【摘要】：國際社會圍繞關于地理標志的知識產(chǎn)權保護問題的爭論，已成為WTO多邊貿(mào)易談判中的焦點議題之一，也成為法學研究的一個重要課題。無論是從地理標志保護的歷史層面分析，還是對現(xiàn)今地理標志的國際立法考察，無論是僅從TRIPS視角出發(fā)，還是從一國或一個地區(qū)的視角出發(fā)，研究地理標志國際保護問題，既具有理論意義又具有現(xiàn)實意義。 在論文的框架結構與內(nèi)容上，本文分為五章。 本文的第一章，首先是探討了地理標志的基本理解，為全文的寫作奠定基礎。就內(nèi)容結構和邏輯線索而言，首先簡要分析了地理標志保護的緣起與演進，之后對地理標志的內(nèi)涵進行了界定，并分析了地理標志的權屬及保護要件。應該說，地理標志的相關問題，并不僅僅是一個法律問題，更是一個經(jīng)濟問題和文化問題。這部分對地理標志相關的概念：原產(chǎn)地標志、貨源標志、原產(chǎn)地名稱、地理標識等等做出了比較分析；并指出：地理標志是一種特殊類型的知識產(chǎn)權其法律屬性具體體現(xiàn)為以下三個層面：其一，地理標志具有私權屬性；其二，地理標志是一種新型的知識產(chǎn)權；其三，地理標志是一種具有集體性質的權利。地理標志的認定需考慮商品的特定質量、聲譽或其他特征和表示商品來源的地理來源，同時特定的質量、聲譽或其他特征與特定的地理區(qū)域有著來源的聯(lián)系。 本文的第二章，以標準分析為切入點，探討了地理標志國際的保護標準，在分析地理標志國際保護的現(xiàn)實需求的基礎上，論述了地理標志保護從國內(nèi)法、到雙邊條約，再到區(qū)域性協(xié)定和多邊條約的發(fā)展，論證了地理標志國際保護標準的初步形成，同時探討了地理標志國際保護標準的發(fā)展及動向。專門立法、反不正當競爭法、商標法的保護模式關注點各有所側重。無論是從一國視角，還是從國際貿(mào)易視角來說，除了完善和加強地理標志國內(nèi)立法外，與國際立法接軌并不斷地加強國際合作與談判是必然趨勢，這樣就可能突破一國國內(nèi)立法，這也是地理標志國際保護體系建立的必然性要求。從TRIPS談判到后TRIPS時代，地理標志的國際保護問題呈現(xiàn)出不同的表征。后TRIPS時代地理標志國際保護逐步發(fā)展，TPP協(xié)定對地理標志規(guī)定，在TRIPS協(xié)定的基礎上更進一步，保護的力度進一步加強，標準進一步提高，這充分體現(xiàn)了地理標志國際保護標準提高的發(fā)展趨勢。 本文的第三章，深入分析了地理標志國際保護范圍擴大的爭論。首先，對地理標志國際保護爭論的緣起與表現(xiàn)進行了概括，其次，深入探討了地理標志國際保護范圍爭論的經(jīng)濟、政治以及文化方面的原因，再次，重點論證了地理標志國際保護擴大化趨勢及紛爭，最后，對地理標志一般保護的充分性、擴大化保護的正當性和可行性進行了理性分析。TRIPS協(xié)定確立一個地理標志保護的最低標準，但是相對于一般保護，TRIPS協(xié)定所確立的額外保護能否擴大，各國一直有著不同的主張。爭論的雙方主要以發(fā)達世界的美國和歐盟為代表。從當前的國際社會看，在所有的爭論當中，以美國為代表的利益一方主體和以歐盟為代表的利益一方主體關于地理標志是否應得到延伸保護的爭論是焦點所在。 本文的第四章，，通過對地理標志國際保護最低標準問題、保護擴大化問題以及協(xié)調(diào)問題方面的考察，對地理標志國際保護標準進行思考。論述了地理標志國際保護標準的具體適用，并對地理標志國際保護標準進行了利益平衡分析，探討了地理標志保護的延伸，建議TRIPS第23條的保護應適用于所有產(chǎn)品地理標志，TRIPS第24條中的例外情形應作必要修改。各成員方在地理標志國際保護標準的具體適用上，首先要履行TRIPS協(xié)定所確定的義務，既然已經(jīng)加入?yún)f(xié)定，則根據(jù)條約必須信守原則需尊重業(yè)已確定的規(guī)則，而當履行出現(xiàn)障礙時要通過合法途徑積極尋求解決矛盾與糾紛問題的合理對策；在沒有達成一個新的地理標志保護規(guī)則之前，仍然需遵循原有的制度規(guī)則。要實現(xiàn)在各成員中在地理標志上的利益協(xié)調(diào)，必須考量各成員在地理標志國際貿(mào)易中的基本立場，基于不同的利益基點達成一致的協(xié)議從而形成基本上被各成員認可的保護標準。 本文的第五章，分析了我國地理標志保護的選擇。通過對我國關于地理標志保護的立法及執(zhí)法狀況考察，從而對我國地理標志保護的現(xiàn)狀與缺陷進行了闡述與反思，進而探討了我國地理標志保護與國際接軌的問題，最后從立法模式、保護標準定位等方面提出了我國地理標志保護的應對策略與完善建議。我國雖然地理標志資源豐富，但在保護上管理混亂，地理標志保護意識不足，法律層面的保護分散且水平不高，由此導致我國的地理標志保護無法滿足國際保護需要。在地理標志的制度構建與立法銜接，要堅持保護模式選擇與法律本土化相結合。我國地理標志保護標準在定位上需與我國的國情相符，同時考慮到國際保護標準。商標法與專門立法相結合的雙軌制立法保護模式，考慮得更為全面和細致，可以作為我國將來立法考慮的制度選擇。在執(zhí)法上要協(xié)調(diào)各行政部門，加強執(zhí)法力度，簡化執(zhí)法程序，注重實效。對于地理標志的談判，我們必須堅持主權原則，積極參與國際合作與談判。
[Abstract]:The international community's controversy over the protection of intellectual property rights over geographical indications has become one of the focuses of WTO multilateral trade negotiations and an important topic of legal research. Starting from the point of view of a country or a region, it has both theoretical and practical significance to study the international protection of geographical indications.
In the framework and content of the thesis, this paper is divided into five chapters.
In the first chapter, the author discusses the basic understanding of geographical indications and lays a foundation for the writing of the full text. As far as the content structure and logical clues are concerned, the origin and evolution of the protection of geographical indications are briefly analyzed, and then the connotation of geographical indications is defined, and the ownership and protection requirements of geographical indications are analyzed. This part makes a comparative analysis of the concepts related to geographical indications, such as the indication of origin, the indication of goods origin, the name of origin, the geographical indication and so on, and points out that geographical indication is a special type of intellectual property rights and its law. The attributes are embodied in the following three aspects: firstly, geographical indications have the property of private rights; secondly, geographical indications are a new type of intellectual property rights; thirdly, geographical indications are a kind of collective rights. At the same time, specific quality, reputation or other characteristics are related to specific geographical regions.
In the second chapter of this paper, taking standard analysis as the breakthrough point, the author discusses the international protection standards of geographical indications, discusses the development of the protection of geographical indications from domestic law, bilateral treaties, regional agreements and multilateral treaties, and demonstrates the beginning of the international protection standards of geographical indications. Special legislation, anti-unfair competition law and the protection mode of trademark law have their respective focuses. Whether from the perspective of a country or from the perspective of international trade, in addition to improving and strengthening domestic legislation on geographical indications, they are in line with international legislation and are constantly in line with international legislation. It is an inevitable trend to strengthen international cooperation and negotiation so as to break through a country's domestic legislation, which is also an inevitable requirement for the establishment of an international protection system for geographical indications. As for the provisions of geographical indications, on the basis of TRIPS agreement, the protection is further strengthened and the standards are further improved, which fully reflects the development trend of the international protection standards of geographical indications.
In the third chapter, the dissertation analyzes the debate on the expansion of the international protection scope of geographical indications. Firstly, the dissertation summarizes the causes and manifestations of the dispute on the international protection of geographical indications. Secondly, the dissertation discusses the economic, political and cultural reasons for the dispute on the international protection scope of geographical indications. Thirdly, the dissertation focuses on the international protection of geographical indications. Finally, the paper makes a rational analysis of the adequacy of the general protection of geographical indications, the legitimacy and feasibility of the extended protection. The TRIPS Agreement establishes a minimum standard for the protection of geographical indications. However, compared with the general protection, whether the additional protection established by the TRIPS Agreement can be extended or not has always been the subject of different countries. Zhang. The two sides of the debate are mainly represented by the United States and the European Union in the developed world.
In the fourth chapter of this paper, the author considers the international protection standards of geographical indications by investigating the minimum standards of international protection of geographical indications, the expansion of protection and the coordination of the issues. The author discusses the specific application of the international protection standards of geographical indications, and analyzes the interests balance of the international protection standards of geographical indications. It is suggested that the protection of Article 23 of TRIPS should be applied to all geographical indications of products and that the exceptions in Article 24 of TRIPS should be amended as necessary. To abide by the principle, we should respect the established rules, and actively seek reasonable countermeasures to solve contradictions and disputes through legal channels when obstacles arise in the implementation; we should still follow the original system rules before reaching a new protection rule for geographical indications. Coordination must take into account the basic position of each member in the international trade of geographical indications and reach an agreement on the basis of different interests so as to form a protection standard which is generally accepted by each member.
In the fifth chapter of this paper, the author analyzes the choice of the protection of geographical indications in our country. By investigating the legislation and law enforcement of the protection of geographical indications in our country, the author elaborates and reflects on the present situation and defects of the protection of geographical indications in our country, and then discusses the problems of the protection of geographical indications in our country in line with the international standards. The countermeasures and suggestions for the protection of geographical indications in China are put forward in terms of protection standards and positioning. Although there are abundant resources of geographical indications, the protection of geographical indications in China is confused, the protection consciousness of geographical indications is insufficient, the protection of geographical indications in law is scattered and the level is not high, which leads to the fact that the protection of geographical indications in China can not meet the needs of international protection. The protection standard of geographical indications in China should conform to China's national conditions and take into account international protection standards. The dual-track legislative protection model of trademark law and special legislation should be considered more comprehensively and carefully. In law enforcement, we should coordinate all administrative departments, strengthen law enforcement, simplify law enforcement procedures, and pay attention to actual results. In the negotiation of geographical indications, we must adhere to the principle of sovereignty and actively participate in international cooperation and negotiations.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D997.1

【引證文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 陳明惠;知識產(chǎn)權國際強保護趨勢探究[D];吉林大學;2014年

本文編號：2194179