随着自有知识产权萌芽、发展，知识产权自身特征所引发的诉讼困难逐渐显现，普通程序难以解决诸多问题。受国际压力的影响，我国侵犯知识产权刑事实体法远远超前于经济社会发展水平，刑事诉讼程序却未能充分发挥“出罪”功能。新成立的知识产权法院并未将刑事案件纳入管辖范围，与“三审合一”审判模式改革相冲突。实践和理论对解决上述问题均提出了极大需求，这便是本文以此选题进行研究的缘由。本文分为绪论、我国侵犯知识产权案件刑事诉讼面临的主要问题、侵犯知识产权案件刑事程序的启动、侵犯知识产权刑事案件特殊侦查与证据的运用、侵犯知识产权单位犯罪强制措施的适用、侵犯知识产权刑事案件的和解、侵犯知识产权刑事案件的审判、余论八个部分，对侵犯知识产权刑事案件诉讼中的特殊问题进行探讨，以期推动学界对此类问题深入研究。“绪论”部分重点介绍了侵犯知识产权刑事案件诉讼程序的研究现状，梳理了理论研究中的主要观点，并提出了本文的研究价值。“我国侵犯知识产权案件刑事诉讼面临的主要问题”介绍了本文的三条主线。第一条主线是自有知识产权的萌芽，对刑事维权提出了较高需求，知识产权自身特征决定了普通诉讼程序难以胜任。第二条主线是在知识经济国际发展的大背景下，我国不断降低侵犯知识产权案件的入罪门槛，超越了国内经济文化发展水平，为了防止泛刑化趋势，需要从诉讼程序中寻找出路。第三条主线是我国知识产权审判改革虽已取得阶段性成果，知识产权法院也得以成立，但是专门法院的管辖模式、技术调查官制度的构建及国外秘密保持命令制度的引入等问题仍需要深入研究。归纳而言，上述问题涵盖刑事程序的启动、特殊侦查与证据的运用、单位犯罪强制措施的适用、刑事和解和审判。“侵犯知识产权案件刑事程序的启动”主要研究管辖、立案和自诉。知识产权无形性特征导致取证困难，对降低刑事立案门槛和刑事自诉受案门槛提出了强烈需求。多元化作案方式的出现造成犯罪地多发，有必要根据知识产权特点确立特殊的管辖制度。通过借鉴域外管辖制度，建议我国在传统“犯罪地”中增加“行为人希望结果发生地”，同时提高刑事诉讼的级别管辖并承认侦查管辖的独立性，以解决侦查阶段与审判阶段的管辖冲突问题。“侵犯知识产权刑事案件特殊侦查与证据的运用”包括诱惑侦查、刑事推定、秘密保持命令制度。主要论证诱惑侦查、刑事推定在侵犯知识产权刑事案件中的适用价值及特殊性，同时论证引进域外秘密保持命令制度的必要性，对上述具体制度构建提出建议。“侵犯知识产权单位犯罪强制措施的适用”主要论证知识产权单位犯罪日益猖獗，而我国知识产权单位犯罪强制措施立法缺位，引发追诉难、执行难、遏制难等问题。建议增设知识产权侵犯单位犯罪强制措施种类、明确规定诉讼程序，增强行业协会的参与性。“侵犯知识产权刑事案件的和解”主要从知识产权的私权属性论证了知识产权案件刑事和解的正当性，建议明确“严重危害社会秩序和国家利益”的评价标准，扩大和解案件范围，发挥司法机关在刑事和解中的积极作用，增设和解内容。“侵犯知识产权刑事案件的审判”主要探讨“三审合一”审判模式和技术调查官制度等审判中的特殊问题。建议建立专门法院、巡回法庭、专门审判庭相结合的审判组织体系，统一审理三大诉讼案件，选拔并培养复合型法官，设置与之相匹配的检察机构，在坚持“刑事优先”的基础上赋予被害人程序选择权，赋予法官直接确权职能。根据刑事诉讼程序特点，建议将技术调查官制度延伸至侦查阶段，同时明确技术调查官的地位、各诉讼阶段职能、技术调查意见及调查报告的效力等问题。“余论”部分概括了全文的主要观点，呼吁学界关注知识产权问题，以推动侵犯知识产权刑事案件特别程序之构建。

With the owned intellectual property`s sprouting and growing, the litigation difficulties caused by the self-characteristics of the intellectual property rights is appearing，which the common criminal procedure can not solve effectively. Under the international pressure, our criminal substantive law about the violation of intellectual property rights advances the development of economy and society far before, but the criminal litigation procedure could not play its decriminalization part in mollifying the contradiction well. The criminal cases are not in the range of the newly established intellectual property court`s jurisdiction, being conflict with the “unification of triple trials”reform. It need to resolve this issue practically and theoretically, and that is the article researches on. The article comprised of introduction, main problem, the starting of criminal procedure, the use of special investigation and evidence, the application of coercive measures on unit crimes, the criminal reconciliation, and the trial, researching on the special problems occurs in the criminal procedure about violation of intellectual property rights, with the hope of pushing the study on such issue forward.The part “introduction” puts its importance on the present research situation about criminal procedure about the violation of intellectual property rights, analyzes the the main views in theory research, and points out the research value of the article.The part“the main problems of the criminal procedure about the violation of intellectual property rights in our country” introduces three threads. Firstly, common criminal procedure can not be coordinated with the budding of own intellectual property rights, which demand for criminal right-safeguarding, but the self characteristics of intellectual property rights makes it difficult. Secondly, under the background of the international development of knowledge economy, the threshold of prosecuting the violation of intellectual property rights is lowering in our country, and this situation is beyond the development of domestic economy and culture. To avoid the the trend of punishment widely, it needs to find a way to exempt some light criminals from punishment in the procedure. Thirdly, although the periodical results in reforming the mechanism of trial of intellectual property rights has been achieved, and the intellectual property court has been set up, the issue of the model of jurisdiction of special court, the construction of technical investigation official institution, the introduce of secret-keeping-order institution abroad still needs to be researched deeply. In summary, the issue above covers the starting of criminal procedure, the use of special investigation and evidence, the application of coercive measures on unit criminals, the criminal reconciliation, and the trial about the criminal cases of intellectual property rights. The part“the starting of the criminal procedure about the violation of intellectual property rights” researches on jurisdiction, criminal case-filing, and private prosecution. The intangible character makes it is difficult to obtain evidence for intellectual property rights, so it needs strongly to lower the threshold of criminal case-filing and private prosecution. The diversification of crimes influence multiple localities, so it is necessary to establish special jurisdiction system according to the characteristics of intellectual property rights. Learning from the external jurisdiction system, we`d better add “locality where the criminal expects to occur” to traditional “locality of a crime”, raise the jurisdiction grade of criminal prosecution and admit the independence of investigation jurisdiction, avoiding the conflict of jurisdiction between investigation and trial.The part “the use of special investigation and evidence in criminal cases about the violation of intellectual property rights” includes criminal presumption, inductive investigation, and secret-keeping-order system. It mainly discusses the significance and specialty of inductive investigation and criminal presumption in the criminal cases about violation of intellectual property rights, introduces secret-keeping-order system overseas, and gives the suggestion to the construction of systems above. The part“the application of coercive measures on unit criminals who violate of intellectual property rights” mainly researches the increasingly rampant unit crime of intellectual property rights. In our country, the lack of legislation of coercive measures on unit crime about intellectual property rights leads to serious consequences such as prosecution difficulty, enforcement difficulty, and containment difficulty. It suggests to add kinds of coercive measures on unit crime about intellectual property rights, define clearly the litigation procedure, and strengthen the participation of industry associations.The part“the reconciliation in criminal cases about violation of intellectual property rights” mainly demonstrates the legitimacy of criminal reconciliation of intellectual property rights cases, based on the private rights of intellectual property rights, suggests to define the criteria for what is the “serious harm to public order and state interest”, broaden the range of reconciliation cases, play the positive part in criminal reconciliation for the judiciary, and add contents of reconciliation.The part“the trial of criminal cases about violation of intellectual property rights” mainly discusses the special questions in this field, covering the “unification of triple trials”model and technical investigation system. It suggests to set up a trial organization system combined by special court, circuit court, special judicial tribunal, have a unified trial of the three kinds of lawsuits, select and develop composite judges, establish a matching procuratorate organ, give the victim the right of option of civil procedure based on the “priority of criminal”, and give the judge the function of direct confirmation. According to the characteristics of criminal procedure, it suggests to put the technical investigation official constitution in the investigation, and at the same time clear the position of the technical investigation official, the function of each litigation phase, and the legal effect of the technical investigation suggestion and report.The part“conclusion”summarizes the article`s main views partly, appeals to the academics for intellectual property rights, and promotes the construction of special procedure of criminal criminal procedure of intellectual property rights.