本文選題：商標(biāo)共存 + 混淆理論　； 參考：《華中師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的迅速發(fā)展,商標(biāo)共存現(xiàn)象已屢見不鮮。所謂的“商標(biāo)共存”指的是,在同種或相似的商品或服務(wù)上使用相同或者類似商標(biāo)的現(xiàn)象。這種現(xiàn)象從表面上看來挑戰(zhàn)了傳統(tǒng)意義上的混淆理論和侵權(quán)理論,但實(shí)則,是對混淆理論與侵權(quán)理論的一種完善和補(bǔ)充。在國外,商標(biāo)共存理論的相關(guān)研究已較為祥具,大多數(shù)國家的立法體系與司法機(jī)制已對商標(biāo)共存的客觀法律事實(shí)進(jìn)行了認(rèn)證,反觀我國,由于法律體系不夠完善,相關(guān)制度不夠健全,商標(biāo)共存理論現(xiàn)階段還尚未正式納入法律體系與框架中。本研究認(rèn)為在不違背商標(biāo)法意旨下,我國在法律上認(rèn)可商標(biāo)共存,建立商標(biāo)共存機(jī)制,對維持商業(yè)的自由競爭與相關(guān)權(quán)益都有很大的幫助,同時(shí)也可增加現(xiàn)有的經(jīng)營者使用自有商標(biāo)時(shí)的底氣與自信,平衡商標(biāo)權(quán)人、商業(yè)競爭者與相關(guān)消費(fèi)者利益,更是對自由競爭市場秩序的保護(hù)。在同種或類似商品上使用相同或相似的商標(biāo)是商標(biāo)侵權(quán)和商標(biāo)合法共存界限中的模糊地帶,而我國在傳統(tǒng)理論上并沒有將商標(biāo)共存與侵權(quán)厘清開來。事實(shí)上,在同種或類似的商品上使用相同或者相似的商標(biāo)并不必然導(dǎo)致消費(fèi)者產(chǎn)生選擇混淆,這為商標(biāo)共存現(xiàn)象預(yù)留一定的法律空間。另一方面,從公平與效率原則的角度看,國內(nèi)外大量實(shí)踐證明,認(rèn)定商標(biāo)合法共存比判定商標(biāo)侵權(quán)更為公平,更加符合效率原則�；诖�,本研究首先通過商標(biāo)共存的理論與概念入手,以市場的經(jīng)濟(jì)效益與法律視角為出發(fā)點(diǎn),對商標(biāo)共存理論進(jìn)行了理性的分析與探討,同時(shí)對國外的商標(biāo)共存機(jī)制與案例進(jìn)行了分析與參考,進(jìn)而對如何完善我國的相關(guān)機(jī)制提出了具體的建議與可行性方法。本文共由五部分內(nèi)容構(gòu)成:第一章是對商標(biāo)共存理論的分析和探討,主要闡述了商標(biāo)共存現(xiàn)象的產(chǎn)生和制度是如何演進(jìn)的,以及對商標(biāo)共存的內(nèi)涵和類型進(jìn)行介紹;第二章是對商標(biāo)共存的認(rèn)證研究,對商標(biāo)的實(shí)際使用情況進(jìn)行了論述,以及分析了商標(biāo)共存協(xié)議,分別從是否構(gòu)成不正當(dāng)競爭或者壟斷、有無防止發(fā)生實(shí)質(zhì)混淆的措施、是否涉及公共利益三方面進(jìn)行了分析;第三章對商標(biāo)共存制度之理性進(jìn)行論證,從公平與正義的法律理性、市場效益的經(jīng)濟(jì)理性和商標(biāo)共存的域外立法和運(yùn)行模式的經(jīng)驗(yàn)理性三方面進(jìn)行了論證分析;第四部分從立法層面和司法層面對我國商標(biāo)共存機(jī)制現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行了評價(jià),總結(jié)我國法律和實(shí)踐當(dāng)中存在的問題;第五部分是全文研究的核心部分,基于前文分析在法律和實(shí)踐層面提出了六點(diǎn)完善建議。希望通過本部分的探討可以明晰商標(biāo)共存的脈絡(luò),發(fā)現(xiàn)實(shí)踐中的問題,以期對相關(guān)的工作和實(shí)務(wù)有所裨益。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of economy, trademark coexistence phenomenon has been common. "Trademark coexistence" refers to the use of the same or similar trademark in the same or similar goods or services. On the surface, this phenomenon challenges the traditional confusion theory and tort theory, but in fact, it is a kind of perfection and supplement to the confusion theory and tort theory. In foreign countries, the related research of trademark coexistence theory has been more auspicious. The legislative system and judicial mechanism of most countries have authenticated the objective legal facts of trademark coexistence. In contrast, the legal system is not perfect enough in our country. The related system is not perfect, the trademark coexistence theory has not yet been formally incorporated into the legal system and framework. This study holds that, without violating the intention of trademark law, the coexistence of trademark and the establishment of trademark coexistence mechanism in China are of great help to maintain the free competition and related rights and interests of commerce. At the same time, it can also increase the confidence and confidence of existing operators when using their own trademark, balance the interests of trademark owners, commercial competitors and related consumers, and protect the order of free competition market. The use of the same or similar trademark on the same or similar goods is a fuzzy zone in the boundary of trademark infringement and trademark legal coexistence, but the traditional theory of our country has not clarified the coexistence and infringement of trademark. In fact, the use of the same or similar trademarks on the same or similar goods does not necessarily lead to confusion of choice by consumers, which reserves a certain legal space for the coexistence of trademarks. On the other hand, from the point of view of the principle of fairness and efficiency, a large number of practices at home and abroad have proved that it is more fair and more consistent with the principle of efficiency to determine the legal coexistence of trademarks than to determine the infringement of trademarks. Based on this, this research firstly starts with the theory and concept of trademark coexistence, taking the market economic benefit and legal perspective as the starting point, carries on the rational analysis and the discussion to the trademark coexistence theory. At the same time, the author analyzes and consults the foreign trademark coexistence mechanism and cases, and then puts forward some concrete suggestions and feasible methods on how to perfect the related mechanism in China. This paper consists of five parts: the first chapter is the analysis and discussion of trademark coexistence theory, mainly expounds the emergence of trademark coexistence phenomenon and how the system evolves, and introduces the connotation and types of trademark coexistence; The second chapter is the certification of trademark coexistence, discusses the actual use of trademark, and analyzes the trademark coexistence agreement, from whether to constitute unfair competition or monopoly, whether there are measures to prevent the occurrence of substantial confusion. The third chapter demonstrates the rationality of trademark coexistence system from the perspective of fairness and justice. The economic rationality of market efficiency and the empirical rationality of extraterritorial legislation and operation mode of trademark coexistence are demonstrated and analyzed. The fourth part evaluates the present situation of trademark coexistence mechanism in China from the legislative and judicial levels. The fifth part is the core part of the full text research, based on the previous analysis, the author puts forward six suggestions on the legal and practical aspects. It is hoped that the discussion in this part can clarify the venation of trademark coexistence and find out the problems in practice so as to benefit the relevant work and practice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.43

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王娟;;近似商標(biāo)轉(zhuǎn)讓制度模式的選擇與重構(gòu)[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2017年02期

2 吳漢東;;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)領(lǐng)域的表達(dá)自由:保護(hù)與規(guī)制[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2016年03期

3 趙加兵;;論商標(biāo)共存協(xié)議在商標(biāo)注冊中的地位——以《商標(biāo)法》第30條為視角[J];鄭州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2016年01期

4 周栻川;;共存協(xié)議與商標(biāo)注冊[J];中國專利與商標(biāo);2014年01期

5 黃小洵;;從商標(biāo)使用意義論商標(biāo)共同注冊制度[J];理論月刊;2013年08期

6 黃保勇;;論商標(biāo)法對普通未注冊商標(biāo)的間接保護(hù)[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2013年02期

7 李玉香;劉曉媛;;構(gòu)建我國商標(biāo)共存制度的法律思考[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2012年11期

8 梁曉青;;商標(biāo)共存實(shí)現(xiàn)模式的境外實(shí)踐[J];中華商標(biāo);2012年11期

9 孔祥俊;;論我國商標(biāo)司法的八個(gè)關(guān)系——紀(jì)念《商標(biāo)法》頒布30周年[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2012年07期

10 李雨峰;倪朱亮;;尋求公平與秩序:商標(biāo)法上的共存制度研究[J];知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2012年06期

，

本文編號：2046711