發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-18 15:34

  本文選題：反向混淆 + 解決機(jī)制　； 參考：《首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著我國(guó)市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,商標(biāo)也在市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中發(fā)揮著越來(lái)越重要的作用,商標(biāo)侵權(quán)類型也呈現(xiàn)多樣化。反向混淆作為還不為人們所熟知的商標(biāo)侵權(quán)類型,如今在我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)的越來(lái)越多。在學(xué)術(shù)界,多數(shù)學(xué)者關(guān)注于反向混淆案件的危害、特點(diǎn)、構(gòu)成要件以及責(zé)任的承擔(dān),但對(duì)針對(duì)其獨(dú)特性和我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐特點(diǎn)提出的解決機(jī)制建議較少。本文試圖從反向混淆案件特點(diǎn)出發(fā),結(jié)合我國(guó)的司法實(shí)踐和國(guó)外經(jīng)驗(yàn),對(duì)我國(guó)反向混淆案件的解決機(jī)制提出建議。文章共分為五個(gè)部分:第一部分為商標(biāo)反向混淆的概念。在此部分主要介紹商標(biāo)反向混淆的概念及其主要特征。第二部分為商標(biāo)反向混淆問(wèn)題認(rèn)定的復(fù)雜性。一方面,商標(biāo)反向混具有社會(huì)危害性,應(yīng)該認(rèn)定侵權(quán)進(jìn)行處罰;但另一方面,認(rèn)定侵權(quán),禁止后使用者使用涉案商標(biāo),可能在有些情況下不滿足侵權(quán)構(gòu)成、造成對(duì)大企業(yè)善意投入的不合理對(duì)待以及市場(chǎng)資源的浪費(fèi)。因而商標(biāo)反向混淆問(wèn)題的認(rèn)定具有復(fù)雜性,在適用相關(guān)理論時(shí)應(yīng)該兼顧公平與效率。第三部分討論當(dāng)前我國(guó)解決機(jī)制存在的問(wèn)題。在我國(guó)立法文件中,商標(biāo)反向混淆案件處理模式只有認(rèn)定侵權(quán)的規(guī)定,過(guò)于僵化單一;而在司法實(shí)踐中,當(dāng)事人的需求多樣化又造成了司法裁判的隨意性。因而探索有效的商標(biāo)反向混淆案件的處理機(jī)制成為當(dāng)前急切需求。第四部分為構(gòu)建商標(biāo)反向混淆問(wèn)題解決機(jī)制的建議。在此部分,本文建議應(yīng)該把個(gè)案原則、利益平衡原則和調(diào)解優(yōu)先原則作為商標(biāo)反向混淆案件的處理原則,同時(shí)引入消費(fèi)者調(diào)查制度、強(qiáng)制許可使用制度和懲罰性賠償制度。最后根據(jù)個(gè)案的情況,提出了裁判建議。第五部分是結(jié)論。商標(biāo)反向混淆問(wèn)題雖屬混淆,但其具有復(fù)雜性,當(dāng)前我國(guó)解決機(jī)制過(guò)于單一,無(wú)法較好進(jìn)行糾紛解決。因而應(yīng)引進(jìn)多重制度解決機(jī)制,滿足多樣化的需求。
[Abstract]:With the development of market economy in China, trademark also plays a more and more important role in market competition. As a kind of trademark infringement, reverse confusion appears more and more in our country's judicial practice. In academic circles, most scholars pay attention to the harm, characteristics, constitutive elements and responsibility of reverse confusion cases, but few suggestions are put forward to solve the problems in the light of its uniqueness and the characteristics of judicial practice in our country. Based on the characteristics of reverse confusion cases and the judicial practice of our country and foreign experience, this paper tries to put forward some suggestions on how to solve the reverse confusion cases in our country. The article is divided into five parts: the first part is the concept of trademark reverse confusion. This part mainly introduces the concept of trademark reverse confusion and its main characteristics. The second part is the complexity of trademark reverse confusion. On the one hand, the reverse mixing of trademarks is harmful to society and should be recognized as a punishment for infringement; on the other hand, if the trademark is found to be infringed and the user is prohibited from using the trademark, it may not satisfy the infringement constitution in some cases. This will result in unreasonable treatment and waste of market resources. Therefore, the identification of trademark reverse confusion is complicated, and fairness and efficiency should be taken into account in the application of relevant theories. The third part discusses the problems existing in the current solution mechanism of our country. In the legislative documents of our country, the only way to deal with trademark reverse confusion cases is to recognize the infringement, which is too rigid and single. In judicial practice, the diversification of the needs of the parties has resulted in the arbitrariness of the judicial decision. Therefore, it is urgent to explore the effective handling mechanism of trademark reverse confusion cases. The fourth part is to construct the trademark reverse confusion solution mechanism. In this part, the author suggests that the principle of case, the principle of balance of interests and the principle of priority of mediation should be taken as the principle of dealing with cases of trademark reverse confusion, and at the same time, the system of consumer investigation, the system of compulsory licensing and the system of punitive damages should be introduced. Finally, according to the case of the case, put forward the recommendations of the referee. The fifth part is the conclusion. Although the problem of trademark reverse confusion belongs to confusion, it is complicated, and the current solution mechanism of our country is too single to solve disputes well. Therefore, we should introduce multi-system solution mechanism to meet the diversified needs.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.43

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條

1 張愛(ài)國(guó);;商標(biāo)“反向混淆”理論初探——以案例為視角[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年08期

2 楊靜;;“半u]W”與“半畝田”商標(biāo)侵權(quán)案評(píng)析——兼議商標(biāo)注冊(cè)制度及侵權(quán)構(gòu)成[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2009年10期

3 夏朝羨;;美國(guó)商標(biāo)反向混淆理論與實(shí)踐及對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒[J];中華商標(biāo);2011年01期

4 張小琳;姚新超;;美國(guó)商標(biāo)“反向混淆誤認(rèn)”的判定及其對(duì)中國(guó)的啟示[J];國(guó)際貿(mào)易;2013年05期

5 徐聰穎;;商標(biāo)與商譽(yù)關(guān)系的再思考——由 “王老吉”商標(biāo)的法律紛爭(zhēng)說(shuō)起[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2012年09期

，

本文編號(hào)：1906403