It is particularly important for the obligee to choose the most favorable and feasible method of obtaining evidence according to the specific circumstances of the case. The main methods are as follows: 1. Collect evidence by oneself and entrust a lawyer to investigate and collect evidence. Because intellectual property cases are very professional, it will be difficult for the obligee to accurately grasp the direction and scope of evidence collection. Lawyers specialize in legal work and provide legal services to the society as their profession. Lawyers not only have rich legal knowledge, but also have rich experience in handling cases and skilled litigation skills, and can make appropriate choices for the parties at different stages of litigation. Generally speaking, it is much more convenient for lawyers to investigate and collect evidence than the parties, and the scope of evidence collection is more extensive and accurate. In judicial practice, judges often treat lawyers differently and provide more convenience. 2. Apply for evidence preservation by a notary public. One of the statutory businesses of notaries is "preserving evidence". Notarized evidence has the effect of presumption of truth. Article 59 of the Civil Procedure Law stipulates: "The people's court shall confirm the validity of notarized legal acts, legal facts and documents. However, unless there is enough evidence to the contrary to overturn the notarial certificate. " The evidence preservation of notary office has the same effect as that of the court ex officio. Before litigation, the parties can make full use of the notary office to collect and preserve evidence, which is an effective measure to make good preparations before litigation. 3. Apply to the court for pre-litigation evidence preservation. Article 25 of the Supreme Court's Provisions on Several Issues of Evidence in Civil Litigation in 2002: "If there are provisions in laws and judicial interpretations on the preservation of evidence before litigation, such provisions shall be followed." This establishes a legal basis for the parties or interested parties to apply to the court for pre-litigation evidence preservation. The judicial interpretation of the Supreme Court, which was implemented on June 5438+ 10, 2002, stipulates that trademark infringement cases may apply for pre-litigation evidence preservation. Article 1 6 of Several Provisions on Applicable Laws for Stopping Patent Infringement before Litigation, which was implemented by the Supreme Court on July12006, also stipulates the preservation of evidence before litigation. Article 1 of the Interpretation on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Copyright Civil Disputes, which was implemented by the Supreme Court on June 5438+00, 2002, stipulates that "the people's courts shall accept the following copyright civil disputes", one of which is "applying for pre-litigation property preservation and pre-litigation evidence preservation cases". Evidently, evidence preservation before litigation exists in a large number of intellectual property infringement cases. After taking protective measures, the parties or interested parties shall bring a lawsuit within the statutory time limit. If no lawsuit is brought to the court, such preservation measures shall be lifted, or relevant evidence shall be destroyed or returned, and the applicant shall also bear the losses caused thereby. 4. Apply to the people's court for evidence collection. Article 64 of China's Civil Procedure Law stipulates that the people's court shall investigate and collect evidence that the parties and their agents cannot obtain on their own due to objective reasons, or evidence that the people's court considers necessary for hearing a case. Based on this, when the parties file patent infringement, trademark infringement and copyright infringement lawsuits, they often apply for evidence collection. The evidence obtained is usually divided into three categories: one is to preserve the accused infringing products; Second, investigate the financial books of the alleged infringement unit to determine the amount of compensation; Third, collect the evidence of the alleged infringer's infringement. According to the provisions of the Civil Procedure Law and the judicial interpretation of the Supreme Court, there are two ways for the court to investigate and collect evidence: one is to take the initiative to investigate and collect evidence according to its authority. Involving facts and related procedural matters that may harm national interests, social public interests or the legitimate rights and interests of others, the court shall take the initiative to investigate and collect evidence according to its functions and powers, without the need for the parties to file an application for evidence collection. The second is to collect evidence according to the application of the parties. After the scope of the court's initiative to obtain evidence is narrowed, it is becoming more and more important for the parties to apply for evidence investigation. If there is a lack of timely application for evidence investigation by the parties, the court will generally not take the initiative to investigate the evidence. Whether the court starts the investigation and evidence collection mechanism after the parties file an application for evidence investigation depends on the court's review and judgment. Only when the application submitted by the parties meets the scope of evidence collection by the court, the court has the obligation to investigate and collect evidence, otherwise the court shall reject the application. When the parties apply for court investigation and evidence collection, they should pay attention to two points: first, the scope of evidence applied for investigation must conform to the legal situation; Second, this application must pay attention to the time limit for proof. The usual measures taken by the court are to take photos of the accused infringing products that are easy to obtain, or to record the technical characteristics of the accused infringing products, and to seal up and extract the easily obtained account books and trademarks, while the financial account books of the accused infringer are often extremely difficult to obtain because of the obstruction or concealment of the infringer. 5. Apply to the administrative organ for investigation and evidence collection. Chapter V of China's Patent Administrative Law Enforcement Measures has special provisions on investigation and evidence collection. In the process of investigating and handling cases, the department in charge of patent work may, if necessary, investigate and collect relevant evidence according to its functions and powers. You can check it