Abstract: In the era of digital economy, the application of the patent "exception for scientific research and experimental use" system is of great significance to the healthy development of the entire innovation ecosystem. By means of historical and comparative research, this paper combs the path of strict and loose interpretation of the system, and finds the problems of abstract generalization of legislation and limited application of judicial cases in our country. The patent "experimental use exception" system originated from the common law practice in the early 19th century, and has been interpreted in a strict way. In 1984, the "Hatch-Waxman Act" was passed in the United States, which provided an independent statutory basis for the "experimental use" of patents for generic drugs and medical devices for administrative approval. European civil law countries such as France and Germany also included the "experimental use exception" system in their patent legislation in the 1960s and 1970s, with a slightly looser interpretation path than the United States. In 1984, the first Patent Law of China established the system of "scientific research and experimental use exception" on the basis of foreign experience. However, this system is abstract and general, has not been revised in each amendment, and has been rarely applied in judicial practice. On this basis, according to the characteristics of technology innovation in the digital economy era, such as iterative acceleration, subject collaboration, data dependence and cross integration, have an important impact on the demand and form of patent use, this paper analyzes that the "four elements" standards of judging copyright fair use can be used for reference to determine whether relevant patent uses constitute "scientific research and experimental use exception" from the aspects of the purpose, object, subject and behavior of use, as well as the influence of use on the patentee's market interests. From the point of view of the purpose of use, the use of a patent to verify whether a patent is "fully disclosed", whether it is patentable and whether it meets the requirements of statutory authorization, the use of a patent to improve a specific patented technology, and the use of a patent purely for scientific research and technological development constitute the "scientific research and experimental use exception" of a patent. From the perspective of the object of use, the use of existing patents for invention-creation activities of "the same subject" and the use of patents for "research tools" under urgent and necessary circumstances belong to the "scientific research and experimental use exception" of patents. From the perspective of the subject and behavior of use, the specific nature of universities and scientific research institutions, the source of funds and the organizational form of scientific research activities, as well as the nature, environment, scale, time, scope and results of the use of patents by market operators are the factors to determine whether they constitute "scientific research and experimental use exception" of patents. From the perspective of the impact on the patentee's market interests, the "scientific research and experimental use" of a patent must not interfere with the patentee's normal production and operation of the market interests can be considered as an exception that does not constitute infringement.