Abstract: The Patent Law and its Implementing Rules, which are the antecedents of the crime of counterfeiting patents in the Criminal Law, have undergone several revisions, and the definition of counterfeiting patents has gone through three stages: from “counterfeiting others’ patents” to “counterfeiting others’ patents and non-patents passing off patents”, to “counterfeiting patents”. The evolution of the definition has caused the following problems: the connection between the Patent Law and the Criminal Law is not smooth, the legislative value orientation is unclear, it is difficult to judge whether the legislative focus is “counterfeiting other people’s patents” or “non-patents passing off patents”, and the ambiguity in the expression of terms leads to confusion in judicial practice, which causes the article of “counterfeiting other people’s patents” to be a criminal punishment for “patent infringement”. By classifying and discussing the behavior of counterfeiting patents and its infringed legal interests, and referring to overseas legislative experience, it can be demonstrated that it is reasonable and necessary to amend the counterfeit patent clause. On the path of amendment: First, restore “counterfeiting patents” to “counterfeiting others’ patents” and exclude the jurisdiction of the Patent Law on “non-patents passing off patents”; Second, referring to the expression of “false marking” from patent laws of other countries, make it clear that illegal patent implementation does not belong to counterfeiting other people’s patents, so as to avoid the ambiguity of current legislation; Third, regulate the act of counterfeiting patent certificates through the crime of forging or altering certificates; Finally, the crime of counterfeiting patents should be abolished at an appropriate time.