試地點(dian)(dian)確定(ding)的行政案(an)件(jian)，重點(dian)(dian)明確了DUS測試地點(dian)(dian)的確定(ding)應當以能夠保(bao)證品(pin)種的性狀(zhuang)得到充分表達(da)為標準這一基本要求。
案例十五
涉“沃玉3號”玉米(mi)品種父母本侵(qin)犯商業(ye)秘密罪案
一審(shen)：河北省邯鄲(dan)市肥鄉區(qu)人民法院(yuan)（2023）冀0407刑初56號
【基本案情】
“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)米(mi)(mi)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)（母(mu)本(ben)M51×父本(ben)VK22-4）系河北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)選(xuan)育品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)，2013年7月(yue)(yue)2日通(tong)過山(shan)西省農作(zuo)物品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)審(shen)定(ding)(ding)委(wei)員會審(shen)定(ding)(ding)，獲得品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)審(shen)定(ding)(ding)證(zheng)書(shu)。河北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)于2019年6月(yue)(yue)4日分別就VK22和M51品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)申(shen)請植物新品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權，并于2021年12月(yue)(yue)30日獲得授權。在申(shen)請和獲得品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)權之前(qian)，河北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)對(dui)“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)米(mi)(mi)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本(ben)繁(fan)殖材料(liao)采取了保(bao)密措施，制訂(ding)了商(shang)業(ye)(ye)秘(mi)密管(guan)(guan)理守則，作(zuo)為(wei)其核心商(shang)業(ye)(ye)秘(mi)密。河北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)與(yu)甘(gan)(gan)肅(su)省張(zhang)掖市(shi)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)每年簽(qian)訂(ding)委(wei)托生產合同(tong)，約(yue)定(ding)(ding)甘(gan)(gan)肅(su)省張(zhang)掖市(shi)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)對(dui)“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)米(mi)(mi)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)制種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本(ben)材料(liao)附有保(bao)密和妥善保(bao)管(guan)(guan)責任，不得私留(liu)、私繁(fan)、贈與(yu)、出售(shou)等(deng)。2021年，甘(gan)(gan)肅(su)省張(zhang)掖市(shi)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)的(de)法(fa)定(ding)(ding)代(dai)表人，即被告人張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)，違反與(yu)河北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)的(de)合同(tong)約(yue)定(ding)(ding)，對(dui)外銷(xiao)售(shou)“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本(ben)930公(gong)斤給崔(cui)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)，崔(cui)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)將(jiang)這些(xie)親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本(ben)交由新疆的(de)范某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)植。范某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)將(jiang)生產出的(de)“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)米(mi)(mi)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)子134200公(gong)斤交由崔(cui)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)回收并銷(xiao)售(shou)。經(jing)司(si)(si)法(fa)鑒定(ding)(ding)，因張(zhang)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)違反約(yue)定(ding)(ding)出售(shou)“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)米(mi)(mi)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)親(qin)(qin)(qin)(qin)本(ben)，給河北某(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)(mou)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)業(ye)(ye)公(gong)司(si)(si)造成經(jing)濟損失499725.24元。同(tong)時，“沃(wo)(wo)(wo)(wo)玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)3號(hao)”玉(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)(yu)米(mi)(mi)品(pin)種(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)(zhong)父本(ben)繁(fan)殖材料(liao)、母(mu)本(ben)繁(fan)殖材料(liao)在2022年8月(yue)(yue)7日之前(qian)不為(wei)公(gong)眾所知(zhi)悉。
【裁判結果】
河(he)北(bei)省邯鄲(dan)市肥鄉區人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)法(fa)(fa)(fa)院一審認(ren)為(wei)，“沃玉(yu)3號”玉(yu)米品種的父本和母本繁殖材料是河(he)北(bei)某(mou)(mou)種業公(gong)司(si)的核心商(shang)業秘(mi)密(mi)，被(bei)告人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)張某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)違反保密(mi)義務，給河(he)北(bei)某(mou)(mou)種業公(gong)司(si)造成重大損失(shi)，情節(jie)嚴重、事實清(qing)楚、證(zheng)據確實充分(fen)，已(yi)構成侵犯(fan)商(shang)業秘(mi)密(mi)罪(zui)，公(gong)訴(su)機關指控(kong)罪(zui)名成立。被(bei)告人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)張某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)自(zi)愿認(ren)罪(zui)認(ren)罰(fa)，依(yi)法(fa)(fa)(fa)從(cong)寬處(chu)罰(fa)。被(bei)告人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)張某(mou)(mou)某(mou)(mou)取(qu)得被(bei)害人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)諒解，依(yi)法(fa)(fa)(fa)酌情從(cong)輕處(chu)罰(fa)。辯(bian)護人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)提出(chu)被(bei)告人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)系初犯(fan)、認(ren)罪(zui)認(ren)罰(fa)、悔(hui)罪(zui)，取(qu)得被(bei)害人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)諒解的辯(bian)護意見予(yu)以采納。遂(sui)判(pan)處(chu)被(bei)告人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)有期徒刑(xing)八個(ge)月，并處(chu)罰(fa)金(jin)人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)民(min)幣十(shi)萬(wan)元。一審判(pan)決后，被(bei)告人(ren)(ren)(ren)(ren)未提出(chu)上(shang)訴(su)。
【典型意義】
本(ben)案將違(wei)反保密(mi)約定對(dui)外銷售(shou)雜交種親(qin)本(ben)繁殖材料(liao)的行(xing)為(wei)認(ren)定為(wei)侵(qin)犯商業(ye)秘密(mi)的犯罪行(xing)為(wei)，并依法(fa)追(zhui)究刑事(shi)責任。裁判(pan)彰顯(xian)對(dui)種業(ye)領域違(wei)法(fa)犯罪行(xing)為(wei)的嚴(yan)厲懲治，加(jia)大(da)了對(dui)種業(ye)知識產權尤其(qi)是親(qin)本(ben)繁殖材料(liao)的商業(ye)秘密(mi)刑事(shi)保護(hu)力度，有力維護(hu)了種業(ye)市場經濟(ji)秩序。
