論TRIPS協(xié)議下地理標志的保護
發(fā)布時間：2018-08-20 09:18
【摘要】：與貿易有關的知識產權協(xié)議(以下簡稱TRIPS協(xié)議)對地理標志(以下簡稱GIs)的定義是指識別貨物原產自一成員方境內或其境內的一個地區(qū)或地方的標志,貨物的特定質量、聲譽或其他特性實質性地取決于其地理原產地。與商標、集體商標和證明商標不同,地理標志具有與地理因素緊密聯(lián)系、與農業(yè)特殊聯(lián)系、所有權人特殊、權利永續(xù)、本土化與國際化共存等特征,這使得地理標志權不同于一般的知識產權。正是因為地理標志具有這些與眾不同的特征,使其具有指示功能、保證功能和升值功能,越來越受到各國的關注,在國際市場上也的價值也越來越高。 縱觀地理標志保護的歷史,從《巴黎公約》到《馬德里協(xié)定》、《里斯本協(xié)定》,再到TRIPS協(xié)議,國際社會對地理標志的保護越來越重視,盡管各個協(xié)定、條約對地理標志的保護都或多或少的存在不完善的地方,但是我們卻欣喜的看到關于地理標志概念、保護條款的磋商和談判越來越多,各國都開始重視起地理標志的重要價值,對地理標志的保護已經沖破發(fā)達國家的范圍,更多的發(fā)展中國家參與進來,在地理標志國際市場上爭得一席之地。在眾多條約、協(xié)定當中,TRIPS協(xié)定對地理標志的保護是具有里程碑意義的,TRIPS協(xié)議中保護地理標志的條款有很多,其中包括綜合性保護條款、概念性保護條款、基礎性保護條款以及例外條款,其中基礎性保護條款又包括了一般保護條款、特別保護條款。這些條款從多方面、多角度對地理標志進行了保護,使得TRIPS協(xié)議成為目前保護地理標志的最有效工具。但是,由于文化傳統(tǒng)、殖民歷史、法律制度等原因,使得各國對地理標志的保護問題產生分歧,其中以法國和美國為代表國家。爭議的主要問題包括是否應該擴大對地理標志的一般保護的問題、建立地理標志通告和注冊制度的嚴格程度問題以及是否需要對地理標志淡化和通用化的問題進行嚴格限制的問題。 雖然存在著諸多問題,但是隨著全球化時代的到來,TRIPS協(xié)議各成員國必將本著互利共贏的原則,在今后的談判中進行進一步的磋商,力求達到利益的平衡。而面對經濟全球化的趨勢,我國作為地理標志的大國,也需要不斷完善現(xiàn)有法律中對于地理標志保護的不當之處,力求適應TRIPS協(xié)議的要求,并且對地理標志的保護立法進行深入的研究,以期我國的地理標志能在國際貿易中煥發(fā)出更加奪目的光彩。
[Abstract]:The Agreement on Trade-Related aspects of intellectual property Rights (hereinafter referred to as the TRIPS Agreement) defines geographical indications (hereinafter referred to as GIs) as the identification of the origin of goods from the territory of a member Party or a region or place within its territory, and the specific quality of the goods, Reputation or other characteristics depend materially on their geographical origin. Unlike trademarks, collective trademarks and certification trademarks, geographical indications are closely related to geographical factors, special to agriculture, special to owners, permanent in rights, localization and internationalization, and so on. This makes the right of geographical indication different from the general intellectual property rights. It is precisely because geographical indications have these distinctive features that they have the functions of indication, assurance and appreciation, which have attracted more and more attention from all countries and become more and more valuable in the international market. Throughout the history of the protection of geographical indications, from the Paris Convention to the Madrid Agreement, the Lisbon Agreement, and to the TRIPS Agreement, the international community has paid more and more attention to the protection of geographical indications, despite the various agreements, The protection of geographical indications by the treaty is more or less imperfect, but we are glad to see that there are more and more consultations and negotiations on the concept of geographical indications, protection clauses, and countries are beginning to attach importance to the important value of geographical indications. The protection of geographical indications has broken beyond the scope of developed countries, more developing countries to participate in the geographical indications in the international market for a place. Among many treaties, the trips Agreement's protection of geographical indications is a landmark. There are many provisions for the protection of geographical indications in the trips Agreement, including comprehensive protection clauses and conceptual protection clauses. The basic protection clause and the exception clause include the general protection clause and the special protection clause. These clauses protect geographical indications from many aspects and angles, which makes TRIPS protocol become the most effective tool to protect geographical indications. However, due to cultural tradition, colonial history, legal system and other reasons, countries have different views on the protection of geographical indications, in which France and the United States are the representatives of the country. The main issues in the dispute include whether the general protection of geographical indications should be extended, The strict degree of establishing a geographical indication notification and registration system and the question of whether it is necessary to restrict the dilution and generalization of geographical indications or not. Although there are many problems, with the arrival of the era of globalization, the members of trips Agreement will, on the basis of the principle of mutual benefit and win-win situation, conduct further negotiations in future negotiations in order to achieve a balance of interests. In the face of the trend of economic globalization, China, as a large country with geographical indications, also needs to constantly improve the improper protection of geographical indications in existing laws in order to meet the requirements of the TRIPS Agreement. And the protection legislation of geographical indication is studied deeply, in the hope that the geographical indication of our country can shine more brilliantly in the international trade.
【學位授予單位】：重慶大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D997.1
本文編號：2193126
[Abstract]:The Agreement on Trade-Related aspects of intellectual property Rights (hereinafter referred to as the TRIPS Agreement) defines geographical indications (hereinafter referred to as GIs) as the identification of the origin of goods from the territory of a member Party or a region or place within its territory, and the specific quality of the goods, Reputation or other characteristics depend materially on their geographical origin. Unlike trademarks, collective trademarks and certification trademarks, geographical indications are closely related to geographical factors, special to agriculture, special to owners, permanent in rights, localization and internationalization, and so on. This makes the right of geographical indication different from the general intellectual property rights. It is precisely because geographical indications have these distinctive features that they have the functions of indication, assurance and appreciation, which have attracted more and more attention from all countries and become more and more valuable in the international market. Throughout the history of the protection of geographical indications, from the Paris Convention to the Madrid Agreement, the Lisbon Agreement, and to the TRIPS Agreement, the international community has paid more and more attention to the protection of geographical indications, despite the various agreements, The protection of geographical indications by the treaty is more or less imperfect, but we are glad to see that there are more and more consultations and negotiations on the concept of geographical indications, protection clauses, and countries are beginning to attach importance to the important value of geographical indications. The protection of geographical indications has broken beyond the scope of developed countries, more developing countries to participate in the geographical indications in the international market for a place. Among many treaties, the trips Agreement's protection of geographical indications is a landmark. There are many provisions for the protection of geographical indications in the trips Agreement, including comprehensive protection clauses and conceptual protection clauses. The basic protection clause and the exception clause include the general protection clause and the special protection clause. These clauses protect geographical indications from many aspects and angles, which makes TRIPS protocol become the most effective tool to protect geographical indications. However, due to cultural tradition, colonial history, legal system and other reasons, countries have different views on the protection of geographical indications, in which France and the United States are the representatives of the country. The main issues in the dispute include whether the general protection of geographical indications should be extended, The strict degree of establishing a geographical indication notification and registration system and the question of whether it is necessary to restrict the dilution and generalization of geographical indications or not. Although there are many problems, with the arrival of the era of globalization, the members of trips Agreement will, on the basis of the principle of mutual benefit and win-win situation, conduct further negotiations in future negotiations in order to achieve a balance of interests. In the face of the trend of economic globalization, China, as a large country with geographical indications, also needs to constantly improve the improper protection of geographical indications in existing laws in order to meet the requirements of the TRIPS Agreement. And the protection legislation of geographical indication is studied deeply, in the hope that the geographical indication of our country can shine more brilliantly in the international trade.
【學位授予單位】：重慶大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D997.1
【參考文獻】
相關期刊論文 前6條
1 克拉克·W·萊克特,白鷹;地理標記與原產地名稱[J];中華商標;1999年05期
2 王笑冰;;法國對地理標志的法律保護[J];電子知識產權;2006年04期
3 曾令良;區(qū)域貿易協(xié)定的最新趨勢及其對多哈發(fā)展議程的負面影響[J];法學研究;2004年05期
4 吳春岐;地理標志及原產地名稱等相關概念的探究[J];山東大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2003年04期
5 李華;王照科;;地理標志與商標的本質區(qū)別[J];世界農業(yè);2006年01期
6 萬怡挺;;解讀TRIPS協(xié)定中地理標志條款[J];WTO經濟導刊;2006年07期
相關重要報紙文章 前1條
1 張今 東方;[N];中國知識產權報;2002年
，本文編號：2193126
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/guojifa/2193126.html
