辨識李逵和李鬼

Identify Li Kui and Li Gui

?

“竭澤而漁，豈不獲得？而明年無魚；焚菽而田，豈不獲得，而明年無獸?！边@句話出自《呂氏春秋》。這話看起來文字似乎有點晦澀，其實不難理解。它是在忠告世人：做事如果只顧眼前利益，無論你一時獲得多大的豐收，但絕對不會長久，最終是會走上窮途末路的。

"To drain the lake to catch fish, how can the fish not be caught??But next year there will be no fish.?To burn down the woods, how can the animal not be hunt??But next year there will be no beasts."?This quote comes from Lv’s Spring and Autumn Annals.?The sentence may seem obscure, but they are not difficult to understand.?It is a warning to the world: if you only focus on the immediate interests, no matter how big a harvest you get at the moment, but it never lasts long, and will eventually be on the dead road.

四川星河公司和成都金橙公司，就像一對狹路相逢的冤家，為了侵權(quán)和反侵權(quán)的問題，幾年以來，一直都在進行著明里暗里的博弈。這種博弈，有時甚至是毫不留情的。他們數(shù)次走上法庭，各顯神通，官司從綿陽打到成都，從成都打到北京，打得來天昏地暗飛沙走石。

Sichuan Xinghe Company and Chengdu Jincheng Company, like a pair of rivals, for the infringement and anti-infringement problem, had been engaged in the game for several years.?The game was sometimes even merciless.?They went to the court several times, showing own magic power, and the lawsuit was transferred from Mianyang to Chengdu, from Chengdu to Beijing, day by day and night by night.

問題的癥結(jié)：兩個面目相似，手中都掄著板斧的好漢，到底誰是李逵？誰是李鬼？

The crux of the problem was that: two persons had the similar facial features, with the board ax in the hand; after all, who was Li Kui??Who was Li Gui?

《四川經(jīng)濟日報》曾做過這樣的報道：

Sichuan Economic Daily once reported:

?

“點草成金”竟讓四川星河建材周興和靠秸稈發(fā)家！毫不起眼的稻草經(jīng)過一番技術(shù)處理，就可變成“黃金萬兩”的輕質(zhì)墻材。這一“點草成金”的專利技術(shù)，引來眾多投資者的明爭暗斗，也使不少發(fā)財心切的商家不擇手段大肆進行仿制。昨日，其發(fā)明人周興和在成都向外界宣布，他已組織律師小組，從即日開始“清理門戶”，首先將全國各地20家克隆其技術(shù)和產(chǎn)品的企業(yè)推上被告席。

"Turning straw into gold", Sichuan Xinghe Building Materials’ Zhou Xinghe unexpectedly made a fortune relying on the straw!?After some technical treatments, the unremarkable straw can be turned into the "priceless" lightweight wall material.?This "turning straw into gold" patent technology, attracted many investors infighting, but also made many businessmen eager to get rich by hook to copy the technology.?Its inventor, Zhou Xinghe, announced yesterday in Chengdu that he had organised a team of lawyers to "clean up the house", starting with 20 companies across the country that had infringed his technology and products and put them in the dock.

據(jù)省建設(shè)廳和省科技廳有關(guān)人士介紹，秸稈綜合利用這道世界難題，近年來首先在四川獲得重大突破。四川農(nóng)民企業(yè)家、四川星河建材有限公司總裁周興和花費10年心血，在技術(shù)上實現(xiàn)四大突破，終于成功運用秸稈開發(fā)出“五防輕體隔墻板”等一系列綠色建材產(chǎn)品，先后獲得國家8項專利，并被列入國家星火計劃項目、國家環(huán)保重點推廣項目、2001年國家級重點新產(chǎn)品。然而，就在發(fā)明人采取技術(shù)入股的方式，在全國20多個省市辦起了37家生產(chǎn)秸稈墻代替秦磚漢瓦的企業(yè)之時，卻驚奇地發(fā)現(xiàn)，市場上出現(xiàn)了不少外形和技術(shù)相似的“克隆品”。1999年6月，周興和在綿陽發(fā)現(xiàn)，綿陽高新區(qū)高強輕體建材公司生產(chǎn)銷售與其專利完全相同的五防輕體隔墻板，隨即將對方告上法庭。去年2月，成都市中級人民法院判決高強輕體建材公司停止生產(chǎn)侵權(quán)產(chǎn)品，公開賠禮道歉，賠償損失3萬元。今年4月，周興和又在成都周邊市場邛崍等地發(fā)現(xiàn)了與其專利相同的五防輕體隔墻板，只好又將生產(chǎn)商成都市金橙環(huán)保輕質(zhì)建材公司告至法庭。最讓周興和不安的是，各地已出現(xiàn)至少20家“克隆企業(yè)”，可謂防不勝防。據(jù)建材專家介紹，四川年產(chǎn)秸稈4500萬噸，全國高達6億噸，而目前通過各種方式利用的不足10%。若將其中的5%轉(zhuǎn)化為建材產(chǎn)品，年產(chǎn)值就高達數(shù)百億元。正是其中蘊藏的巨大商機，令各方投資者紛至沓來。周興和表示，不管花多大的代價，都要將官司進行到底。

According to the introduction of concerned personage of Provincial Department of Construction and Provincial Department of Science and Technology, the world difficult problem of straw comprehensive use, obtained major breakthrough in recent years in Sichuan.?Farmer entrepreneur in Sichuan, President of Sichuan Xinghe Building Materials Co., Ltd., Zhou Xinghe had spent 10 years, and realized the four big breakthrough on technology, finally and successfully applied the straw to develop the "five-proof lightweight partition board" and a series of green building materials products, which had won eight national patents, and was included in the national Spark Plan Program, national key environmental protection projects, and 2001 state-level key new products.?However, when the inventor adopted the way of technology investment, to set up 37 enterprises in more than 20 provinces and cities across the country with the straw wall production instead of the brick and tile, he surprised to find that there had appeared many "counterfeits" with similar appearance and technology on the market. In June of 1999, Zhou Xinghe discovered in Mianyang that, Mianyang High-Tech Zone Gaoqiang Lightweight Building Materials Company produced and sold the five-proof lightweight partition wall board identical with his patent, and immediately sued it to the court.?In February last year, the Chengdu Intermediate People's Court ordered Gaoqiang Company to stop producing the infringing products and to make a public apology and compensate for the losses of 30,000 yuan.?In April this year, Zhou Xinghe also found the five-proof lightweight partition wall board identical with his patent in Qionglai and other places around Chengdu, and had to sue the manufacturer Chengdu Jincheng Environmental Protection Light Building Materials Company to the court.?What made Zhou Xinghe uneasy mostly was that, there had already appeared at least 20 "clone enterprises" in all regions.?According to the building materials experts, the annual output of straw in Sichuan was 45 million tons, and in the whole country was as high as 600 million tons, but the current use was less than 10% through various ways.?If 5% of them was turned into the building materials products, the annual output value could be as high as tens of billions of yuan.?It was the huge business opportunities contained therein that made the investors coming constantly.?Zhou Xinghe said that no matter what the cost is, the lawsuit will be carried through.

?

星河公司和金橙公司的官司，除了前面所述的法院判決過程外，他們在專利局也有一番精彩的博弈。2000年下半年，星河公司起訴金橙公司侵權(quán)，金橙公司于2001年初以星河公司的隔墻板不具備創(chuàng)造性為由，要求專利局復(fù)審委員會宣布星河公司專利無效。專利局復(fù)審委于2001年5月30日發(fā)文，駁回金橙公司要求，確認(rèn)星河公司專利全部有效。

In addition to the court process of the case between Xinghe and Jincheng described above, there was also a good game at the Patent Office.?In the second half of 2000, Xinghe Company sued Jincheng Company for infringement. In early 2001, Jincheng Company asked the Patent Office Review Board to declare Xinghe Company's patent invalid on the grounds that the partition wall boards of Xinghe Company were not creative.?The Patent Office Review Board issued a notice on May 30, 2001, rejecting the request of Jincheng Company and confirming that all the patents of Xinghe Company were valid.

而金橙公司又于2001年下半年，以星河公司隔墻板不具備新穎性為由，再次要求專利局復(fù)審委宣布星河公司專利無效。專利局復(fù)審委又于2001年11月26日發(fā)文，再次確認(rèn)星河公司專利全部有效。事情延續(xù)到2002年上半年，金橙公司又聯(lián)合綿陽高強公司，以仁和輕型建材公司名義，再次出面申請宣布星河公司專利無效。專利局于2002年5月24日發(fā)文，再次確認(rèn)星河公司專利全部有效！

In the second half of 2001, Jincheng Company again asked the Patent Office Review Board to declare the patent of Xinghe Company was invalid on the grounds that the partition board of Xinghe Company was not novel.?The Patent Office Review Board issued a document on November 26, 2001, confirming again that the patents of Xinghe Company were all valid.?Things continued to the first half of 2002, Jincheng Company and Mianyang Gaoqiang Company, in the name of Renhe Light Building Materials Company, again applied for the invalidation of Xinghe Company’s patent.?The Patent Office issued a document on May 24, 2002, confirming again that all the patents of Xinghe Company were valid!

哎呀呀，這個扯皮的過程，就像在念一段“繞口令”，有時連筆者也念得有些糊涂了，念著念著也成了結(jié)巴。

Alas, this process of wrangling was like reading a "tongue twister", and sometimes even the author also reads and feels confused.

這時，奇跡卻終于發(fā)生了！

Then, at last, a miracle happened!

2004年初，金橙公司志在必奪，再次把他們的神通發(fā)揮到了極致。4月12日，專利局竟然否定自己過去幾次言之鑿鑿的文字結(jié)論，再次發(fā)文，宣布星河公司的專利部分有效，部分無效！按照《專利法》規(guī)定，實用新型專利申請無效只能是兩次，而專利局復(fù)審委卻在第4次復(fù)審時，宣布星河公司專利部分無效！

At the beginning of 2004, Jincheng Company once again put their magic to the best use.?On April 12, the Patent Office denied the firm conclusions it had made several times in the past, and once again declared Xinghe's patent partially valid and partially invalid.?According to the provisions of the Patent Law, the utility model patent applications can only be invalid twice, but the Patent Office Review Board in the fourth review, declared Xinghe Company's patent partially invalid!

什么叫我行我素？這就是。

What is my own way??Here it is.

周興和得到這個結(jié)果，真是啼笑皆非欲哭無淚，沒有辦法，只好又起訴到北京某法院，打起一場行政訴訟官司來。這樣一樁讓明眼人一看就明白的官司，北京一家有名的專利代理公司和一個著名的律師，看完周興和給他們提供的一系列證據(jù)，信心滿滿地告訴他：這樁官司是壇子里捉烏龜——手到擒拿?？沙龊跛麄円饬系氖牵麄冑M盡九牛二虎之力，也終無回天之力，也灰溜溜地敗下陣來。那家法院一二審判決，竟依然維持星河公司的專利部分有效、部分無效的結(jié)論！

Zhou Xinghe was so distraught that he had no choice but to take his case to a court in Beijing and start an administrative lawsuit.?A well-known patent agency in Beijing and a famous lawyer, after reading the evidence Zhou Xinghe had presented to them, confidently told him that this case was a case easy as a piece of cake.?But to their surprise, they tried their best and failed miserably.?That court still maintained the conclusion that Xinghe's patent was partially valid and partially invalid!