本文選題：TRIPS協(xié)議　切入點：商標權刑法保護　出處：《華東政法大學》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：《與貿易有關的知識產(chǎn)權協(xié)定》（以下簡稱“TRIPS協(xié)議”）是第一個規(guī)定商標權刑法保護的國際公約，它不僅要求各締約國對商標權提供必要的刑法保護手段，還進一步規(guī)定了侵犯商標權犯罪的刑事程序和刑罰措施。我國作為TRIPS協(xié)議的締約國，有義務履行TRIPS協(xié)議的規(guī)定，將其對于商標權刑事救濟的規(guī)定轉化為國內法適用。目前，我國商標權的刑法保護已經(jīng)達到了TRIPS協(xié)議的最低標準，但是并未完全符合TRIPS協(xié)議的有關規(guī)定，并且明顯滯后于商標部門法的發(fā)展和發(fā)達國家商標權刑事立法。本文試從比較法的視角，通過比較研究我國商標權的刑法保護與TRIPS協(xié)議及世界主要國家侵犯商標權犯罪的刑事立法，來剖析我國商標權刑法保護的不足，并提出相應的立法完善建議。 本文共分為四部分：第一部分介紹了我國侵犯商標權犯罪高發(fā)的現(xiàn)狀，，并總結出我國侵犯商標權犯罪呈現(xiàn)出主體日益復雜化、手段日益高科技化、行為日益復合化、對象日益廣泛化、活動日益國際化、后果日益嚴重化等特點。進而從經(jīng)濟角度、犯罪人角度、被害人角度和政治法律角度分析了我國侵犯商標權犯罪高發(fā)的原因，并回顧了我國商標權刑法保護的立法沿革，簡要評析了侵犯商標權犯罪的具體罪名。 第二部分主要介紹了TRIPS協(xié)議對商標權的刑法保護。TRIPS協(xié)議對商標權刑法保護的目標是促進技術的革新轉讓與傳播、促進商標權的所有者和使用者互相受益、促進權利與義務的平衡；TRIPS協(xié)議對商標權刑法保護的基本原則為國民待遇原則、保護公共秩序原則、社會公共利益原則等；TRIPS協(xié)議對商標權刑法保護的標準是最低標準，WTO成員國必須遵守。TRIPS協(xié)議對商標權刑法保護的適用條件包括保護的對象、規(guī)制的行為、行為人主觀方面、刑罰設置和具體實施等方面。 第三部分首先從宏觀上分析了TRIPS協(xié)議下我國刑法介入商標權保護領域是必要的，但是不能過度夸大和強調刑法介入的實際效用。之后從中美知識產(chǎn)權WTO爭端案的角度切入，提出我國商標權刑法保護雖然達到了TRIPS協(xié)議的最低標準，但是在立法模式、保護范圍、刑罰設置上仍存在以下缺陷：集中型立法模式導致商標權刑法保護的滯后、缺乏對服務商標的保護、缺乏對馳名商標的特殊保護、缺少對馳名商標淡化行為和反向假冒行為的規(guī)制、罪刑結構失衡、刑罰設置缺乏針對性且過于嚴厲等。 第四部分通過借鑒TRIPS協(xié)議和世界主要國家對侵犯商標權犯罪的刑事立法，從兩個方面提出完善我國商標權刑法保護的建議。在價值取向選擇方面，我國商標權的刑法保護應當堅持以國際化為主本土化為輔的選擇和秩序優(yōu)先兼顧權利的選擇，保持我國商標權刑法保護的獨立品格并實現(xiàn)個人利益與社會利益的平衡。在具體立法方面，可從三個方面進行完善：第一，借鑒結合型立法模式，在商標法中補充規(guī)定侵犯商標權犯罪的犯罪構成和刑事責任；第二，擴大商標權刑法保護的范圍，將注冊服務商標納入假冒注冊商標罪的保護范圍、加強對馳名商標的特殊保護、將反向假冒行為納入刑法規(guī)制；第三，調整刑罰配置，可以逐步弱化自由刑，偏重罰金刑的運用，同時注重發(fā)揮資格刑的作用，實現(xiàn)侵犯商標權犯罪刑罰方式的多樣化等。
[Abstract]:< > intellectual property agreements related to trade (hereinafter referred to as the "TRIPS agreement") is the first International Convention on the protection of trademark rights provisions of criminal law, it not only requires the parties to provide the necessary means of criminal protection of trademark rights, but also further stipulated the crime of trademark infringement criminal procedures and penalties in China as measures. The TRIPS agreement of the parties, the obligation to fulfill the provisions of the TRIPS agreement, the provisions of the trademark rights criminal relief into domestic law. At present, the criminal protection of trademark in our country has reached the minimum standard TRIPS protocol, but the relevant provisions did not fully comply with the TRIPS agreement, and lagged behind the Trademark Department the development of developed countries and the trademark rights criminal legislation. This paper from the perspective of comparative law, through the comparative study of China's trademark rights criminal law protection and TRIPS protocol and the main countries in the world of infringement of trademark The criminal legislation of the right crime is used to analyze the shortage of the criminal law protection of the trademark right in our country, and to put forward the corresponding suggestions for perfecting the legislation.
This paper is divided into four parts: the first part introduces the current situation of the crime of trademark infringement in China, and summed up China's trademark infringement crime shows body become increasingly complex, increasingly high, behavior becomes more and more complex, the object is becoming increasingly widespread, more international, increasingly serious consequences etc. then from the economic point of view, the criminal victim and political point of view, view of legal point of view of the causes of the crime of trademark infringement in China, and reviews the legislative history of the criminal protection of trademark in our country, analyzes the specific charges of violations of trademark rights crime.
The second part mainly introduces the target TRIPS protocol to the trademark rights of criminal law protection of.TRIPS agreement on the criminal protection for trademark rights is to promote the reform of the transfer and dissemination of technology, promote the trademark owners and users of mutual benefit, to promote the balance of rights and obligations; the basic principles of criminal law protection of trademark right TRIPS agreement for the principle of national treatment and protection the public order principle, the principle of public interest; the standard TRIPS protocol on the criminal protection of trademark rights is the lowest standard, WTO members must comply with the.TRIPS agreement the applicable conditions of criminal protection of trademark rights including the protection of objects, regulation of behavior, subjective behavior, penalty setting and implementation.
The third part of the first from the macro analysis is necessary under the TRIPS agreement in China's criminal law protection of the right to intervene in the field of trademark, the actual utility but not exaggerated and emphasized the intervention of the criminal law. After the Sino US intellectual property dispute case from WTO's angle, proposed our country trademark rights criminal law protection while the minimum standards to TRIPS protocol. But in the legislative model, the scope of protection, there are still defects following penalty setting: centralized legislative mode causes the criminal protection of trademark rights, the lack of protection of service trademark, the lack of the special protection of the well-known trademark, the lack of regulation of trademark dilution and counterfeiting, the imbalance of structure, the penalty for lack of and too harsh.
The fourth part mainly through using the TRIPS protocol and the world of national trademark infringement crimes criminal legislation, put forward to perfect the criminal protection of trademark rights in China from two aspects. In the aspect of the selection of the value orientation of criminal protection for trademark right in China should adhere to the selection and order of the main International Soil supplemented by priority rights select and maintain the independent character of criminal law protection of trademark in our country and realize the balance of individual interests and social interests. In the specific legislation should be perfected from three aspects: first, from the combined legislative mode of constitution of crime and criminal responsibility in the trademark law in the supplementary provisions of the crime of trademark infringement; second, to expand the scope of the criminal protection of trademark rights, trademark registration services will be included in the scope of protection of the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks, strengthen the protection of well-known trademark, the reverse counterfeit behavior into the punishment Law regulation; third, adjusting penalty allocation can gradually weaken the penalty of freedom and emphasize the application of fine penalty. At the same time, we should give full play to the function of qualification penalty, and achieve the diversification of punishment methods of trademark infringement.

【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D924.3;D923.4;D997.1

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 儲槐植;嚴而不厲:為刑法修訂設計政策思想[J];北京大學學報(哲學社會科學版);1989年06期

2 喻曉玲;論WTO法境下的侵犯商標權犯罪[J];北京大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2002年S1期

3 邱玉梅,羅開卷;論反向假冒商標行為的刑法規(guī)制——兼論假冒注冊商標罪的立法完善[J];長沙理工大學學報(社會科學版);2005年02期

4 張偉君;;知識產(chǎn)權刑事保護門檻:從TRIPs到ACTA[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權;2011年08期

5 朱欖葉;;從中國在TRIPS協(xié)定下的義務看美國對中國的申訴[J];法學;2007年08期

6 王作富;;犯罪功能分析與價值評判的路徑選擇[J];法學;2008年09期

7 高艷東;論TRIPS視野下刑法保護知識產(chǎn)權的必要性與限度性[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學院學報;2003年05期

8 賀小勇;;論TRIPS協(xié)定第61條“商業(yè)規(guī)模”的解釋問題——評析中美知識產(chǎn)權貿易爭端[J];國際貿易;2008年07期

9 孫萬懷;侵犯知識產(chǎn)權犯罪刑事責任基礎構造比較[J];華東政法學院學報;1999年02期

10 胡志堅;論我國加入WTO后商標權刑法保護的完善[J];人民檢察;2002年11期

本文編號：1664787