JP2020166627A - Counterfeit intellectual property response system, counterfeit intellectual property response method, and program - Google Patents

Abstract

To provide a counterfeit intellectual property response system, a counterfeit intellectual property response method, and a program that can efficiently extract a counterfeit product posted on a website and perform determination regarding design right similarity.SOLUTION: A counterfeit intellectual property response system includes an extraction unit (200) configured to extract a counterfeit product posted on a website, and a determination unit (300) configured to refer to the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit and a design for which the design right is registered to calculate a degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the design and perform determination regarding the similarity of the design right based on the calculated degree of approximation.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

The present invention relates to a counterfeit IP IP response system, a counterfeit IP response method, and a program.

In recent years, with the enhancement of shopping sites on the Internet, the purchase of products via the Internet (so-called online shopping) has expanded rapidly. Along with this, there are increasing opportunities for illegal counterfeit products, including dead copies, to be sold through shopping sites. The flood of such counterfeit products reduces the quality of the market and increases the likelihood that the purchaser of the product will unintentionally suffer a disadvantage. The term "counterfeit product" as used herein includes dead copies and articles whose design shape has been partially modified.

Here, an infringement verification system capable of verifying whether or not the right of an object represented by a three-dimensional shape is infringed has been proposed (see Patent Document 1). Further, a display device for displaying design information related to each other has been proposed (see Patent Document 2).

JP-A-2018-116466 JP-A-2015-64836

By the way, the technique described in Patent Document 1 is for confirming whether or not it infringes an existing patent right or the like from the time of product development, and effectively responds to a copy posted on a website. It's not something you can do. Similarly, the technique described in Patent Document 2 cannot effectively cope with the copy posted on the website.

The present invention has been made in consideration of such circumstances, and is a counterfeit product intellectual property handling system that can effectively deal with counterfeit products posted on the website, a counterfeit product intellectual property handling method, and a counterfeit product intellectual property handling method. The purpose is to provide a program.

The counterfeit intellectual property handling system, the counterfeit intellectual property handling method, and the program according to the present invention have adopted the following configurations.
(1): In one aspect of the present invention, an extraction unit (200) for extracting counterfeit products posted on a website, a counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit (200), and a design right are registered. Counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence including a determination unit (300) that calculates the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the design based on the design and determines similarity based on the design right based on the calculated degree of approximation. It is a system.

(2): In the aspect of (1) above, at least one of the genuine product equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products posted on one or more websites is monitored, and the genuine product equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products posted are used. Further, a monitoring unit (100) for determining whether or not to perform extraction by the extraction unit (200) is further provided based on at least one of them.

(3): In the aspect of (2) above, the monitoring unit (100) monitors at least the genuine product equipment rate, and when the current value or future forecast value of the genuine product equipment rate becomes less than the threshold value, or , When the amount of decrease in the genuine equipment rate, the expected future decrease in the genuine equipment rate, the decrease in the genuine equipment rate, or the future expected decrease in the genuine equipment rate exceeds the threshold value. , It is determined to perform the extraction by the extraction unit (200).

(4): In the embodiment (2) or (3) above, the monitoring unit (100) monitors at least the number of counterfeit products posted, and the current value or future forecast value of the number of counterfeit products posted is equal to or higher than the threshold value. Or, the amount of increase in the number of counterfeit products, the expected increase in the number of counterfeit products in the future, the rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products, or the expected rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products in the future is equal to or greater than the threshold. In the case of, it is decided to perform the extraction by the extraction unit (200).

(5): In any one of the above (2) to (4), the monitoring unit (100) is based on a combination of a value related to the genuine product equipment rate and a value related to the number of counterfeit products posted. It is for determining whether or not to perform extraction by the extraction unit (200). Here, the values related to the equipment rate are, for example, the current equipment rate, the future forecast value, the amount of decrease, and the future forecast decrease rate, and the values related to the number of publications are, for example, the current number of publications and the future forecast. Value, amount of increase, expected rate of increase in the future.

(6): In any one of the above (1) to (5), the extraction unit (200) uses a reference simpler than the degree of approximation with respect to the counterfeit product posted on the website. By performing the primary determination based on the above, the counterfeit products extracted as the determination target of the determination unit (300) are narrowed down.

(7): In any one of the above (1) to (6), the extraction unit (200) has a plurality of positions with respect to the counterfeit product and the design posted on the website. When the results of the pattern comparison satisfy a predetermined condition, the counterfeit product posted on the website is extracted as the judgment target of the judgment unit (300). It is a thing.

(8): In the aspect of the above (7), when the design is a partial design, the extraction unit (200) has at least one end of both ends of the design across which a scanning line along the specific direction crosses. The lengths in the specific directions are compared with respect to the position where the portion is the solid line portion of the partial design.

(9): In the aspect of (7) or (8) above, the extraction unit (200) prepares the outline of the counterfeit product posted on the website and the outline of the design before performing the pattern comparison. In order to match, a fitting process including adjusting the size of at least one of the contour of the counterfeit product and the contour of the design is performed, and by performing the fitting process, the contour of the counterfeit product and the contour of the design are combined. When the difference between the above is equal to or less than the threshold value, the counterfeit product posted on the website is extracted as the judgment target of the determination unit without performing the pattern comparison, or the counterfeit product posted on the website is said. It is judged to be similar to a design right.

(10): In any one of the above (1) to (9), the extraction unit (200) has a reception unit (230) for receiving an image of a counterfeit product, and the determination unit (200) 300) calculates the degree of approximation based on the image received by the reception unit (230) and the design when the image of the counterfeit product posted on the website does not exist, and obtains the calculated degree of approximation. Based on the above, the design right and the similarity judgment are performed.

(11): In any one of the above (1) to (10), the determination unit (300) applies the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit (200) and the design as the degree of approximation. On the other hand, the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area are calculated, and the design right and the similarity are determined based on the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area.

(12): In the aspect of (11) above, the determination unit (300) determines whether or not the design right is similar to the design right based on the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area. It is a thing.

(13): In the aspect of (11) or (12) above, when the design is a partial design, the determination unit (300) sets the total length along the solid line portion of the partial design as the circumference of the design. It is calculated as the length, and the total length of the portion corresponding to the solid line portion of the partial design in the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit (200) is calculated as the peripheral length of the counterfeit product.

(14): In any one of the above (1) to (13), the determination unit (300) has, when the design is a partial design, one or more solid line portions of the design and the said The area of the specific area surrounded by the boundary line connecting the plurality of ends of one or more solid line portions is calculated as the area of the design, and the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit (200) has the specific area. The area of the corresponding region is calculated as the area of the counterfeit product.

(15): In any one of the above (1) to (14), the information output unit (400) for outputting information indicating the determination result of the determination unit (300) is further provided, and the determination unit ( In 300), the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the overall design is calculated based on the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit (200) and the overall design for which the design right is registered, and the calculated degree of approximation is calculated. Based on, it is determined whether or not it is similar to the design right of the whole design, not similar to the design right of the whole design, or similar to the design right of the whole design. However, when it is determined that the information output unit (400) is similar to the design right of the overall design or is not similar to the design right of the overall design, the determination unit (300) It outputs information indicating the determination result.

(16): In the aspect of the above (15), when the determination unit (300) determines whether or not it is similar to the design right of the overall design in the determination using the overall design. In addition, the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the partial design is calculated based on the counterfeit product that is the subject of the determination using the entire design and the partial design for which the design right is registered, and the calculated approximation is performed. Based on the degree, it is determined whether the design right of the partial design is similar or not similar to the design right of the partial design.

(17): In any one of the above (1) to (14), the determination unit (300) has a similarity between the degree of approximation and the design right based on the model to which the counterfeit product corresponds. One of the judgment criteria maps whose correspondence with the above is set in advance for each model is selected, and the similarity of the design right is judged based on the selected judgment criteria map. is there.

(18): In any one of the above (1) to (14), the determination unit (300) is the main part of the design in the difference between the design in which the design right is registered and the counterfeit product. The correspondence between the degree of similarity and the presence or absence of similarity of the design right depends on whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the design and the counterfeit product, based on whether or not is included. One judgment standard map is selected from a plurality of set judgment standard maps, and a judgment regarding the similarity of the design right is made based on the selected judgment standard map.

(19): One aspect of the present invention is that one or more computers extract a counterfeit product posted on a website, and the counterfeit product is based on the extracted counterfeit product and a design for which a design right is registered. This is a counterfeit product intellectual property handling method in which the degree of similarity between a product and the design is calculated, and the similarity of the design right is determined based on the calculated degree of similarity.

(20): One aspect of the present invention is to have one or a plurality of computers extract a counterfeit product posted on a website, and the counterfeit product based on the extracted counterfeit product and a design in which a design right is registered. This is a program that calculates the degree of similarity between the design and the design and makes a determination regarding the similarity of the design right based on the calculated degree of similarity.

According to the above-mentioned aspects (1), (19), and (20), the counterfeit product posted on the website can be extracted, and the determination regarding the similarity of the design right with respect to the extracted counterfeit product can be automatically performed. it can. As a result, it is possible to effectively deal with counterfeit products posted on the website, such as being able to perform similarity determination with high efficiency at one time for many counterfeit products. As a result, it is possible to promote the reduction of counterfeit products posted on the website, and through the improvement of the quality of the market, it is possible to reduce the chances of the purchaser to purchase the low quality products.

According to the aspect (2) above, at least one of the genuine product equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products listed can be monitored, and necessary measures can be taken when the sales volume of counterfeit products increases above a certain level. As a result, the processing capacity of the counterfeit product intellectual property handling system can be allocated in preference to the counterfeit product having a large sales volume, and as a result, the counterfeit product can be dealt with more effectively.

According to the aspect (3) above, the sales status of counterfeit products can be estimated based on the genuine equipment equipment rate, and necessary measures can be taken regularly or at any time when the sales volume of counterfeit products increases. .. For example, when estimating the sales situation based on future values such as the future forecast value of the genuine product equipment rate, the future forecast decrease amount, the future forecast decrease rate, etc., take necessary measures before a large number of counterfeit products actually appear on the market. It can be done, and the buyer can have less chance to purchase low quality goods.

According to the aspect (4) above, the sales situation of the counterfeit product can be estimated based on the number of counterfeit products posted, and necessary measures can be taken when the sales volume of the counterfeit product increases. For example, when estimating the sales situation based on future values such as the future forecast value of the number of counterfeit products, the future forecast increase amount, the future forecast increase rate, etc., it is necessary before many counterfeit products are actually sold. It is possible to take action and reduce the chances of the purchaser purchasing low quality products.

According to the aspect (5) above, it is possible to more appropriately grasp and estimate the sales status of counterfeit products based on the combination of the value related to the genuine product equipment rate and the value related to the number of counterfeit products posted. As a result, it is possible to more appropriately determine the necessity of correspondence.

According to the aspect (6) above, all of the many counterfeit products posted on the website are narrowed down by performing the primary determination by the extraction unit and narrowing down the counterfeit products extracted as the determination target of the determination unit. Compared with the case of making a precise judgment using the degree of approximation, it is possible to deal with many counterfeit products with higher efficiency at one time.

According to the aspect (7) above, the extraction unit performs pattern comparison between the counterfeit product and the design, and when the result of the pattern comparison satisfies a predetermined condition, the counterfeit product is extracted as the determination target of the determination unit. Therefore, it is possible to respond with high efficiency to many counterfeit products posted on the website. For example, according to a pattern comparison in which lengths in specific directions are compared, the calculation load is smaller than in the case of obtaining the circumference and area, and it is possible to make a determination necessary for high efficiency.

According to the aspect (8) above, even when the design right relates to a partial design, the pattern comparison can be performed to narrow down the counterfeit products to be judged by the judgment unit. This makes it possible to respond more efficiently to many counterfeit products posted on websites.

According to the aspect (9) above, when the difference between the contour of the counterfeit product and the contour of the design becomes equal to or less than the threshold value due to the fitting process, a predetermined measure is taken, and many counterfeit products posted on the website are taken. Can be dealt with.

According to the aspect (10) above, by providing a reception unit that accepts the input of the image of the counterfeit product, it is possible to deal with the case where the image of the counterfeit product does not exist on the website.

According to the aspect (11) above, a determination regarding the similarity of design rights is made based on the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area. Here, with respect to the outer shape appearing on the two-dimensional plane, when both the circumference and the area are the same, the contour shape tends to be the same. Therefore, by using both the circumference and the area as determination elements, it is possible to determine the similarity of design rights with higher accuracy. Further, when the determination is performed using the length in a specific direction as the primary determination by the extraction unit, the extraction unit and the determination unit differ from each other in terms of "length in specific direction", "perimeter", and "area". Judgment regarding similarity will be made based on three factors. In such a case, the determination regarding the similarity of the design right will be made with higher accuracy.

According to the aspect (12) above, it is possible to determine with higher accuracy whether or not the design right is similar to the design right based on the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area.

According to the aspects (13) and (14) above, even when the design right relates to a partial design, the determination regarding the similarity of the design right is performed with higher accuracy by using the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area. Can be done.

According to the aspect (15) above, it is possible to determine whether or not the counterfeit product is similar to the design right based on the overall design (that is, the basic configuration aspect of the design).

According to the aspect (16) above, it is possible to determine whether or not the counterfeit product is similar to the design right based on the partial design (that is, the specific configuration aspect of the design). For example, when it is determined that whether or not the design right of the entire design is similar to the design right of the entire design is undecided in the determination using the entire design, the difference between the designs to be compared can be grasped by performing the determination using the partial design. After that, it is possible to perform the similarity judgment in more detail with high accuracy.

According to the aspect (17) above, the judgment criteria selected from a plurality of judgment criteria maps in which the correspondence between the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the design and the presence or absence of similarity in the design right is set in advance for each model. Since the determination regarding similarity is made using the map, the determination can be made more accurately.

According to the aspect (18) above, the correspondence between the degree of approximation and the presence or absence of similarity of the design right depends on whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the design and the counterfeit product. Since the determination regarding the similarity is performed using the determination criterion map selected from the set plurality of determination criterion maps, the determination can be performed more accurately.

It is a figure which shows the whole structure of the counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence system of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the contents of the equipment rate history DB of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the content of the counterfeit product publication number history DB of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the contents of the counterfeiter management DB of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structure of the monitoring part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the monitoring process of the genuine product equipment rate of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the monitoring process of the number of counterfeit products of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the monitoring process by the monitoring part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structure of the extraction part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the processing of the fitting part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the processing of the scanning part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the processing of the scanning part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the processing of the scanning part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the process of the length comparison part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the processing of the scanning part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the processing of the scanning part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the processing of the scanning part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the process of the length comparison part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure which shows the structure of the determination part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the process of the determination part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the process of the determination part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another example of the process of the determination part of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the process of the similarity determination part of 1st Embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the processing flow of the server apparatus of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the 1st determination of the modification of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the 2nd determination of the modification of 1st Embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the processing flow of the server apparatus of the modification of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating the similarity determination standard map in which the area standard of 1st Embodiment is variable. It is a figure for demonstrating the variation of the similarity determination criterion map of 1st Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating a plurality of similarity determination criteria maps of 2nd Embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the processing flow of the server apparatus of 2nd Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating one similarity determination criterion map of 3rd Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another similarity determination criterion map of 3rd Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating another similarity determination criterion map of 3rd Embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the pattern comparison in 3rd Embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the processing flow of the server apparatus of 3rd Embodiment. It is a figure for demonstrating an example of the processing of the scanning part of the modification of 1st to 3rd Embodiment.

Hereinafter, the counterfeit intellectual property handling system, the counterfeit intellectual property handling method, and the program of the embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. In the following description, configurations having the same or similar functions are designated by the same reference numerals. Then, the duplicate description of those configurations may be omitted. As used herein, the term "based on XX" means "based on at least XX" and includes the case where it is based on another element in addition to XX. Further, "based on XX" is not limited to the case where XX is directly used, but also includes the case where it is based on the case where calculation or processing is performed on XX. "XX" is an arbitrary element (for example, arbitrary information). In the present specification, the term "counterfeit product" broadly means a product made to resemble a genuine product (genuine product), and is used to include a product that does not infringe intellectual property rights. In the following, the database is simply referred to as "DB". The “map” in the present specification is an example of a “judgment standard”.

"Similarity" in the present specification is determined by whether or not a certain criterion is satisfied in comparison between a registered design and a counterfeit product, in relation to pattern comparison, circumference, area, and the like. When it meets the certain standard, it is called "similar", and when it does not meet the certain standard, it is called "dissimilar". Further, "similarity determination" refers to determining whether "similarity" or "dissimilarity" is made according to the above criteria.

In the embodiment described below, as an example of the counterfeit product intellectual property handling system, a system for determining the similarity of a design right for a counterfeit product of an automobile floor mat will be described. The floor mat may be referred to as a "specific product". However, the counterfeit IP support system described below can be widely applied not only to automobile floor mats, but also to other automobile accessories (including parts that make up vehicles) and products other than automobile accessories. is there.

(First Embodiment)
First, the first embodiment will be described. The first embodiment is a class having "○ (similar region)", "Δ (additional determination region)", and "× (dissimilar region)" after the calculation of the degree of approximation (step S108 in FIG. 24) described later. This is an embodiment corresponding to a method (method A) that uses a rejection criterion map. In this method A, the similarity determination is performed in two stages, and when it is determined that the position is located in "Δ (additional determination area)" in the determination in the first stage, additional determination is performed by another means. This method A is used, for example, in dealing with a clever imitation form. The additional determination is not limited to a specific method, but an example is a method using a map with higher accuracy prepared in advance according to the conditions as shown in the second embodiment and the third embodiment described later. Is listed as. Hereinafter, such a first embodiment will be described.

[1. Overall configuration of counterfeit IP support system]
First, the overall configuration of the counterfeit IP IP support system 1 of the first embodiment will be described. FIG. 1 is a diagram showing an overall configuration of a counterfeit product intellectual property handling system 1. The counterfeit intellectual property support system 1 includes, for example, a server device 10 and a terminal device (administrator terminal) 20.

The server device 10 performs main information processing in the counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence system 1. The server device 10 is a terminal device 20, a server device of one or more shopping sites (for example, server devices SA, SB, SC, ... Of shopping sites A, B, C, ...) And a company itself via a network NW. It is possible to communicate with the sales information management server device 30. The network NW includes, for example, the Internet, a WAN (Wide Area Network), a LAN (Local Area Network), and the like. Some or all communication in the network NW may be realized wirelessly. The details of the server device 10 will be described later.

The terminal device 20 is, for example, a personal computer used by the administrator of the counterfeit intellectual property support system 1, and has a display device 21 for displaying information and an input device 22 for receiving information input. The display device 21 displays the result of information processing by the server device 10.

Each of the shopping sites A, B, C, ... Is an example of a "website (net site)". The shopping sites A, B, C, ... Are sites where counterfeit products of products (for example, floor mats) targeted by the counterfeit product intellectual property handling system 1 may be posted. Here, the "shopping site" includes an auction site and an in-house operated site of each sales company.

The in-house sales information management server device 30 is, for example, a server device that manages sales information of affiliated automobile sales companies. The in-house sales information management server device 30 includes a storage unit 31 that stores the sales information DB 31a. The sales information DB 31a stores, for example, the number of new vehicles sold by vehicle type and the number of genuine floor mats sold by vehicle type. The number of new cars sold and the number of genuine floor mats sold are aggregated for each preset period (for example, every month) and registered in the sales information DB 31a. The sales information DB 31a may include information on the genuine product equipment rate, which will be described later. In other words, the equipment rate monitoring unit 110, which will be described later, may be provided in the in-house sales information management server device 30 instead of the server device 10.

[2. Configuration of server device for counterfeit IP system]
Next, the configuration of the server device 10 of the counterfeit intellectual property handling system 1 will be described.
As shown in FIG. 1, the server device 10 includes, for example, a monitoring unit 100, an extraction unit 200, a determination unit 300, an information output unit 400, and a storage unit 500.

Each functional unit (monitoring unit 100, extraction unit 200, determination unit 300, and information output unit 400) of the server device 10 is, for example, one or more hardware such as a CPU (Central Processing Unit) or a GPU (Graphics Processing Unit). It is realized by the hardware processor executing a program (software). However, some or all of these functional parts are realized by hardware (circuit part; including circuitry) such as LSI (Large Scale Integration), ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit), and FPGA (Field-Programmable Gate Array). It may be done, or it may be realized by the cooperation of software and hardware. The storage unit 500 is realized by one or more storage devices such as an HDD (Hard Disk Drive) and a flash memory, for example.

Here, the outline of the server device 10 will be described first. The monitoring unit 100 of the server device 10 monitors the sales status of counterfeit products (the number of counterfeit products posted on the website, etc.). When the sales status of the counterfeit product monitored by the monitoring unit 100 satisfies a predetermined condition, the extraction unit 200 makes a first-stage determination (primary determination) on the counterfeit product posted on the website. Extract counterfeit products that meet the specified conditions from the counterfeit products posted on the website. The determination unit 300 makes a second-stage determination (secondary determination), which is more precise than the first-stage determination, on the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit 200, and has a similar design right to the counterfeit product. Make a judgment about. The information output unit 400 outputs information regarding the determination result of the determination unit 300 to the terminal device 20.

Hereinafter, the configuration of the server device 10 will be described in detail.
[2.1 Storage unit]
First, the storage unit 500 will be described. The storage unit 500 stores the equipment rate history DB 501, the counterfeit product publication number history DB 502, the registered design DB 503, the determination information DB 504, and the counterfeit trader management DB 505.

The equipment rate history DB 501 stores the history of the genuine product equipment rate at each time in the past. For example, in the equipment rate history DB 501, the value of the genuine equipment equipment rate of the floor mat calculated by the monitoring unit 100 described later is stored for each vehicle type. "Vehicle type" is an example of the model of the product to which the counterfeit product corresponds. Therefore, in this specification, "vehicle type" may be read as "model".

FIG. 2 is a diagram showing an example of the contents of the equipment rate history DB 501. As shown in FIG. 2, in the equipment rate history DB 501, the number of new vehicles sold by vehicle type, the number of genuine floor mats sold by vehicle type, and the genuine equipment ratio of floor mats by vehicle type at each time point in the past. Is managed in association with.

The history of the number of counterfeit products posted is stored in the history of the number of counterfeit products posted at each time in the past. For example, in the counterfeit product publication number history DB 502, the value of the counterfeit product publication number of the floor mats on the shopping sites A, B, C, ... Calculated by the monitoring unit 100 described later is stored for each vehicle type.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing an example of the contents of the counterfeit product publication number history DB 502. As shown in FIG. 3, in the counterfeit product publication number history DB 502, the counterfeit product publication number of the floor mat for each shopping site is managed at each time in the past. The number of counterfeit products listed is managed by vehicle type.

In the registered design DB 503, a design of one or more floor mats (hereinafter, referred to as "registered design") in which a design right is registered is stored. In the registered design DB 503, a design drawing (for example, a plan view) of each registered design is registered in association with a vehicle model name corresponding to the floor mat of the registered design. In the present specification, the term "design" is not limited to an ordinary design unless otherwise specified, and may be any of a partial design, a braided design, a secret design, a related design, and the like specified by the Design Law. Further, in the present specification, a design that is not a partial design may be referred to as a "whole design" for the sake of distinction.

The registered design registered in the registered design DB 503 includes an overall design having the same shape as the genuine product of the floor mat of each vehicle model, and a partial design in which a part of the shape of the genuine product is acquired. Further, the registered design registered in the registered design DB 503 may include a secret design.

The determination information DB 504 includes various threshold values used in the determination by the monitoring unit 100, the extraction unit 200, and the determination unit 300, which will be described later, an approximate expression, a correspondence necessity determination standard map M1 (see FIG. 8), and a similarity determination reference map. M2A (see FIG. 23) is stored.

In the counterfeiter management DB 505, the status of correspondence to manufacturers (counterfeiters) of counterfeit products similar to design rights is registered.

FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of the contents of the counterfeiter management DB 505. As shown in FIG. 4, in the counterfeiter management DB505, the manufacturer of the counterfeit product similar to the design right, the site name of the shopping site on which the counterfeit product is posted, the posting date, the correspondence date, the correspondence status, the correspondence result, and the corresponding The registration number of the design right, information indicating whether the relevant design right is the design right of the whole design or the design right of the partial design, the approximation rate described later, and the specific contents of the correspondence are managed. "Correspondence" means, for example, a notification to the manufacturer of the counterfeit product that it is similar to a design right, an application for suspension of sales, an application for deletion of the listing on the shopping site where the counterfeit product is posted, and customs It is a crackdown application. The counterfeiter management DB 505 is updated at an arbitrary timing.

[2.2 Monitoring Unit]
Next, the monitoring unit 100 will be described.
FIG. 5 is a diagram showing the configuration of the monitoring unit 100. The monitoring unit 100 monitors one or more indicators that directly or indirectly indicate the sales status of counterfeit products (such as the number of counterfeit products posted on the website). When the index indicating the sales status of the counterfeit product directly or indirectly satisfies a predetermined condition set in advance, the monitoring unit 100 has a predetermined intellectual property handling flow (extraction and determination unit 300 by the extraction unit 200 described later). Judgment by) is decided to be executed. The monitoring unit 100 includes, for example, an equipment rate monitoring unit 110 and a counterfeit product publication number monitoring unit 120.

[2.2.1 Equipment rate monitoring unit]
First, the equipment rate monitoring unit 110 will be described. The equipment rate monitoring unit 110 includes, for example, an information acquisition unit 111, an equipment rate calculation unit 112, and a response necessity determination unit 113.

The information acquisition unit 111 communicates with the in-house sales information management server device 30 via the network NW every preset period (for example, every month), and is registered in the sales information DB 31a of the in-house sales information management server device 30. Get the latest information. That is, the information acquisition unit 111 acquires the latest information on the number of new vehicles sold by vehicle type at the dealer and the number of genuine floor mats sold by vehicle type.

The equipment rate calculation unit 112 calculates the latest value (current value) of the genuine product equipment rate based on the information acquired by the information acquisition unit 111. For example, the equipment rate calculation unit 112 divides the number of genuine floor mats sold by vehicle type for a predetermined period by the number of new vehicles sold by vehicle type during the same period to equip genuine floor mats for each vehicle type. Calculate the rate. The equipment rate calculation unit 112 additionally registers the latest value of the calculated genuine product equipment rate in the equipment rate history DB 501, and outputs the latest value of the genuine product equipment rate to the correspondence necessity determination unit 113.

FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining an example of the monitoring process of the genuine product equipment rate by the response necessity determination unit 113. In FIG. 6, “t1” is a time point in the past, “t2” is a time point in the present, and “t3” is a time point in the future. t1, t2, and t3 are set at intervals of, for example, a constant period T1. In FIG. 6, "E1" is the genuine equipment equipment rate at the past time (t1), "E2" is the genuine equipment equipment rate at the present time (t2), and "E3" is the genuine equipment equipment rate at the future time (t3). Is shown.

For example, when the latest value (current value) of the genuine equipment ratio of the floor mat for a certain vehicle model is less than the threshold value, the response necessity determination unit 113 executes a predetermined intellectual property correspondence flow for the floor mat of that vehicle model. Decide to do. In addition to the above determination or in addition to the above determination, the response necessity determination unit 113 reduces the genuine equipment equipment ratio (ΔEq) and / or between the past time point (t1) and the present time point (t2). When the reduction rate (ΔEr) becomes equal to or higher than the threshold value, it may be decided to execute a predetermined IP correspondence flow. Here, the amount of decrease ΔEq = | E2-E1 | and the rate of decrease ΔEr = | E2-E1 | / E1 × 100%. “||” indicates an absolute value. The genuine equipment equipment rate at the past time point (t1) can be obtained from the equipment rate history DB 501.

In addition, the response necessity determination unit 113 may decide to execute a predetermined intellectual property response flow in place of or in addition to the above determination based on the value of the genuine product equipment rate at a future time point. .. In this case, the response necessity determination unit 113 obtains an approximate expression that approximates the transition of the genuine product equipment ratio between one or more past time points and the present time point, for example. This approximate expression may be a linear expression or a multidimensional expression. The approximate expression F11 shown in FIG. 6 is an example of an approximate expression of a linear expression, and the approximate expression F12 shown in FIG. 6 is an example of a multidimensional approximate expression.

The response necessity determination unit 113 uses the obtained approximate expression to determine the future forecast value of the genuine product equipment rate and the expected decrease in the genuine product equipment rate between the current time point (t2) and the future time point (t3) (ΔEqf). ) And / or the expected rate of decrease (ΔErf). Here, the expected reduction amount ΔEqf = | E3-E2 |, and the expected reduction rate ΔErf = | E3-E2 | / E2 × 100%. Then, the response necessity determination unit 113 determines when the future expected value of the genuine product equipment rate is less than the threshold value, or when the future expected decrease amount or the expected reduction rate of the genuine product equipment rate is equal to or more than the threshold value. You may decide to carry out the IP handling flow of.

[2.2.2 Counterfeit product listing number monitoring unit]
Next, the counterfeit product publication number monitoring unit 120 will be described. The counterfeit product publication number monitoring unit 120 includes, for example, an information collection unit 121, a publication number calculation unit 122, and a response necessity determination unit 123 (see FIG. 5).

The information collecting unit 121 communicates with the server devices SA, SB, SC of the shopping sites A, B, C, ... Via the network NW every preset period (for example, every week), and the shopping site A, Collect information indicating the number of counterfeit products on floor mats by vehicle type in B, C, .... For example, the information collection unit 121 automatically performs a keyword search that combines a "product name (floor mat)", a "manufacturer name", and a "model name" at each of the shopping sites A, B, C, and so on. Collect information indicating the number of counterfeit products posted on floor mats by vehicle type at shopping sites A, B, C, and so on. The information collecting unit 121 outputs the collected information to the publication number calculation unit 122.

The publication number calculation unit 122 calculates the total value of the number of counterfeit products posted on the floor mats on the shopping sites A, B, C, ... For each vehicle type based on the information collected by the information collection unit 121. The publication number calculation unit 122 additionally registers the latest value (current value) of the calculated counterfeit product publication number in the counterfeit product publication number history DB 502, and outputs the latest value of the counterfeit product publication number to the correspondence necessity determination unit 123. ..

FIG. 7 is a diagram for explaining an example of the monitoring process of the number of counterfeit products posted by the response necessity determination unit 123. In FIG. 7, “t1” is a time point in the past, “t2” is a time point in the present, and “t3” is a time point in the future. t1, t2, and t3 are set at intervals of, for example, a constant period T2. The cycle T2 may be the same as or different from the cycle T1 regarding the genuine equipment equipment ratio. In FIG. 7, "N1" is the number of counterfeit products posted at the past time (t1), "N2" is the number of counterfeit products posted at the present time (t2), and "N3" is the number of counterfeit products posted at the future time (t3). Is shown.

For example, when the latest value (current value) of the number of counterfeit products posted on a floor mat for a certain vehicle model exceeds the threshold value, the response necessity determination unit 123 executes a predetermined IP response flow for the floor mat of that vehicle model. Decide to do. In addition, instead of or in addition to the above determination, the response necessity determination unit 123 increases the number of counterfeit products posted between the past time point (t1) and the present time point (t2) (ΔNq) and / or When the rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products (ΔNr) is equal to or greater than the threshold value, it may be decided to execute a predetermined IP handling flow. Here, the amount of increase in the number of counterfeit products is ΔNq = | N2-N1 |, and the rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products is ΔNr = | N2-N1 | / N1 × 100%. The number of counterfeit products posted at the past time point (t2) can be obtained from the counterfeit product publication number history DB 502. This threshold is set in advance for each vehicle type.

In addition, the response necessity determination unit 123 may decide to execute a predetermined IP response flow in place of or in addition to the determination based on the value of the number of counterfeit products posted at a future time point. .. In this case, the response necessity determination unit 123 obtains, for example, an approximate expression that approximates the transition of the number of counterfeit products posted between one or more past time points and the present time point. This approximate expression may be a linear expression, a multidimensional expression, or a linear type / non-linear type. The approximate expression F21 shown in FIG. 7 is an example of an approximate expression of a linear expression, and the approximate expression F22 shown in FIG. 7 is an example of a multidimensional approximate expression.

The response necessity determination unit 123 uses the obtained approximate expression to determine the future forecast value of the number of counterfeit products posted and the expected increase in the number of counterfeit products posted between the current time point (t2) and the future time point (t3) (ΔNqf). ) And / or the expected rate of increase (ΔNrf). Here, the expected increase amount ΔNqf = | N3-N2 |, and the expected increase rate ΔNrf = | N3-N2 | / N2 × 100%. Then, the response necessity determination unit 123 determines when the future expected value of the number of counterfeit products posted exceeds the threshold value, or when the future expected increase amount or the expected increase rate of the number of counterfeit products posted exceeds the threshold value. You may decide to carry out the IP response flow of.

In the above description, an example has been described in which the monitoring unit 100 determines whether or not it is necessary to execute a predetermined IP response flow based on at least one of the genuine product equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products posted. However, instead of the above example, the monitoring unit 100 determines the necessity of executing the predetermined IP response flow based on the combination of the value related to the genuine product equipment rate and the value related to the number of counterfeit products posted. 130 (see FIG. 5) may be provided. The "value related to the genuine product equipment rate" is, for example, any one of the above-mentioned current value, future forecast value, reduction amount, future expected reduction amount, reduction rate, or future forecast reduction rate of the genuine product equipment rate. More than one. Similarly, the “value related to the number of counterfeit products” is, for example, the current value, future forecast value, increase amount, future expected increase amount, increase rate, or future expected increase rate of the counterfeit product listing number described above. Any one or more.

FIG. 8 is a diagram for explaining an example of monitoring processing by the response necessity determination unit 130. The response necessity determination unit 130 is, for example, a response necessity determination standard map in which a combination of the genuine product equipment rate and the increase rate of the number of counterfeit products is associated with the necessity of executing a predetermined IP response flow. Based on M1, it is determined whether or not it is necessary to execute the predetermined IP correspondence flow. In FIG. 8, “less than 0%” means that the rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products is negative (the number of counterfeit products is decreasing).

In the response necessity judgment standard map M1, for example, for a combination of a case where the genuine product equipment rate is 80% or more and less than 85% and a case where the increase rate of the number of counterfeit products is 10% or more and less than 20%. "○: Correspondence required (that is, it is necessary to execute a predetermined IP correspondence flow)" is associated. On the other hand, in the response necessity judgment standard map M1, for example, for a combination of a case where the genuine product equipment rate is 95% or more and a case where the increase rate of the number of counterfeit products is 0% or more and less than 5%. "X: No correspondence (that is, it is not necessary to execute a predetermined IP correspondence flow)" is associated. In addition, in the correspondence necessity judgment standard map M1, for example, a combination of a case where the genuine product equipment rate is 85% or more and less than 90% and a case where the increase rate of the number of counterfeit products is 5% or more and less than 10% is used. On the other hand, "Δ: Correspondence examination (additional judgment by another means is required)" is associated. By referring to the response necessity determination standard map M1, the response necessity determination unit 130 needs to execute a predetermined IP response flow for each combination of the genuine product equipment rate and the increase rate of the number of counterfeit products posted. To judge.

Here, the various threshold values, approximation formulas, and cycles T1 and T2 used by the monitoring unit 100 are determined by, for example, the vehicle type, the type of vehicle (sedan, minivan, etc.), the number of years elapsed since the sales of the target vehicle type, and the like. Different values and formulas are used. These different values and expressions are stored in advance in the determination information DB 504.

[2.3 Extractor]
Next, the extraction unit 200 will be described.
FIG. 9 is a diagram showing the configuration of the extraction unit 200. When the monitoring unit 100 determines that it is necessary to execute the predetermined intellectual property handling flow, the extraction unit 200 makes a first-stage determination (primary determination) based on a standard simpler than the degree of approximation described later. From the counterfeit products posted on the shopping sites A, B, C, ..., The counterfeit products satisfying the predetermined conditions (counterfeit products having a certain degree of possibility of being similar to the design right) are extracted. In other words, the copy extraction unit narrows down the counterfeit products to be extracted as the determination target of the determination unit 300 by performing the determination in the first stage. The extraction unit 200 includes, for example, a counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210, a notification unit 220, a reception unit 230, a fitting processing unit 240, a pattern comparison unit 250, and an extraction necessity determination unit 260.

[2.3.1 Counterfeit Product Information Acquisition Department]
The counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210 communicates with the server devices SA, SB, SC, ... Of the shopping sites A, B, C, ... Through the network NW, and is posted on the shopping sites A, B, C, ... The image of the counterfeit product and the information posted in association with the image (for example, the model name corresponding to the floor mat of the counterfeit product) are acquired. The image of the counterfeit product may be a photograph or a drawing. The counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210 outputs the acquired image and information to the fitting processing unit 240.

[2.3.2 Notification unit]
The notification unit 220 indicates that the counterfeit product is sold on any of the shopping sites A, B, C, ..., But if the image of the counterfeit product does not exist on the website, the image of the counterfeit product does not exist. Performs a notification operation to notify the administrator. For example, the notification unit 220 generates information indicating that the image of the counterfeit product does not exist on the website as an example of the notification operation, and transmits the information to the terminal device 20 to transmit the information to the terminal device 20. Display on the display device 21. This allows the administrator to know that there is a counterfeit product for which the image does not exist. The administrator actually purchases the counterfeit product in question as needed and creates an image of the counterfeit product by taking a picture.

[2.3.3 Reception desk]
If the image of the counterfeit product does not exist on the website, the reception unit 230 has the image of the counterfeit product created by actually purchasing and taking a picture, and the model name corresponding to the floor mat of the counterfeit product. Accept input. The server device 10 performs the following processing on the image received by the reception unit 230 as being equivalent to the image acquired by the counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210.

[2.3.4 Fitting processing unit]
The fitting processing unit 240 refers to the registered design DB 503 based on the information acquired by the counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210 (for example, the vehicle model name posted in association with the counterfeit product), and one corresponding to the counterfeit product. Identify the above registered designs. For example, the fitting processing unit 240 identifies a group of registered designs managed by the registered design DB 503 in association with the corresponding vehicle model of the counterfeit floor mat, and draws the specified registered design (hereinafter, "design drawing"). ) Is obtained from the registered design DB 503. In the following, the process of comparing the counterfeit product with one registered design will be described, but in reality, the same process as below is executed for each of the specified group of registered designs.

Here, the counterfeit product appearing in the image acquired by the counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210 and the registered design appearing in the design drawing may differ in size, angle position, and the like. Therefore, the fitting processing unit 240 performs the fitting processing shown below.

FIG. 10 is a diagram for explaining an example of the fitting process. The fitting processing unit 240 uses the counterfeit product contour C1 and the registered design to match the counterfeit product contour C1 included in the image acquired by the counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210 with the registered design contour C2 included in the design drawing. A fitting process is performed to adjust the size and angular position of at least one of the contours C2 of the above.

Specifically, the fitting processing unit 240 performs a correction process for changing the size or angle position of at least one of the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design, and the contour of the counterfeit product after the correction process. The amount of difference between C1 and the contour C2 of the registered design is calculated. Difference amount, for example, a ShigumaderutaX ² the sum with respect to the plurality of positions square of X direction deviation ΔX of the imitation of contour C1 in each of a plurality of positions and registered design contour C2, mimicking the plurality of locations it is a sum of the ShigumaderutaY ² the sum with respect to the plurality of positions the square value of the Y direction deviation ΔY between goods contour C1 and registered design contour ^{C2 (ΣΔX 2 + ΣΔY 2)} . However, the definition of the difference amount is not limited to the above example and can be set as appropriate. For example, the difference amount may be ΣΔX, ΣΔY, ΣΔX ² , or ΣΔY ² . The fitting processing unit 240 repeats the above correction processing according to a predetermined algorithm so as to minimize the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design. When the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design is minimized, the fitting processing unit 240 provides information indicating the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design with the minimized difference. Is output to the pattern comparison unit 250.

When the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design (for example, the difference amount) becomes equal to or less than the threshold value by performing the fitting process, the fitting processing unit 240 performs a pattern comparison described later. Instead, the counterfeit product may be extracted as a determination target of the determination unit 300. In another example, when the fitting processing unit 240 performs the fitting processing so that the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design (for example, the difference amount) becomes equal to or less than the threshold value, a pattern described later The counterfeit product may be determined to be similar to the design right without performing the comparison and determination processing of the determination unit 300.

[2.3.5 Pattern comparison section]
The pattern comparison unit 250 compares the pattern of the contour C1 of the counterfeit product whose size and angle position have been adjusted by the fitting processing unit 240 with the contour C2 of the registered design. The pattern comparison unit 250 includes, for example, a scanning unit 251 and a length comparison unit 252 (see FIG. 9).

<(A) First example of pattern comparison for the entire design>
FIG. 11 is a diagram for explaining an example of scanning processing by the scanning unit 251. FIG. 11 shows a scanning process for the entire design of the floor mat for the passenger seat.

(A) in FIG. 11 shows a scanning process for a counterfeit product. In this scanning process, the origin P1 is set at an arbitrary position in the image of the counterfeit product. Then, scanning is performed on the counterfeit product using a scanning line along the X direction (first direction), and the length (width in the X direction) ΔLx of the counterfeit product in the X direction at the position where the scanning is performed is Detected. The X direction is an example of a "specific direction". Scanning in the X direction is performed for each of a plurality of positions (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) In the Y direction (second direction) that are separated from each other at arbitrary preset intervals. The "arbitrary interval" may be evenly spaced or unequally spaced in the Y direction. The scanning unit 251 outputs the length ΔLx in the X direction for each of the plurality of positions detected by performing the above scanning on the counterfeit product to the length comparison unit 252.

(B) in FIG. 11 shows a scanning process for a registered design. In this scanning process, the origin P2 is set at a position corresponding to the origin P1 set in the image of the counterfeit product in the design drawing of the registered design. The "corresponding position" is a position where the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design overlap each other when the fitting process is performed so as to minimize the difference. Instead of the above, the origin P2 may be set first in the design drawing, and the origin P1 may be set at the position of the corresponding image of the counterfeit product.

Then, scanning is performed on the registered design using scanning lines along the X direction, and the length (width in the X direction) ΔLx of the registered design at the position where the scanning is performed is detected. Scanning in the X direction is performed in the Y direction at each of the same plurality of positions (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) As the plurality of positions where the counterfeit product was scanned. The scanning unit 251 outputs the length ΔLx in the X direction for each of the plurality of positions detected by performing the above scanning on the registered design to the length comparison unit 252.

(C) in FIG. 11 schematically shows the processing of the length comparison unit 252. The length comparison unit 252 has, for example, the length ΔLx in the X direction at each of the plurality of positions (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) Detected for the counterfeit product, and the plurality of positions detected for the registered design. The length ΔLx in the X direction in each of (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) Is compared for each detection position in the Y direction. As a result of the pattern comparison, the length comparison unit 252 extracts the difference between the length ΔLx in the X direction of the counterfeit product and the length ΔLx in the X direction of the registered design at each detection position in the Y direction. Output to 260.

The scanning unit 251 may perform scanning in the Y direction in addition to scanning in the X direction. FIG. 12 is a diagram for explaining an example of scanning processing in the Y direction by the scanning unit 251. For scanning with respect to the Y direction, "X direction" and "Y direction" are read as each other in the above description of scanning with respect to the X direction, and "plurality of positions (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...)" Is referred to as "plurality of positions (X0)". , X1, X2, ...) ”.

When scanning in the Y direction is performed in addition to scanning in the X direction, the extraction necessity determination unit 260, which will be described later, determines that the comparison results of both the pattern comparison in the X direction and the pattern comparison in the Y direction satisfy predetermined conditions. Only when the condition is satisfied, the counterfeit product that is the target of the pattern comparison may be extracted as the judgment target of the determination unit 300. In this case, the extraction unit 200 can improve the accuracy of the determination by the extraction unit 200 by comparing the lengths in each of the X direction and the Y direction.

<(B) Second example of pattern comparison for the entire design>
FIG. 13 shows an example of scanning processing for the entire design of the entire floor mat (that is, the entire design including the driver's seat floor mat, the passenger's seat floor mat, and the rear seat floor mat). In the example shown in FIG. 13, the counterfeit product includes a separation unit S1 that separates the first region R1 and the second region R2 between the first region R1 and the second region R2 included in the counterfeit product. Similarly, the registered design includes a separation unit S2 that separates the first region R3 and the second region R4 between the first region R3 and the second region R4 included in the registered design.

In this case, scanning in the X direction with respect to the counterfeit product is performed except for the separation portion S1. That is, in scanning in the X direction with respect to the counterfeit product, the length ΔLx1 of the first region R1 of the counterfeit product in the X direction and the second region of the counterfeit product at a plurality of positions (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) In the Y direction. The length ΔLx2 in the X direction of R2 is detected, respectively, and the sum of the length ΔLx1 in the X direction of the first region R1 and the length ΔLx2 in the X direction of the second region R2 is the length ΔLx in the X direction of the counterfeit product. Is obtained as.

Similarly, scanning in the X direction with respect to the registered design is performed except for the separation portion S2. That is, in scanning in the X direction with respect to the registered design, the length ΔLx3 of the first region R3 of the registered design in the X direction and the second region of the registered design at a plurality of positions (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) In the Y direction. The length ΔLx4 in the X direction of R4 is detected, and the sum of the length ΔLx3 in the X direction of the first region R3 and the length ΔLx4 in the X direction of the second region R4 is the length ΔLx in the X direction of the registered design. Is obtained as.

FIG. 14 is a diagram schematically showing the processing of the length comparison unit 252 regarding the overall design of the entire floor mat. In this case, the length comparison unit 252 determines the length ΔLx (the lengths of the first and second regions R1, R2) of the counterfeit product in the X direction for each detection position (Y0, Y1, Y2, ...) In the Y direction. The sum of ΔLx1 and ΔLx2) and the length ΔLx in the X direction of the registered design (the sum of the lengths ΔLx3 and ΔLx4 of the first and second regions R3 and R4) are compared. The positions Y0 to Y6 in FIG. 14 correspond to the positions Y0 to Y6 in FIG.

<(C) First example of pattern comparison for partial design>
FIG. 15 shows an example of scanning processing for a partial design of the floor mat of the passenger seat. When the design to be scanned is a partial design, the extraction unit 200 is at a position where at least one end of both ends of the design crossed by a scanning line along a specific direction is a solid line portion of the partial design (example shown in FIG. 15). Now, for Y1 to Y4), the lengths in the specific directions are compared.

In the example shown in FIG. 15B, the design drawing of the partial design includes a plurality of solid line portions SL1 and SL2. Further, the design drawing of the partial design may include boundary lines BL1 and BL2 which are alternate long and short dash lines connecting the ends of the plurality of solid line portions SL1 and SL2. The "boundary line" is a line indicating the boundary between the part to be registered as a partial design and the other part in the design drawing. However, the design drawing of the partial design does not have to include the boundary lines BL1 and BL2. In this case, the extraction unit 200 may set the boundary lines BL1 and BL2 so as to connect the ends of the plurality of solid line portions SL1 and SL2 in the design drawing. On the other hand, the extraction unit 200 sets virtual lines VL1 and VL2 corresponding to the boundary lines BL1 and BL2 of the partial design on the image of the counterfeit product.

Scanning in the X direction with respect to the registered design is performed at a plurality of positions (Y1 to Y4) where the scanning lines overlap at least one of the solid line portions SL1 and SL2. Scanning in the X direction with respect to the registered design is not performed at the position where the scanning line does not overlap both of the solid line portions SL1 and SL2. In other words, scanning for the registered design is performed only on the area surrounded by the solid line portions SL1 and SL2 and the boundary lines BL1 and BL2.

In this case, the scanning in the X direction for the counterfeit product is performed only at the same plurality of positions (Y1 to Y4) as the plurality of positions in the Y direction in which the scanning in the X direction is performed for the registered design. In other words, scanning for the counterfeit product is performed only on the portion of the contour of the counterfeit product that corresponds to the solid line portions SL1 and SL2 and the region surrounded by the virtual lines VL1 and VL2. Then, the length comparison unit 252 compares the length ΔLx in the X direction of the counterfeit product with the length ΔLx in the X direction of the registered design for each detection position (Y1 to Y4) in the Y direction.

<(D) Second example of pattern comparison for partial design>
FIG. 16 shows another example of the scanning process for the partial design of the passenger seat floor mat. FIG. 16 shows an example in which scanning in the Y direction is performed. As shown in FIG. 16, in the extraction unit 200, one end of both ends of the registered design crossed by the scanning line along the specific direction is the solid line portion SL1 and SL2, but the other end is the solid line portion SL1 and SL2. If not, the length including the boundary line BL1 included in the design drawing (or set for the design drawing) as the starting point or the ending point is acquired as the length ΔLy at the detection position. In this case, scanning in the Y direction with respect to the counterfeit product acquires the length starting or ending at the virtual line VL1 set in the image of the counterfeit product as the length ΔLy at the detection position, as in the registered design. .. Then, the length comparison unit 252 compares the length ΔLy in the Y direction of the counterfeit product with the length ΔLy in the Y direction of the registered design for each detection position (X1 to X4) in the X direction. Regarding the detection position where the scanning line does not cross the solid line portions SL1 and SL2 of the registered design, the length ΔLy between the two boundary lines BL1 and BL2 and the two virtual lines VL1 and VL2 is detected. They may be compared with each other, or these lengths may not be detected or compared.

<(E) Third example of pattern comparison for partial design>
FIG. 17 shows another example of the scanning process for the partial design of the floor mat of the rear seat. In the example shown in FIG. 17, the counterfeit product includes a separation unit S3 that separates the first region R5 and the second region R6 between the first region R5 and the second region R6 included in the counterfeit product. Similarly, the registered design (partial design) includes a separation unit S4 that separates the first region R7 and the second region R8 between the first region R7 and the second region R8 included in the registered design. In this case, the extraction unit 200 scans the counterfeit product and the partial design except for the separation units S3 and S4, as in the above-mentioned "(b) Second example of pattern comparison for the entire design". Compare the dimensions.

In this case, the design drawing of the partial design may include boundary lines BL1, BL2, BL3, BL4 which are alternate long and short dash lines connecting the ends of the plurality of solid line portions SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4. However, the design drawing of the partial design may not include the boundary lines BL1, BL2, BL3 and BL4. In this case, the extraction unit 200 may set the boundary lines BL1, BL2, BL3, BL4 so as to connect the ends of the plurality of solid line portions SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4 in the design drawing. Each of the boundary lines BL1, BL2, BL3, and BL4 is set by, for example, one or more straight lines along the X direction or the Y direction. However, each of the boundary lines BL1, BL2, BL3, and BL4 may be set by a straight line extending in an inclined direction with respect to the X direction or the Y direction. Then, scanning of the registered design of the partial design is performed only on the region surrounded by the solid line portion SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4 and the boundary line BL1, BL2, BL3, BL4.

On the other hand, the extraction unit 200 sets virtual lines VL1, VL2, VL3, VL4 corresponding to the boundary lines BL1, BL2, BL3, BL4 of the partial design on the image of the counterfeit product. Then, scanning for the counterfeit product is performed only on the portion of the contour of the counterfeit product corresponding to the solid line portions SL1, SL2, SL3, SL4 and the region surrounded by the virtual lines VL1, VL2, VL3, VL4. ..

FIG. 18 schematically shows the processing of the length comparison unit 252 regarding the registered design and the counterfeit product shown in FIG. As a result of the pattern comparison, the length comparison unit 252 has the length ΔLx in the X direction of the counterfeit product at the detection position in the Y direction (for example, Y3 and Y4 shown in FIG. 17) and the length in the X direction of the registered design. The difference from ΔLx is output to the extraction necessity determination unit 260.

[2.3.6 Extraction necessity determination unit]
The extraction necessity determination unit 260 determines whether or not the counterfeit product that is the target of the pattern comparison should be extracted as the determination target of the determination unit 300. For example, the extraction necessity determination unit 260 extracts the counterfeit product that is the target of the pattern comparison as the determination target when the result of the pattern comparison by the length comparison unit 252 satisfies a predetermined condition. The above-mentioned predetermined condition is, for example, when, in the result of pattern comparison, the difference between the length ΔLx in the X direction of the counterfeit product and the length ΔLx in the X direction of the registered design is equal to or less than the threshold value at all the detection positions in the Y direction. Is.

For example, in the example shown in FIG. 11 (c), the length ΔLx in the X direction of the counterfeit product and the length ΔLx in the X direction of the registered design are significantly different at a part of the detection positions in the Y direction. Therefore, in the example shown in (c) in FIG. 11, the counterfeit product that is the target of the pattern comparison is not extracted as the judgment target of the determination unit 300.

[2.4 Judgment unit]
The determination unit 300 calculates the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the registered design based on the counterfeit product and the registered design extracted by the extraction unit 200, and determines the similarity of the design right based on the calculated degree of approximation. The determination unit 300 includes, for example, a circumference calculation unit 310, an area calculation unit 320, and a similarity determination unit 330. Information indicating the model (vehicle model) of the product to which the counterfeit product corresponds is, for example, acquired by the counterfeit product information acquisition unit 210 of the extraction unit 200 and output to the determination unit 300.

[2.4.1 Perimeter calculation unit and area calculation unit]
The perimeter calculation unit 310 calculates the perimeter LC of the counterfeit product and the perimeter LD of the registered design, respectively, by image analysis, for example. The perimeter LC of the counterfeit product is the length of the contour C1 of the counterfeit product. The perimeter LD of the registered design is the length of the contour C2 of the registered design. The calculation of the perimeter when the registered design is a partial design will be described later.

The area calculation unit 320 calculates the area SC of the counterfeit product and the area SD of the registered design, respectively, by image analysis, for example. The area SC of the counterfeit product is the area inside the contour C1 of the counterfeit product. The area SD of the registered design is the area inside the contour C2 of the registered design. The calculation of the area when the registered design is a partial design will be described later.

FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an example of calculation of the circumference LC, LD and the area SC, SD by the circumference calculation unit 310 and the area calculation unit 320. When the registered design is an overall design, the perimeter calculation unit 310 and the area calculation unit 320 are based on the contours C1 and C2 of the counterfeit product and the registered design, the perimeter LC and area SC of the counterfeit product, and the perimeter of the registered design. LD and area SD are calculated respectively.

Next, the calculation of the circumference and the area when the registered design is a partial design will be described.
21 and 22 are diagrams showing an example of each of the calculation of the perimeter LC, LD and the area SC, SD by the perimeter calculation unit 310 and the area calculation unit 320. When the registered design is a partial design, the peripheral length calculation unit 310 calculates the total length along the solid line portions SL11, SL12, SL13, and SL14 of the partial design as the peripheral length LD of the registered design.

On the other hand, the circumference calculation unit 310 sets the total length of the portions CL11, CL12, CL13, SL14 corresponding to the solid line portions SL11, SL12, SL13, SL14 of the partial design to the circumference of the counterfeit product. Calculated as long LC. That is, the peripheral length calculation unit 310 sets virtual lines VL11, VL12, VL13, VL14 corresponding to the boundary lines BL11, BL12, BL13, BL14 of the partial design on the image of the counterfeit product. Then, the circumference calculation unit 310 extracts the contour of the counterfeit product, and corresponds to the solid line portion SL11, SL12, SL13, SL14 of the partial design in the contour of the counterfeit product based on the virtual lines VL11, VL12, VL13, VL14. The parts to be used are specified, and the total length of the specified parts is calculated as the perimeter LC of the counterfeit product. As shown in FIG. 21 (c), when the registered design (or counterfeit product) has a connection portion of a plurality of members (plural areas), the circumference calculation unit 310 determines the circumference length of the connection portion. May be excluded and handled.

When the registered design is a partial design, the area calculation unit 320 connects the solid line portions SL11, SL12, SL13, SL14 of the partial design and the plurality of ends of the solid line portions SL11, SL12, SL13, SL14 to each other. The area of the specific area SR1 surrounded by BL11, BL12, BL13, and BL14 is calculated as the area SD of the registered design. Further, the area calculation unit 320 calculates the area SR2 of the region corresponding to the specific region SR1 of the partial design as the area SC of the counterfeit product with respect to the counterfeit product.

[2.4 Similarity determination unit]
The similarity determination unit 330 calculates an approximate difference in the circumference based on the circumference LC of the counterfeit product calculated by the circumference calculation unit 310 and the circumference LD of the registered design. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 divides the perimeter LD of the registered design by the perimeter LC of the counterfeit product and subtracts 1 to convert the absolute value to a percentage (| (LD / LC) -1 | × 100) is calculated as an approximate difference in circumference (approximate degree of difference in circumference). The approximate difference in circumference is an example of the "approximate degree" between the counterfeit product and the registered design.

The similarity determination unit 330 calculates an approximate difference in area based on the area SC of the counterfeit product calculated by the area calculation unit 320 and the area SD of the registered design. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 divides the area SD of the registered design by the area SC of the counterfeit product and subtracts 1 to convert the absolute value to a percentage (| (SD / SC) -1 | × 100 ) Is calculated as an approximate difference in area (approximate degree of area difference). The approximate difference in area is another example of the "approximate degree" between the counterfeit product and the registered design.

Then, the similarity determination unit 330 determines the similarity of the design right based on the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area. Here, the "judgment regarding the similarity of design rights" is not limited to the judgment of determining whether the design rights are similar or dissimilar, and may be a judgment showing the probability of similarity (degree of possibility of similarity). In the present embodiment, the similarity determination unit 330 determines the probability of similarity in a plurality of stages (similarity / additional determination required / dissimilarity) based on the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area.

FIG. 23 is a diagram for explaining an example of a process of determining the probability of similarity by the similarity determination unit 330. The similarity determination unit 330 determines the similarity probability based on, for example, the similarity determination standard map M2A in which the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area and the similar probability are associated with each other. For example, in the similarity judgment standard map M2A, "○: Similar" is used for the combination of the case where the approximate difference in circumference is 0% or more and less than 5% and the case where the approximate difference in area is 0% or more and less than 5%. "Is associated with it. On the other hand, for example, in the similarity determination standard map M2A, for the combination of the case where the approximate difference in circumference is 20% or more and less than 40% and the case where the approximate difference in area is 20% or more and less than 40%, " X: Non-invasive similarity ”is associated.

Further, in the similarity judgment standard map M2A, "Δ: addition" is given to the combination of the case where the approximate difference in circumference is 5% or more and less than 10% and the case where the approximate difference in area is 5% or more and less than 10%. "Judgment required" is associated. When it is determined that additional determination is necessary, the similarity determination unit 330 may perform additional determination by the server device 10, for example, by performing more precise pattern matching. The similarity determination unit 330 outputs the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330 to the information output unit 400.

The "approximate degree" used for the determination of the similarity determination unit 330 is not limited to the circumference and the area. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 calculates the degree of approximation based on the difference between the coordinates of a plurality of positions on the contour C1 of the counterfeit product with respect to the origin P1 and the coordinates of the plurality of positions on the contour C2 of the registered design with respect to the origin P2. May be good.

[2.4 Information output unit]
The information output unit 400 generates information to be displayed on the display device 21 of the terminal device 20 based on the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330, and transmits the information to the terminal device 20. As a result, the display device 21 of the terminal device 20 displays the determination result (similar probability for each counterfeit product) of the similarity determination unit 330.

[3. Example of processing flow]
Next, an example of the processing flow of the server device 10 will be described.
FIG. 24 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing flow of the server device 10. First, the monitoring unit 100 calculates the genuine product equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products posted on the shopping sites A, B, C, ... In a fixed cycle T1 and T2, respectively (step S101). The monitoring unit 100 determines whether or not the value related to the genuine product equipment rate and the value related to the number of counterfeit products posted satisfy the predetermined conditions (step S102). For example, the monitoring unit 100 determines that the above-mentioned predetermined conditions are satisfied when the genuine product equipment rate and the increase rate of the number of counterfeit products posted are in the area of "○: response required" in the response necessity determination standard map M1. ..

If the predetermined condition is not satisfied (step S102: NO), the monitoring unit 100 returns to the process of step S101. On the other hand, when the predetermined condition is satisfied (step S102: YES), the monitoring unit 100 outputs a signal indicating that the predetermined condition is satisfied to the extraction unit 200. When the extraction unit 200 receives the above signal, it first acquires an image of the counterfeit product from the shopping site. Then, the extraction unit 200 performs a fitting process between the acquired counterfeit product and the registered design (step S103).

After performing the fitting process, the extraction unit 200 determines whether or not the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design is equal to or less than the threshold value (step S104). When the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design is equal to or less than the threshold value (step S104: YES), the extraction unit 200 does not perform the process related to the pattern determination in steps S105 and S106, and in step S107. Proceed to the calculation of the degree of approximation. If the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design is equal to or less than the threshold value, the fitting processing unit 240 may determine that the design right is similar to the design right at this point. In this case, the determination result of the fitting processing unit 240 is output to the information output unit 400. The term "difference amount is less than or equal to the threshold value" means that, for example, one or more of ΣΔX, ΣΔY, ΣΔX ² , ΣΔY ² , Σ (ΔX ² + ΣY ² ) and the like are equal to or less than the corresponding threshold value. means.

When the difference between the contour C1 of the counterfeit product and the contour C2 of the registered design is larger than the threshold value (step S104: NO), the extraction unit 200 performs pattern comparison by the pattern comparison unit 250 (step S105). Then, the extraction unit 200 determines whether or not the result of the pattern comparison satisfies a predetermined condition (step S106). For example, the extraction unit 200 compares the lengths in the specific directions with respect to the counterfeit product and the registered design at a plurality of positions, and when the difference between the lengths in the specific directions is equal to or less than the threshold value, the above-mentioned predetermined Judge that the condition is satisfied.

When the predetermined condition of step S106 is not satisfied (step S106: NO), the extraction unit 200 outputs a signal to that effect to the information output unit 400. In this case, the information output unit 400 transmits information indicating that the counterfeit products are dissimilar to the terminal device 20 (step S115).

On the other hand, when the predetermined condition of step S106 is satisfied (step S106: YES), the extraction unit 200 extracts the counterfeit product for which the pattern comparison has been performed as the determination target of the determination unit 300 (step S107). Then, the determination unit 300 calculates the degree of approximation (for example, the degree of circumference difference approximation and the degree of area difference approximation) between the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit 200 and the registered design (step S108).

Then, the determination unit 300 determines whether or not the calculated degree of approximation satisfies the first condition (step S109). For example, the determination unit 300 determines that the first condition is satisfied when the calculated degree of approximation falls within the region of “◯: similarity” in the similarity determination criterion map M2A. When the first condition is satisfied (step S109: YES), the determination unit 300 determines that the design right is similar (S110), and outputs a signal to that effect to the information output unit 400. In this case, the information output unit 400 transmits and displays the information indicating that the counterfeit product is similar to the design right to the terminal device 20 (step S115).

On the other hand, when the first condition is not satisfied (step S109: NO), the determination unit 300 determines whether or not the second condition is satisfied (S111). For example, the determination unit 300 determines that the second condition is satisfied when the calculated degree of approximation falls within the area of “Δ: additional determination required” in the similarity determination criterion map M2A. When the second condition is satisfied (step S111: YES), the determination unit 300 determines that an additional determination is necessary (S112), and makes an additional determination (S113). As described above, "performing additional determination" may mean that additional determination may be performed by the server device 10, for example, by performing more precise pattern matching, and for example, the second embodiment or the second embodiment described later. 3. A determination may be made using a map with higher accuracy prepared in advance according to each condition as shown in the embodiment. Then, the determination unit 300 outputs a signal (a signal indicating similarity or dissimilarity) indicating the result of the additional determination to the information output unit 400. In this case, the information output unit 400 transmits information indicating the result of the additional determination to the terminal device 20 and displays it (step S115).

If the second condition is not satisfied (step S111: NO), the determination unit 300 determines that it is not similar to the design right (S114), and outputs a signal to that effect to the information output unit 400. In this case, the information output unit 400 transmits information indicating that the counterfeit product is not similar to the design right to the terminal device 20 and displays it (step S115).

As described above, one flow of processing of the counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence system 1 is completed. The processes from steps S103 to S114 described above are executed for each of the group of registered designs in which the counterfeit floor mat is managed in association with the corresponding vehicle model. These registered designs include one or more secret designs.

With such a configuration, the posting of counterfeit products on the website can be reduced. That is, by executing the processing flow by the counterfeit product IP handling system 1, the counterfeit product posted on the website that is close to the intellectual property right is always judged to be highly efficient. Depending on the result, it is possible to take appropriate deletion measures and suspend the import of counterfeit products. As a result, it is possible to promote the spread of high-quality genuine products to the market and users, and it is possible to improve the profits of users.

In the present embodiment (method A), for example, if a similarity determination is performed in two stages and it is determined that the position is located in "Δ (additional determination area)" in the first stage determination, an additional determination by another means is performed. Will be done. According to such a configuration, one or a small number of similarity determination criteria maps M2A can be used to determine similarity. As a result, the amount of data that the storage unit 500 needs to hold can be reduced.

(Modification example)
Next, a modified example of the first embodiment will be described. In this modification, the similarity determination unit 330 differs from the above embodiment in that the similarity determination unit 330 makes a first determination based on the design right of the entire design and then makes a second determination based on the design right of the partial design. The configuration other than that described below is the same as that of the above embodiment.

[4.1 First Judgment (Judgment based on overall design)]
FIG. 25 is a diagram for explaining an example of a first determination for determining the presence or absence of similarity based on the overall design. The similarity determination unit 330 calculates the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the overall design based on, for example, the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit 200 and the overall design for which the design right is registered. In other words, the similarity determination unit 330 determines the similarity of the counterfeit product based on the basic configuration mode of the design. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 has a similar probability based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-1 in which the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area and the similar probability are associated with each other with respect to the overall design. To judge. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 determines whether the counterfeit product is similar to the design right of the entire design, is not similar to the design right of the overall design, or is based on the similarity determination criterion map M2A-1. Determine if it is undecided whether it is similar to the design right.

For example, in the similarity judgment standard map M2A-1, the combination of the case where the approximate difference in circumference is 0% or more and less than 5% and the case where the approximate difference in area is 0% or more and less than 5% is "○". : Similarity "is associated. On the other hand, for example, in the similarity determination standard map M2A-1, for a combination of a case where the approximate difference in circumference is 20% or more and less than 40% and a case where the approximate difference in area is 20% or more and less than 40%. "X: dissimilar" is associated with. Further, in the similarity determination standard map M2A-1, "Δ" is used for the combination of the case where the approximate difference in circumference is 5% or more and less than 10% and the case where the approximate difference in area is 5% or more and less than 10%. : Additional judgment required (similarity is undecided) ”is associated. It should be noted that the similarity determination unit 330 is similar or dissimilar depending on whether or not the essential part is included in the difference between the counterfeit product and the registered design even when "Δ: additional determination required" is associated. To judge.

As a result of the determination based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-1, the similarity determination unit 330 indicates that the counterfeit product is similar to the design right of the entire design (in the case of "○" in the map M2A-1), or the entire design. If it is not similar to the design right of the design (in the case of "x" in the map M2A-1), the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330 is output to the information output unit 400, and the similarity determination process is terminated. On the other hand, when the similarity determination unit 330 determines whether or not the counterfeit product is similar to the design right of the entire design as a result of the determination based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-1 (“Map M2A-1” in the map M2A-1 In the case of "Δ"), a second determination is made to determine the presence or absence of similarity based on the partial design.

[4.2 Second Judgment (Judgment based on partial design)]
FIG. 26 is a diagram for explaining an example of a second determination for determining the presence or absence of similarity based on a partial design. When it is determined that the similarity determination unit 330 is similar to the design right of the overall design in the determination using the overall design, the counterfeit product is the target of the determination using the overall design. And, based on the partial design for which the design right is registered, the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the partial design is calculated. In other words, the similarity determination unit 330 determines the similarity of the counterfeit product based on the specific configuration mode of the design. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 is based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-2 in which the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area with respect to the partial design and the presence or absence of similarity are associated with each other. To judge. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 determines whether the counterfeit product is similar to the design right of the partial design or is not similar to the design right of the partial design based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-2.

For example, in the similarity judgment standard map M2A-2, "○" is used for the combination of the case where the approximate difference in circumference is 0% or more and less than 5% and the case where the approximate difference in area is 0% or more and less than 5%. : Similarity "is associated. On the other hand, for example, in the similarity determination standard map M2A-2, for a combination of a case where the approximate difference in circumference is 5% or more and less than 10% and a case where the approximate difference in area is 5% or more and less than 10%. "X: dissimilar" is associated with. In the similarity judgment standard map M2A-2, "Δ: additional judgment required (similarity or non-similarity is undecided)" is not set, and "x: dissimilar" is set in the area where the circumference or the area is different to some extent. Are associated with each other.

The similarity determination unit 330 outputs the result of determination based on the similarity determination reference map M2A-2 to the information output unit 400, and ends the process of similarity determination.

[4.3 Information output section]
When the information output unit 400 determines either "similar to the design right of the entire design" or "not similar to the design right of the entire design" as a result of the first determination described above, the information output unit 400 determines. Information indicating the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330 is output to the terminal device 20. As a result, the display device 21 of the terminal device 20 displays the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330.

On the other hand, when the result of the first determination described above is "whether or not it is similar to the design right of the entire design is undecided (when additional determination is required)", the information output unit 400 of the information output unit 400 of the similarity determination unit 330. Information indicating the determination result of the first determination is not output to the terminal device 20. In this case, when the information output unit 400 determines either "similar to the design right of the entire design" or "not similar to the design right of the entire design" as a result of the second determination described above. In addition, information indicating the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330 is output to the terminal device 20. As a result, the display device 21 of the terminal device 20 displays the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330.

FIG. 27 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing flow of the server device 10 of this modified example. In this modification, in the flow of the above-described embodiment, instead of performing steps S109 to S114, a determination process (step) including a first determination process (step S201) and a second determination process (step S202). S200) is performed.

In step S201, the similarity determination unit 330 makes a determination based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-1, and the counterfeit product is similar to the design right of the entire design (in the case of “◯: similar”), or If it is not similar to the design right of the entire design (in the case of "x: dissimilarity"), step S202 is skipped and the process proceeds to step S114. The similarity determination unit 330 proceeds to step S202 when it is undecided whether or not the counterfeit product has similar design rights to the overall design (in the case of “Δ: additional determination required”).

In step S202, the similarity determination unit 330 makes a determination based on the similarity determination standard map M2A-2, and when the counterfeit product is similar to the design right of the partial design (in the case of “◯: similar”), or In any case where the design right of the partial design is not similar (in the case of “x: dissimilar”), the process proceeds to step S114.

According to such a configuration, first, a first determination is made based on the basic configuration mode of the design, and when a similar determination is undecided in the first determination, a second determination based on a specific configuration target of the design is performed. be able to. Thereby, first, it is possible to determine whether or not it is similar to the rough based on the basic periodic configuration target, and if necessary based on the result, it is possible to make a detailed determination based on the specific configuration mode. As a result, similar determination can be performed more efficiently.

The first embodiment and the modified example have been described above. The similarity determination standard map M2A and the similarity determination standard maps M2A-1 and M2A-2 are not limited to the above-mentioned examples. The similarity determination standard map M2A and the similarity determination standard maps M2A-1 and M2A-2 may be maps as described below.

For example, the region criteria (separated by “〇”, “Δ”, and “×”) in the similarity determination standard map M2A and the similarity determination standard maps M2A-1 and M2A-2 may be predetermined and fixed. , Variable depending on the parameters according to at least one of the vehicle type (model) and preconditions (for example, which part of the vehicle the floor mat is placed on, the ratio of the main part of the design to the entire design, etc.) It may be. The precondition also includes, for example, the case where it is specified whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the design right and the counterfeit product.

FIG. 28 is a diagram for explaining the similarity determination reference map M2A in which the area reference is variable. As shown in FIG. 28, the similarity determination standard map M2A in which the area standard is variable corresponds to “Δ” depending on, for example, a parameter indicating at least one of the vehicle type and the precondition and the extraction accuracy result of similar projects. The boundary K2 between the area (additional determination area) and the area corresponding to “x” (dissimilar area) is changed. In addition to or in addition to this, the area corresponding to "○" (similar area) and the area corresponding to "△" (additional judgment area) are determined by parameters indicating at least one of the vehicle type and the preconditions. The boundary K1 with and may be changed. The example shown in FIG. 28 may be applied to the similarity determination criteria maps M2A-1 and M2A-2. For example, when applied to the similarity judgment criterion map M2A-2, the area corresponding to "○" (similar area) and the area corresponding to "x" are determined by the parameters indicating at least one of the vehicle type and the preconditions. The boundary with (dissimilar area) is changed.

Further, the area criteria of the similarity determination standard map M2A and the similarity determination criteria maps M2A-1 and M2A-2 are not limited to the step type as shown in FIGS. 23, 25, and 26, and are as shown below. It may be of various types.

FIG. 29 is a diagram for explaining variations of the similarity determination standard map M2A. In FIG. 23A, as shown in FIGS. 23, 25, and 26, the region reference is set to a step type defined by a matrix. Instead of this, the similarity determination criterion map M2A may be a linear type defined by a mathematical formula such as Y = AX + B (see (b) in the figure), or Y = AX ⁿ + BX ^n-1 + ... It may be an exponential type defined by a mathematical formula (see (c) in the figure) or a logarithmic type defined by a mathematical formula such as Y = log _a X (see (d) in the figure). The example shown in FIG. 29 may be applied to the similarity determination criteria maps M2A-1 and M2A-2.

(Second Embodiment)
Next, the second embodiment will be described. In the second embodiment, after the calculation of the degree of approximation in the first embodiment (step S108 in FIG. 24), a similarity determination criterion map having only “◯ (similar region)” and “× (dissimilar region)” is provided. It differs from the first embodiment in that it is a method to be used (method B). In this method B, for example, one similarity determination criterion map M2B selected according to a condition from a plurality of similarity determination criterion maps M2B-1 to M2B-N (N is an arbitrary integer) prepared in advance. The similarity determination is performed using −X (X is an integer contained in 1 to N). In this method B, for example, when the vehicle type is specified and whether the design to be dissimilar is a whole design or a partial design, the vehicle type is specified and the design is specified. This is done when it is specified whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the right and the counterfeit product. Further, the method B is used, for example, in dealing with dead copy. Hereinafter, such a second embodiment will be described.

The process up to the configuration of the counterfeit IP IP correspondence system 1 of the second embodiment and the calculation of the degree of approximation (step S108 of FIG. 24) is the same as that of the first embodiment. Therefore, the description of the contents overlapping with the first embodiment will be omitted. Further, in the second embodiment, the configurations and functions other than those described below are the same as those in the first embodiment.

FIG. 30 is a diagram for explaining a plurality of similarity determination reference maps M2B-1 to M2B-N used in the second embodiment. Similar to the similarity determination standard map M2A of the first embodiment, each of the similarity determination criteria maps M2B-1 to M2B-N has a combination of an approximate difference in circumference and an approximate difference in area, and the presence or absence of similarity. Is a map associated with. However, each of the similarity determination criteria maps M2B-1 to M2B-N does not have a region corresponding to, for example, "○: similarity". Therefore, the time required for the determination can be significantly reduced. For example, in the case of a system using a computer, the determination processing time is shortened.

In the plurality of similarity determination criteria maps M2B-1 to M2B-N, for example, the area criteria (separation of "〇" and "x") are different from each other. The plurality of similarity judgment criteria maps M2B-1 to M2B-N are, for example, vehicle types and preconditions (for example, which part of the vehicle the floor mat is placed on, the ratio of the main part of the design to the entire design, etc. ) And at least one of the conditions. The plurality of similarity judgment criteria maps M2B-1 to M2B-N include one or more similarity judgment criteria maps of step type, linear type, exponential type, and logarithmic type as shown in FIG. 29. It's fine.

FIG. 31 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing flow of the server device 10 of the second embodiment. In the present embodiment, in the flow of the first embodiment, instead of performing steps S109 to S114, the determination process of step S300 is performed. In this determination process, the similarity determination unit 330 responds to the vehicle type and the preconditions from the plurality of similarity determination criteria maps M2B-1 to M2B-N based on at least one of the vehicle type and the preconditions. One similarity determination criterion map M2B-X is selected, and it is determined whether or not the counterfeit product is similar to the registered design based on the selected similarity determination criterion map M2B-X. The similarity determination unit 330 outputs the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330 to the information output unit 400. The information output unit 400 transmits information indicating the determination result of the similarity determination unit 330 to the terminal device 20 and displays it (step S115).

With such a configuration, the posting of counterfeit products on the website can be reduced as in the first embodiment. Further, according to the second embodiment (method B), the determination regarding the similarity is performed based on the similarity determination standard map M2B-X selected according to the overall design and the partial design for each vehicle type, so that the determination is more accurate. You can do it well. Further, according to the second embodiment (method B), the time required for determination can be significantly shortened by a simpler process for the counterfeit product, and the presence or absence of similarity can be determined.

(Third Embodiment)
Next, the third embodiment will be described. In the third embodiment, after the calculation of the degree of approximation in the first embodiment (step S108 in FIG. 24), the similarity determination criterion map having only “Δ (additional determination required)” and “× (dissimilar region)” It is different from the first embodiment in that it is a method (method C) that utilizes. In this method C, for example, it is determined whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product, and the correspondence between the degree of similarity and the presence or absence of similarity of the design right is the design right. One map is selected from a plurality of similarity judgment criteria maps M2C-1 and M2C-2 preset according to whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the imitation product and the counterfeit product, and the selected map is selected. Judgment regarding the similarity of design rights is made based on. Further, in the present embodiment, the similarity determination unit 330 makes a first determination to determine the probability of similarity of the design right, and a plurality of counterfeit products determined to be “Δ (additional determination required)” in the first determination. The second determination regarding the similarity of design rights is made based on one map selected from the similarity determination criteria maps M2C-1 and M2C-2. Hereinafter, such a third embodiment will be described.

The process up to the configuration of the counterfeit intellectual property handling system 1 of the third embodiment and the calculation of the degree of approximation (step S108 in FIG. 24) is the same as that of the first embodiment. Therefore, the description of the contents overlapping with the first embodiment will be omitted. Further, in the third embodiment, the configurations and functions other than those described below are the same as those in the first embodiment.

FIG. 32 is a diagram for explaining the similarity determination reference map M2C used in the first determination of the third embodiment. Similar to the similarity determination standard map M2A of the first embodiment, the similarity determination standard map M2C is a map in which the combination of the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area and the presence / absence of similarity are associated with each other. is there. However, the similarity judgment standard map M2C, for example, has only the area corresponding to "Δ: additional judgment required" and the area corresponding to "x: non-similarity", and corresponds to "○: similarity". Does not have. The similarity criterion map M2C is used to determine the similar probability of a design right.

FIG. 33 is a diagram for explaining the similarity determination reference map M2C-1 used in the second determination of the third embodiment. Similar to the similarity determination standard map M2A of the first embodiment, the similarity determination standard map M2C-1 is a map in which a combination of an approximate difference in circumference and an approximate difference in area and the presence or absence of similarity are associated with each other. Is. The similarity judgment criterion map M2C-1 has, for example, only an area corresponding to "○: similar" and an area corresponding to "x: dissimilar", and the area corresponding to "Δ: additional judgment required" is I don't have it. The similarity determination standard map M2C-1 is a map set in advance corresponding to the case where it is determined that the difference portion between the registered design and the counterfeit product does not include the main part of the design.

FIG. 34 is a diagram for explaining the similarity determination reference map M2C-2 used in the second determination of the third embodiment. Similar to the similarity determination standard map M2C-1, the similarity determination standard map M2C-2 is a map in which a combination of an approximate difference in circumference and an approximate difference in area and the presence or absence of similarity are associated with each other. Similarity judgment criteria map M2C-2, for example, has only the area corresponding to "○: similar" and the area corresponding to "x: dissimilar", and there is an area corresponding to "△: additional judgment required". do not do. The similarity determination standard map M2C-2 is a map set in advance corresponding to the case where it is determined that the main part of the design is included in the difference portion between the registered design and the counterfeit product. The similarity determination standard map M2C-2 has a narrower region corresponding to “◯: similarity” than the similarity determination criterion map M2C-1.

Here, an example of a method for determining whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product will be described. In the present embodiment, the main part area MR (see FIG. 37) is set for each registered design. The main part area MR is an area corresponding to the main part of the design. The main area MR is, for example, predetermined and set in advance for each registered design based on the design and test results. Then, the information indicating the main part area MR of each registered design is registered in the registered design DB 503 in association with the registered design. The main part area MR may be automatically assigned to each registered design by the server device 10. In this case, for example, the server device 10 compares the registered design with the well-known design or the well-known design, and sets a region that is not common in the registered design as a main part region MR. The information indicating the main part area MR set by the server device 10 is associated with the registered design and registered in the registered design DB 503.

Then, the similarity determination unit 330 (or the pattern comparison unit 250) identifies the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product in the pattern comparison by the pattern comparison unit 250. For example, the similarity determination unit 330 (or the pattern comparison unit 250) is a region in which one or more of ΣΔX, ΣΔY, ΣΔX ² , ΣΔY ² , Σ (ΔX ² + ΣY ² ) and the like are equal to or greater than the corresponding threshold value. If exists, identify that area as the difference. The similarity determination unit 330 (or the pattern comparison unit 250) includes <(c) first example of pattern comparison for partial design>, <(d) second example of pattern comparison for partial design>, and <(d) second example of pattern comparison for partial design> of the first embodiment. ΔLx and ΔLy may be detected by the same method as in <(e) Third example of pattern comparison for partial design>. In this case, the expression "partial design" in the description of the first embodiment related to the above may be read as "main part region MR".

Then, the similarity determination unit 330 (or the pattern comparison unit 250) determines the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product when the specified difference portion includes at least a part (or, for example, half or more) of the main part region MR. It is determined that the main part of the design is included in. On the other hand, in the similarity determination unit 330 (or the pattern comparison unit 250), when the specified difference portion does not include the main part region MR, the difference portion between the registered design and the counterfeit product includes the main part of the design. Judge that there is no.

FIG. 35 is a diagram showing an example of pattern comparison in the third embodiment. The alternate long and short dash line in FIG. 35 (a) indicates the shape of the corresponding registered design (partial design). The example shown in FIG. 35 is an example showing a case where the main part of the design is included in the difference portion between the registered design and the counterfeit product, as shown by the arrow in the figure. Therefore, the presence or absence of the imitation product shown in FIG. 35 is determined by using the similarity determination criterion map M2C-2.

FIG. 36 is a flowchart showing an example of the processing flow of the server device 10 of the third embodiment. In the present embodiment, in the flow of the first embodiment, instead of performing steps S109 to S114, the determination process described below is performed. It should be noted that the determination as to whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product is performed in advance in, for example, the pattern comparison in step S105 (see FIG. 24).

First, the similarity determination unit 330 makes a first determination using the similarity determination reference map M2C (step 401). In this first judgment, is it necessary to make an additional judgment based on the similarity judgment standard map M2C (whether it corresponds to "△: additional judgment required"), or is the counterfeit product similar to the design right ("x"). : Does it correspond to "dissimilarity") is determined. If it is determined in this determination that the counterfeit products do not have similar design rights, the process proceeds to step S115 without performing steps S402 to S404 described below.

Next, the similarity determination unit 330 determines whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product when it is determined in the first determination that additional determination is necessary. (Step S402).

When the difference between the registered design and the counterfeit product includes the main part of the design (step S402: YES), the similarity determination unit 330 makes a second determination using the similarity determination criterion map M2C-2. (Step S403). In this second judgment, based on the similarity judgment criterion map M2C-2, whether the counterfeit product is similar to the design right (whether it corresponds to "○: similar") or the counterfeit product is not similar to the design right. (Whether it corresponds to "x: dissimilarity") is determined. Then, the process proceeds to step S115.

On the other hand, when the similarity determination unit 330 does not include the main part of the design in the difference portion between the registered design and the counterfeit product (step S402: NO), the similarity determination unit 330 uses the similarity determination criterion map M2C-1 to make a second. The determination is made (step S404). In this second judgment, based on the similarity judgment criterion map M2C-1, whether the counterfeit product has a similar design right (whether it corresponds to "○:") or whether the counterfeit product has a similar design right. (Whether it corresponds to "x: dissimilarity") is determined. Then, the process proceeds to step S115.

With such a configuration, the posting of counterfeit products on the website can be reduced as in the first embodiment. Further, according to the third embodiment (method C), the correspondence between the degree of approximation and the presence or absence of similarity of the design right depends on whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the design right and the counterfeit product. Judgment regarding the similarity of design rights can be made based on a plurality of preset similarity determination standard maps M2C-1 and M2C-2. As a result, the determination can be performed in a short time and with higher accuracy.

In the present embodiment, the first determination is made using the similarity determination reference map M2C, and then the second determination is made using the similarity determination criterion map M2C-1 or M2C-2. According to such a configuration, the first judgment based on the similarity of the entire design is performed using the similarity judgment criterion map M2C, and the counterfeit product having a high degree of similarity of the entire design with respect to the registered design (in the first judgment, " It is possible to make a second judgment in consideration of the main part of the design for the imitation product) of “Δ: additional judgment required”. As a result, it is possible to determine the similarity of design rights with higher accuracy.

Here, the viewpoints of the first embodiment and the second embodiment are whether it is a whole design or a partial design, while the viewpoint of the third embodiment is whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference portion. That is to say. For example, the similarity determination standard map M2A-2 (map for partial design: FIG. 26) of the second embodiment and the similarity determination criterion map M2C-2 (FIG. 34) of the third embodiment have the same contents. This is based on the idea that "partial designs always include the main parts of the design". However, not all the main parts are partial designs, as when some of the main parts of the design are included.

It should be noted that each of the similarity determination criteria maps M2C, M2C-1, and M2C-2 of the third embodiment is a map described with reference to FIGS. 28 and 29 in the same way as the modified example of the first embodiment. Similarly, the boundary between the area corresponding to "△" (additional judgment area) and the area corresponding to "x" (dissimilar area), and the area corresponding to "○" (similar area) and "x" Boundaries with corresponding regions (dissimilar regions) may be set.

(Modified examples of the first to third embodiments)
Next, modifications of the first to third embodiments will be described. This modification is different from the above embodiment in that the processing of the extraction unit 200 and the processing of the determination unit 300 are processed by weighting the main parts of the registered design. The configuration other than that described below is the same as that of the above embodiment.

FIG. 37 is a diagram for explaining an example of processing of the scanning portion of this modified example. In this modification, the main part area MR is set for the registered design. The main part area MR is an area corresponding to the main part of the design. The main area MR is preset for each registered design. Then, the information indicating the main part area MR of each registered design is registered in the registered design DB 503 in association with the registered design. The main part area MR may be automatically assigned to each registered design by the server device 10. In this case, for example, the server device 10 compares the registered design with the well-known design or the well-known design, and sets a region that is not common in the registered design as a main part region MR. The information indicating the main part area MR set by the server device 10 is associated with the registered design and registered in the registered design DB 503.

In this modification, the extraction unit 200 weights the main part region MR and compares the patterns. For example, when the extraction unit 200 detects the length in the X direction for each of the plurality of positions in the Y direction, the extraction unit 200 sets the interval g1 in the Y direction of the scanning lines passing through the main part region (first region) MR in the X direction. The region (second region) UR outside the main region MR is set to be smaller than the interval g2 in the Y direction of the scanning lines passing in the X direction. In this case, the extraction unit 200 sets the interval of the scanning line in the Y direction at the same interval as in the case of the main part area MR of the registered design with respect to the area corresponding to the main part area MR of the registered design in the counterfeit product. Set. As a result, the extraction unit 200 can further improve the determination accuracy in the pattern comparison and improve the accuracy of extracting the counterfeit product.

Further, in this modification, the determination unit 300 weights the main part region MR and makes a determination using the degree of approximation. For example, the determination unit 300 may perform weighting such as adding an arbitrary weighting coefficient to increase the length of the contour portion along the main part region MR in the calculation of the peripheral length LD of the registered design. .. In this case, the determination unit 300 increases the length of the contour portion along the region corresponding to the main part region MR of the registered design in the counterfeit product by multiplying it by the same weighting coefficient as the main part region MR.

Further, instead of or in addition to the above, the determination unit 300 weights the area of the main part region MR by multiplying it by an arbitrary weighting coefficient, for example, in calculating the area SD of the registered design. You may go. In this case, the determination unit 300 increases the area of the area corresponding to the main part area MR of the registered design in the counterfeit product by multiplying it by the same weighting coefficient as the main part area MR. As a result, the determination unit 300 can further improve the accuracy of the determination using the degree of approximation.

Although the embodiments for carrying out the present invention have been described above using the embodiments, the present invention is not limited to these embodiments, and various modifications and substitutions are made without departing from the gist of the present invention. Can be added.

1 ... Counterfeit product IP support system 10 ... Server device 20 ... Terminal device 100 ... Monitoring unit 200 ... Extraction unit 230 ... Reception unit 300 ... Judgment unit 400 ... Information output unit 500 ... Storage unit

Claims (20)

An extraction unit that extracts counterfeit products posted on the website,
The degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the design is calculated based on the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit and the design for which the design right is registered, and the determination regarding the similarity of the design right is made based on the calculated degree of approximation. Judgment unit to perform
A counterfeit intellectual property support system characterized by being equipped with. Monitor at least one of the genuine equipment equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products posted on one or more websites, and extract by the extraction unit based on at least one of the genuine product equipment rate and the number of counterfeit products posted. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to claim 1, further comprising a monitoring unit for determining whether or not to perform the operation. The monitoring unit monitors at least the genuine product equipment rate, and when the current value or future forecast value of the genuine product equipment rate is less than the threshold value, or the amount of decrease in the genuine product equipment rate, the genuine product equipment rate. When the future expected decrease amount, the decrease rate of the genuine product equipment rate, or the future expected decrease rate of the genuine product equipment rate exceeds the threshold value, it is determined to perform extraction by the extraction unit. The counterfeit intellectual property support system according to claim 2. The monitoring unit monitors at least the number of counterfeit products posted, and when the current value or future forecast value of the counterfeit products is greater than or equal to the threshold value, or the amount of increase in the number of counterfeit products posted, the number of counterfeit products posted. When the expected future increase in the number of counterfeit products, the rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products, or the expected rate of increase in the number of counterfeit products in the future exceeds the threshold value, it is determined to perform extraction by the extraction unit. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to claim 2 or 3. Claims 2 to 4 are characterized in that the monitoring unit determines whether or not to perform extraction by the extraction unit based on a combination of a value related to the genuine product equipment rate and a value related to the number of counterfeit products posted. The counterfeit intellectual property support system described in any one of the items. The extraction unit narrows down the counterfeit products to be extracted as the determination target of the determination unit by performing a primary determination on the counterfeit products posted on the website based on a standard simpler than the degree of approximation. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to any one of claims 1 to 5, characterized in that. The extraction unit performs pattern comparison of the counterfeit product posted on the website and the design by comparing the lengths in specific directions at each of a plurality of positions, and the result of the pattern comparison is a predetermined condition. The counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence system according to any one of claims 1 to 6, wherein the counterfeit product posted on the website is extracted as a judgment target of the determination unit when the condition is satisfied. .. When the design is a partial design, the extraction unit specifies the position where at least one end of both ends of the design crossed by a scanning line along the specific direction is a solid line portion of the partial design. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to claim 7, wherein the lengths in the directions are compared with each other. Before performing the pattern comparison, the extraction unit may use at least one of the contour of the counterfeit product and the contour of the design in order to match the contour of the counterfeit product posted on the website with the contour of the design. When the fitting process including adjusting the size is performed and the difference between the contour of the counterfeit product and the contour of the design becomes equal to or less than the threshold value by performing the fitting process, the web without performing the pattern comparison. Claim 7 or claim 8 characterized in that the counterfeit product posted on the site is extracted as a judgment target of the determination unit, or the counterfeit product posted on the website is determined to be similar to the design right. Counterfeit IP vs. System as described in. The extraction unit has a reception unit that accepts input of an image of a counterfeit product.
When the image of the counterfeit product posted on the website does not exist, the determination unit calculates the degree of approximation based on the image received by the reception unit and the design, and the determination unit calculates the degree of approximation based on the calculated degree of approximation. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to any one of claims 1 to 9, wherein a determination is made regarding the similarity of design rights. The determination unit calculates, as the degree of approximation, the approximate difference in circumference and the approximate difference in area with respect to the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit and the design, respectively, and the approximate difference in circumference and the area. The counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence system according to any one of claims 1 to 10, wherein a determination regarding the similarity of the design right is made based on the approximate difference of the above. The counterfeit intellectual property according to claim 11, wherein the determination unit determines whether or not the design right is similar to the design right based on a combination of the approximate difference in the peripheral length and the approximate difference in the area. Corresponding system. When the design is a partial design, the determination unit calculates the total length along the solid line portion of the partial design as the peripheral length of the design, and in the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit, the partial design The counterfeit product intellectual property handling system according to claim 11 or 12, wherein the total length of the portions corresponding to the solid line portions is calculated as the peripheral length of the counterfeit product. When the design is a partial design, the determination unit is an area of a specific area surrounded by one or more solid line portions of the design and a boundary line connecting a plurality of ends of the one or more solid line portions. 11 to 13 are calculated as the area of the design, and the area of the region corresponding to the specific region in the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit is calculated as the area of the counterfeit product. The counterfeit intellectual property support system described in any one of the items. An information output unit that outputs information indicating the determination result of the determination unit is further provided.
The determination unit calculates the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the overall design based on the counterfeit product extracted by the extraction unit and the overall design for which the design right is registered, and based on the calculated approximation degree. , It is determined whether the design right of the whole design is similar, the design right of the whole design is not similar, or whether it is similar to the design right of the whole design is undecided.
The information output unit provides information indicating the determination result of the determination unit when it is determined whether or not it is similar to the design right of the entire design or when it is determined that the information output unit is not similar to the design right of the entire design. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to any one of claims 1 to 14, characterized in that it outputs. When it is determined that it is undecided whether or not the determination unit is similar to the design right of the overall design in the determination using the overall design, the determination unit is the target of the determination using the overall design. The degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the partial design is calculated based on the counterfeit product and the partial design for which the design right is registered, and is it similar to the design right of the partial design based on the calculated degree of approximation? The counterfeit IP property handling system according to claim 15, wherein it is determined whether or not the partial design is similar to the design right. Based on the model to which the counterfeit product corresponds, the determination unit determines one from a plurality of determination reference maps in which the correspondence between the degree of approximation and the presence or absence of similarity of the design right is set in advance for each model. The counterfeit intellectual property handling system according to any one of claims 1 to 14, wherein a reference map is selected and a determination regarding the similarity of the design right is made based on the selected criterion map. The determination unit corresponds to the degree of similarity and the presence or absence of similarity of the design right based on whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the design in which the design right is registered and the counterfeit product. One judgment criterion map is selected from a plurality of judgment criterion maps preset depending on whether or not the main part of the design is included in the difference between the design and the counterfeit product, and the selected criterion map is selected. The counterfeit product intellectual property correspondence system according to any one of claims 1 to 14, which determines the similarity of the design right based on the judgment standard map. One or more computers
Extract the counterfeit products posted on the website and
Based on the extracted counterfeit product and the design for which the design right is registered, the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the design is calculated.
Judgment regarding the similarity of the design right is made based on the calculated degree of approximation.
A method of dealing with counterfeit intellectual property, which is characterized by this. On one or more computers
Extract the counterfeit products posted on the website and
Based on the extracted counterfeit product and the design for which the design right is registered, the degree of approximation between the counterfeit product and the design is calculated.
Judgment regarding the similarity of the design right is made based on the calculated degree of approximation.
A program characterized by that.

Images