“让技术说得准、争议审得透”

Core Viewpoint - The establishment and development of the technical investigator system at the Beijing Intellectual Property Court have significantly improved the efficiency and accuracy of technical fact-finding in complex technology-related legal cases, particularly in the context of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence [1][2][4]. Group 1: Technical Investigator System - The Beijing Intellectual Property Court has appointed 306 technical investigators over the past ten years, who have participated in over 4,500 technical cases and provided more than 3,000 technical investigation opinions [1]. - The technical investigators come from diverse professional backgrounds, with 83% holding graduate degrees and 40% holding doctoral degrees, averaging 15 years of relevant technical research experience [2]. - The court has implemented a dual-track operation model that allows technical investigators to participate in both civil and administrative patent cases, enhancing the consistency and stability of technical fact recognition [3]. Group 2: Impact on Legal Proceedings - The involvement of technical investigators has expedited the resolution of disputes, as demonstrated in a patent infringement case involving environmental equipment, where a key component was identified through thorough investigation [2][3]. - The court has achieved a "100%" rate of immediate post-hearing deliberation and submission of technical investigation opinions within one week, indicating improved resource allocation efficiency [3]. - The average duration for handling technical cases has been reduced by nearly 25% due to the contributions of technical investigators [3][4]. Group 3: Future Directions - The court aims to further enhance the application of the technical fact-finding mechanism and integrate the work of technical investigators into the overall judicial process to support technological innovation [4]. - Continuous improvement of the technical investigator system is seen as a crucial support for enhancing the ability to clarify technical facts and improving the quality of judicial decisions [4].