As a social software, WeChat has been widely used in many social fields, such as life, work, publicity, promotion and sales of products or services, affecting all aspects of social study, life and work. A series of legal issues derived from this need to be studied in depth by our legal profession. This paper will analyze whether the nature of WeChat friends circle, the technical measures of WeChat friends circle and the problem of limiting the number of friends in WeChat friends circle can hinder the public's unified understanding of WeChat and WeChat friends circle, affirm that the publication of information in WeChat friends circle constitutes an open view in the sense of patent law, and face up to the positive impact of information disclosure in WeChat friends circle on intellectual property law. With the comprehensive popularization and application of smart phones, a new thing, WeChat free social software developed by Tencent, came into being. Seeing friends on WeChat has become a part of people's daily life and work. Everyone has a circle of friends and a stage to show themselves. Wechat has actually changed from a media publishing platform to a collection of social public networks. However, the legal profession has been arguing that WeChat is different from other electronic evidence, and how to adopt WeChat evidence has not stopped. The intellectual property community also has differences in legal knowledge and understanding because of the release of WeChat friends circle information. Wechat evidence is as bumpy as electronic evidence such as QQ chat and QQ space. I. Legal provisions and legal definitions of existing technologies and designs in the Patent Law Article 22 of the Patent Law stipulates that the existing technologies mentioned in this Law refer to technologies known to the public at home and abroad before the filing date, and Article 23 of the Patent Law stipulates that the existing designs mentioned in this Law refer to designs known to the public at home and abroad before the filing date. These two clauses in the patent law are the provisions of the patent law on existing technology and existing design law, but it is precisely because the public knows that there is no clear legal definition that there are different opinions in judicial practice and legal theory circles. China National Intellectual Property Administration Patent Examination Guide (20 10), Part II, Chapter III 2. 1 stipulates: According to Article 22, paragraph 5 of the Patent Law, existing technology refers to the technology known to the public at home and abroad before the filing date. Existing technologies include technologies that have been publicly published in domestic and foreign publications, publicly used at home and abroad or known to the public in other ways before the filing date (the priority date shall prevail if there is priority). The existing technology should be the technical content that the public can know before the application date. In other words, the existing technology should be available to the public before the application date, and it should contain contents that can enable the public to learn substantive technical knowledge from it. It should be noted that the confidential technical content does not belong to the existing technology. The so-called state of confidentiality includes not only the situation that is bound by confidentiality laws or agreements, but also the situation that is considered to have confidentiality obligations in social concepts or business habits, that is, the situation of implied confidentiality. However, if the person who has the obligation to keep secrets violates the regulations, agreements or tacit understanding, which leads to the disclosure of technical contents and makes the public know these technologies, these technologies also constitute a part of the existing technologies. ; 2. 1.2 disclosure methods The disclosure methods in the prior art include publication disclosure, use disclosure and other forms of disclosure, and there is no geographical restriction. . The Patent Examination Guide clearly stipulates the nature of technical content, who discloses substantive technical content and the way to obtain substantive technical content. However, since the birth of WeChat software as a social software providing instant messaging service, it has been endowed with the functions of setting friends' access rights, making friends in friends' circle and limiting the number of friends. However, the Patent Examination Guide does not restrict the public from obtaining substantive technical content, which makes the legal understanding of the public in the intellectual property community different. Second, whether the information published by WeChat friends circle constitutes different legal understandings in the sense of patent law. At present, it is the mainstream view in judicial practice that the information published by WeChat friends circle does not belong to the disclosure in the sense of patent law, while the legal theorists believe that the current internet technology has the conditions to spread the information of WeChat friends circle indefinitely, and publishing information through WeChat friends circle constitutes the disclosure in the sense of patent law. The Patent Reexamination Board of the State Intellectual Property Office believes that WeChat circle of friends is a space for users to share and pay attention to their friends' lives, not a platform for users to conduct online public marketing activities, and its communication scope is limited to WeChat friends. Only when the two parties authenticate each other and become friends can they see the information posted by the other party, and the number of WeChat friends is limited. From the attribute of the circle of friends and the limitation of the number of friends, it can be concluded that the circle of friends is essentially a private social platform limited to specific people, and the public scope of information posted by users in the circle of friends is limited to WeChat friends, not any unspecified people, so the content disclosed by WeChat circle of friends does not belong to the disclosure in the sense of patent law. In the practice of judicial trial, the case of Ou Mo Sanitary Ware Store, Zhong Yunlin and Jiang Yan infringing the patent right of design in Shuikou Town of Kaiping City is taken as an example. 201610/2, Guangdong Higher People's Court, in its judgment of the second instance, based on the birth of WeChat and the functions and characteristics of WeChat circle of friends, held that the content published by WeChat circle of friends can only be seen by friends of WeChat users, and the authority of WeChat circle of friends can be set, but decided that the disclosure of WeChat circle of friends information does not constitute the disclosure in the sense of patent law. Recently, however, in a design patent dispute case concluded in the second instance of Zhejiang Higher People's Court, both Hangzhou Intermediate People's Court and Zhejiang Higher People's Court affirmed that the disclosure of WeChat friends circle information constitutes disclosure in the sense of patent law. This is also the most direct and up-to-date view made by the High Court on the information disclosure of WeChat friends circle, and it is the third view formed by combining the previous judicial practice and the legal theory circle. Third, the disclosure of information released by WeChat friends circle: the realistic consideration of the existing technology and existing design in the Patent Law. The author believes that although the contents known to the public are not clearly stipulated in the Patent Law at present, from the legislative purpose of the Patent Law and the provisions of the Patent Examination Guide, it can be completely recognized that the disclosure of information published by WeChat friends circle constitutes disclosure in the sense of patent law. Article 1 of the Patent Law stipulates that this Law is formulated for the purpose of protecting the legitimate rights and interests of patentees, encouraging inventions and creations, promoting the application of inventions and creations, improving innovation ability, and promoting scientific and technological progress and economic and social development. This legislative purpose shows that the national legislation on patents not only protects the legitimate rights and interests of patentees, but also encourages people to innovate from the national and government levels, regulates people's innovative behavior, transforms and applies innovative achievements, promotes technological progress and economic development, and improves the overall scientific and technological competitiveness of the country. The openness of the information published by WeChat friends circle provides others with the possibility of knowing the known technology or design, so that others can further carry out technological innovation, make inventions and improve their innovation ability on the basis of the known technology or design. Of course, from the legal provisions of the patent law, it is understood that known is based on the filing date (priority date). If, after the filing date (priority date, if there is priority), others directly apply for a patent with the existing technology or design, but there is no innovation in technology or design, although the patent certificate can be obtained due to the restrictions of the patent law on the contents and conditions of patent examination, it is not an innovation in technology or design in essence. Such technology or design is widely used by the public, and can not stimulate the enthusiasm of the public for invention and creation. Promote scientific and technological progress. On the contrary, the technology or design before patent application is spread by the public through the information published by WeChat friends circle, which makes the existing technology or design widely used and even forms homogeneous competition of products or technologies. Then, such a product, technology or design is protected by the patent law, and the so-called legitimate rights and interests of the patentee will be protected by giving the patentee the right to monopolize the market with the patent right. However, in the long run, it will do more harm than good to reflect the competitive value of market economy and improve the overall scientific and technological level of the country, and it also deviates from the legislative purpose of the patent law to adjust the balance between the interests of patentees and the interests of the public, encourage innovation and improve the overall scientific and technological level of the country. Our legislators and judges only consider the legislative purpose of the patent law, and do not make a one-size-fits-all approach. Under the established patent application system as the main body, they have derived some legal provisions, such as exhaustion of patents, implementation of the right of first use, use for scientific research, temporary transit, exemption of patented drugs or patented medical devices for administrative examination and approval, gift principle, estoppel principle, and functional restriction of patented technology, to delimit the boundaries of market monopoly brought by patent rights. The patentee was warned not to stand on the credit book of inventions produced by previous technological innovations. The public's technological research and development, application and re-innovation may destroy the patentee's patented technological invention and creation at any time, urge the patentee to continuously carry out technological innovation and invention and creation, realize the dynamic balance between protecting the patentee's legitimate rights and interests and the public's technological application, and encourage the public to carry out technological innovation, which is in line with the legislative purpose of the patent law. Although there are many different views on the disclosure of WeChat friends circle information at present, with the continuous development of Internet application technology and the improvement of legal knowledge in China, the view that the disclosure of WeChat friends circle information constitutes disclosure in the sense of patent law will be accepted by the general public, forming social cognition and even forming a unified legal understanding.