No, the principle of judging patent infringement: to judge whether an act constitutes an infringement of a patent for invention or utility model depends on whether the object pointed by the act belongs to the protection scope of the patent for invention or utility model. If the technical scheme implemented by the alleged infringement contains all the necessary technical features expressed in one or more claims of the patent for invention or utility model, the act belongs to the protection scope of the patent for invention or utility model and constitutes an infringement of the patent for invention or utility model. This is the principle of universal coverage. According to the principle of universal coverage, judging whether an act constitutes an infringement of an invention patent or utility model patent does not require that the object accused of infringement is exactly the same as the technical scheme protected by the invention patent or utility model patent, but only requires that it cover the technical features of the claim recorded in the claim. Baiteng Patent Forum lists many cases of patent infringement. It can be seen that when judging the infringement of design patent, the accused product is compared with the design patent product represented in the picture or photo. If they are the same or similar, the accused product constitutes infringement.
Identification of network picture infringement;
1, publishing his works without the permission of the copyright owner;
2. Publishing a work created in cooperation with others as one's own work without the permission of the co-author;
3, did not participate in the creation, in order to seek personal fame and fortune, signed in other people's works;
4. distorting or tampering with other people's works;
5. Plagiarizing other people's works;
6. Use the work by exhibition, shooting or similar shooting, or use the work by adaptation, translation and annotation without the permission of the copyright owner. Unless otherwise provided for in this law;
7, the use of other people's works, should pay remuneration but did not pay; 8. Renting works or audio-visual products without the permission of the copyright owner or copyright-related obligee of film works and works created by similar film production methods, computer software and audio-visual products, except as otherwise provided in this Law.