由於專利權之無體性格，其侵害之損害賠償數額每難加以證明或計算，我國專利法為使專利權人易於主張其權利，於第八十五條第一項及第三項明文規定有五種損害賠償額計算方式，即具體損害賠償說、差額說、總利益說、總價額說及酌定損害賠償說。本文根據德國及我國民法之原理，著眼於專利權之無體財產性，分析我國專利法所允許之損害賠償計算方式之法律基礎以及其優缺點。又本法之損害賠償額計算方式並非列舉之規定，且德國法上之類推授權報酬說乃德國實務上最常被採用之計算方式，因此，本文認為就我國法而言，被害人亦得採類推授權報酬說為損害賠償額之計算方式。最後，鑒於專利權乃法律明文規定之排他性專屬權，其效力本及於法律所允許之任何利用可能性。此可能性之運用，縱因侵害人違法為之而獲利，除扣除必要費用與成本外，本即應歸專利權人，今若專利權人除所失利益(不一定與侵害人所獲利潤相等)外，又受有損害，實應讓其在不重覆的前提下向侵害人請求其所受之損害及侵權人因侵權行為所獲之利益，以獲得完全之賠償。基此，本文建議於將來修法時，宜於不重覆計算之範圍內讓被害人得累積計算並請求所受損害(及所失利益)以及侵權行為人所獲之利益。

A patent, being an exclusive right granted by state, is intangible in nature, although its market value is objectively tangible. This intangibility has made the principles for assessing damages in the case of tangible goods unsuitable or, at least, unapt. In view of this, most countries give patent owners flexible methods to prove and calculate their damages when their patent is infringed. For example, Taiwan's patent law allows patent owners to calculate their damages with the so-called property difference formula, the infringer's gross proceeds formula, the infringer's net proceeds formula, and the enhanced damages formula. Although it is not expressly provided in Taiwan's patent law, this article argues that the reasonable loyalties foumula permitted in German law and American law should also be recognized in Taiwan's patent law. In addition, this article uses relevant legal principles in German patent law and civil code to examine Taiwan's damages remedy for patent infringement, and makes some amendment recommendations.