The controversy of patent contributory infringement legislation has been around for a long time. This article aims to propose the necessity and urgency of the formulation of patent contributory infringement. There are two reasons for the propose. First, considering the new types of infringement are brought by technological development. Second, filling the loopholes where the patentee cannot obtain timely and effective relief. According the development of practice in the United States, I have observed the changes before and after in the judgments of the contributory infringement system, and found that contributory infringement and patent misuse doctrine show interactive relationship. When the court allowed a large number of contributory infringement litigation, the patentee obtained the court’s endorsement and began to expand the scope of patents to non-patented components by tying contracts, which may undermine the order of market competition. In order to curb out-of-control contributory infringements, the common law has spawned patent abuse theory, which has become a sharp weapon for defendants to defend. Furthermore, this theory as a supporting measure makes the courts to regulate contributory infringement. However, the cases which involve contributory infringements in Taiwan’s intellectual property courts, most of them deny the possibility of application on the grounds. Because the patent law has not enacted the indirect infringements regulation, the judges are not willing to use in the judgement. In addition, most of the judges ignore the difference between intangible property rights and tangible property rights and mechanically apply civil law infringement provisions in cases. As a result, the loss rate of verdicts show that plaintiff is much higher than defendant. Nevertheless, the plaintiffs spend a lot of money and time to file a lawsuit, they always get a bad consequence because of lacking indirect infringements regulation in the patent law and the standard operation of the court practice. By contrast, the defendants enjoy the benefits that belonged to the patentees and do not take any responsibility. The comparison between the plaintiffs and defendants are clearly out of balance. Therefore, this article suggests the patent contributory infringement regulation should be enacted to eliminate continuous unfairness.