商標(biāo)善意共存研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-19 16:32
【摘要】：本文所研究的商標(biāo)善意共存是指不同市場(chǎng)主體在相同或類似的商品或服務(wù)上使用相同或相近似的商標(biāo)合法行為。商標(biāo)善意共存在世界上大多數(shù)國(guó)家中得到普遍認(rèn)可,我國(guó)的商標(biāo)善意共存制度規(guī)制較晚,傳統(tǒng)商標(biāo)法考慮較多是商標(biāo)因素和商品因素,“近似即侵權(quán)”成為商標(biāo)侵權(quán)的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn),隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展,司法實(shí)踐的新問題不斷涌現(xiàn),這種傳統(tǒng)的侵權(quán)判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)已經(jīng)不能適合實(shí)際需要,近似不一定侵權(quán)的觀點(diǎn)得到廣泛的認(rèn)可,立法和司法實(shí)踐中逐步承認(rèn)商標(biāo)善意共存現(xiàn)象。本文第一部分,商標(biāo)善意的一般性分析,包括商標(biāo)善意共存的概念,構(gòu)成要件,類型與商標(biāo)善意共存的利益平衡理論分析。商標(biāo)善意共存構(gòu)成要件概括為：商標(biāo)相同或近似；使用在相同或近似的商品或服務(wù)上；主觀上是善意的;具有合法性。商標(biāo)善意共存的合法性原因概括來說包括：不具有混淆可能性；協(xié)議共存；享有先用權(quán)；注冊(cè)商標(biāo)經(jīng)過無效宣告期,這些合法性原因?qū)е铝松虡?biāo)善意共存。本文的第二部分,主要研究國(guó)外的立法和司法實(shí)踐,美國(guó)和英國(guó)直接立法規(guī)定商標(biāo)并行注冊(cè)制度,近似商標(biāo)滿足一定的條件也可以同時(shí)被注冊(cè)。不同于美國(guó)和英國(guó),德國(guó)和日本商標(biāo)法間接規(guī)定了商標(biāo)善意共存制度。各國(guó)立法有所不同,但是商標(biāo)善意共存在世界大多數(shù)國(guó)家已經(jīng)被認(rèn)可。本文的第三部分,對(duì)我國(guó)商標(biāo)善意共存的立法與司法實(shí)踐研究,我國(guó)商標(biāo)法中并沒有商標(biāo)善意共存的明確表述,司法實(shí)踐中,一律按照“近似即侵權(quán)”的做法很難做出公平正義的判決,我國(guó)法律在逐漸地承認(rèn)商標(biāo)善意共存。2002年司法解釋和2014年新《商標(biāo)法》為商標(biāo)善意共存提供了法律基礎(chǔ)。2002年,《最高人民法院關(guān)于審理商標(biāo)民事糾紛案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》對(duì)相關(guān)公眾,商標(biāo)相同,商標(biāo)近似,類似商品,類似服務(wù),商品與服務(wù)類似等法律概念分別進(jìn)行解釋,同時(shí)確定了商標(biāo)近似的認(rèn)定原則。商標(biāo)近似,商品類似均指混淆性近似,商標(biāo)近似不會(huì)構(gòu)成消費(fèi)者誤認(rèn)的,則具有共存的可能性,從而指導(dǎo)對(duì)法院對(duì)相同或近似商標(biāo)侵權(quán)糾紛案件的判決。2014年實(shí)施的新《商標(biāo)法》中,在相同商品上使用相同商標(biāo)的情況被推定為構(gòu)成混淆可能性,直接認(rèn)定為商標(biāo)侵權(quán)。在類似商品上使用相同或近似商標(biāo)或者在相同商品上使用近似商標(biāo)的情況,必須在容易導(dǎo)致消費(fèi)者混淆的情況下,才能認(rèn)定為侵權(quán),混淆可能性作為商標(biāo)侵權(quán)的判斷標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。同時(shí)也明確規(guī)定了商標(biāo)先用權(quán)是相同或近似商標(biāo)侵權(quán)的正當(dāng)抗辯理由。司法實(shí)踐中,存在大量的商標(biāo)共存案例,同時(shí)也存在著前后兩種截然不同的判決,在具體個(gè)案中,法院應(yīng)該嚴(yán)格依據(jù)法律,理解立法的目的和法律條文的真正含義,立足于案件事實(shí),才能做出公平合理的判決。本文的第四部分,筆者希望提出一些完善商標(biāo)善意共存制度建議,主要從完善商標(biāo)先用權(quán)制度,完善商標(biāo)共存協(xié)議立法和添加區(qū)別標(biāo)識(shí)這三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行努力。我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律中商標(biāo)先用權(quán)制度立法模糊,對(duì)于未注冊(cè)商標(biāo)立法中應(yīng)該從先用商標(biāo)實(shí)際使用要求,在先使用的商標(biāo)具有一定的影響力,商標(biāo)在先使用權(quán)人的主觀善意,在先使用的商標(biāo)的原有范圍進(jìn)行規(guī)定。在司法實(shí)踐中,只有不損害消費(fèi)者利益的商標(biāo)協(xié)議才能認(rèn)定為合法有效的,商標(biāo)共存協(xié)議中必須包括防止市場(chǎng)混淆性的措施。同時(shí)應(yīng)該建立起商標(biāo)共存協(xié)議的備案制度,規(guī)范管理。就添加區(qū)別標(biāo)識(shí)而言,其作用是防止市場(chǎng)混淆,穩(wěn)固商標(biāo)善意共存,在商標(biāo)善意共存制度可以被廣泛地運(yùn)用。
[Abstract]:The goodwill coexistence of trademarks studied in this paper refers to the same or similar trademark legal acts used by different market subjects in the same or similar goods or services. With the development of economy and the emergence of new problems in judicial practice, the traditional judgment standard of infringement can no longer meet the actual needs, and the viewpoint of approximate infringement is widely accepted. In legislation and judicial practice, trademark bona fide co-existence is gradually recognized. The first part of this paper, the general analysis of trademark goodwill, including the concept of trademark goodwill coexistence, constitutive requirements, types and trademark goodwill coexistence benefit balance theory analysis. The legitimacy of trademark bona fide coexistence includes: there is no possibility of confusion; agreement coexistence; enjoyment of the right of first use; registered trademark after invalidation period, these legitimacy reasons lead to the coexistence of trademark bona fide. The second part of this paper mainly studies foreign legislation and judicial practice, the United States and the United Kingdom straight. Unlike the United States and Britain, Germany and Japan, trademark laws indirectly stipulate the system of trademark bona fide coexistence. On the legislation and judicial practice of trademark bona fide coexistence in our country, there is no explicit expression of trademark bona fide coexistence in our country's trademark law. In judicial practice, it is difficult to make a fair and just judgment according to the "approximate infringement" approach. Our country's law is gradually recognizing trademark bona fide coexistence. Law > provides a legal basis for the coexistence of trademarks in good faith. In 2002, the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation of Several Questions Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Trademark Civil Disputes explained the legal concepts of the relevant public, such as the same trademark, similar trademark, similar commodity, similar service, similar commodity and service, and determined the similarity of trademarks. Principle of determination. Trademark approximation and commodity approximation refer to confusion approximation. If trademark approximation does not constitute mistaken recognition by consumers, it has the possibility of coexistence, thus guiding the court's judgment in cases of similar or similar trademark infringement disputes. In the new Trademark Law implemented in 2014, the use of the same trademark in the same commodity is presumed to be constructed. In the case of similar goods using the same or similar trademark or using similar trademark in the same goods, it must be easily confused by consumers before it can be identified as infringement. The possibility of confusion is the criterion for judging trademark infringement. In judicial practice, there are a large number of trademark coexistence cases, but there are also two distinct judgments. In specific cases, the court should strictly follow the law, understand the purpose of legislation and the true meaning of legal provisions, based on the facts of the case, to make public. In the fourth part of this paper, the author hopes to put forward some suggestions to improve the system of trademark bona fide coexistence, mainly from the perfection of the system of trademark preemption, the perfection of the legislation of trademark coexistence agreement and the addition of distinctive marks. The law should stipulate the original scope of the pre-used trademark according to the actual use requirements of the pre-used trademark, the pre-used trademark has certain influence, and the subjective goodwill of the pre-user, and the pre-used trademark. It is necessary to include measures to prevent confusion in the market and to establish a record system for trademark coexistence agreements and standardize management.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D923.43
本文編號(hào)：2192211
[Abstract]:The goodwill coexistence of trademarks studied in this paper refers to the same or similar trademark legal acts used by different market subjects in the same or similar goods or services. With the development of economy and the emergence of new problems in judicial practice, the traditional judgment standard of infringement can no longer meet the actual needs, and the viewpoint of approximate infringement is widely accepted. In legislation and judicial practice, trademark bona fide co-existence is gradually recognized. The first part of this paper, the general analysis of trademark goodwill, including the concept of trademark goodwill coexistence, constitutive requirements, types and trademark goodwill coexistence benefit balance theory analysis. The legitimacy of trademark bona fide coexistence includes: there is no possibility of confusion; agreement coexistence; enjoyment of the right of first use; registered trademark after invalidation period, these legitimacy reasons lead to the coexistence of trademark bona fide. The second part of this paper mainly studies foreign legislation and judicial practice, the United States and the United Kingdom straight. Unlike the United States and Britain, Germany and Japan, trademark laws indirectly stipulate the system of trademark bona fide coexistence. On the legislation and judicial practice of trademark bona fide coexistence in our country, there is no explicit expression of trademark bona fide coexistence in our country's trademark law. In judicial practice, it is difficult to make a fair and just judgment according to the "approximate infringement" approach. Our country's law is gradually recognizing trademark bona fide coexistence. Law > provides a legal basis for the coexistence of trademarks in good faith. In 2002, the Supreme People's Court's Interpretation of Several Questions Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Trademark Civil Disputes explained the legal concepts of the relevant public, such as the same trademark, similar trademark, similar commodity, similar service, similar commodity and service, and determined the similarity of trademarks. Principle of determination. Trademark approximation and commodity approximation refer to confusion approximation. If trademark approximation does not constitute mistaken recognition by consumers, it has the possibility of coexistence, thus guiding the court's judgment in cases of similar or similar trademark infringement disputes. In the new Trademark Law implemented in 2014, the use of the same trademark in the same commodity is presumed to be constructed. In the case of similar goods using the same or similar trademark or using similar trademark in the same goods, it must be easily confused by consumers before it can be identified as infringement. The possibility of confusion is the criterion for judging trademark infringement. In judicial practice, there are a large number of trademark coexistence cases, but there are also two distinct judgments. In specific cases, the court should strictly follow the law, understand the purpose of legislation and the true meaning of legal provisions, based on the facts of the case, to make public. In the fourth part of this paper, the author hopes to put forward some suggestions to improve the system of trademark bona fide coexistence, mainly from the perfection of the system of trademark preemption, the perfection of the legislation of trademark coexistence agreement and the addition of distinctive marks. The law should stipulate the original scope of the pre-used trademark according to the actual use requirements of the pre-used trademark, the pre-used trademark has certain influence, and the subjective goodwill of the pre-user, and the pre-used trademark. It is necessary to include measures to prevent confusion in the market and to establish a record system for trademark coexistence agreements and standardize management.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(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3條
1 黃淳;李震;;商標(biāo)共存的合目的性——從“鱷魚”商標(biāo)案談起[J];中國(guó)發(fā)展觀察;2012年06期
2 陳武;;論近似商標(biāo)共存制度[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2008年03期
3 劉維;;論商標(biāo)善意共存原則——以鱷魚商標(biāo)案與百威商標(biāo)案為線索[J];政治與法律;2012年10期
，本文編號(hào)：2192211
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/minfalunwen/2192211.html
最近更新
教材專著
