注冊商標不使用撤銷制度的研究
[Abstract]:In the first chapter of the Trademark Law of our country, the legislative purpose of this Law is to strengthen the administration of trademark, protect the exclusive right of trademark, promote the production, guarantee the quality of goods and services, safeguard the reputation of trademark and other purposes. The principle of registration is adopted in the acquisition of trademark exclusive right in our country. As long as the acquisition of trademark conforms to the relevant provisions of our trademark law, the trademark exclusive right will be obtained after being approved and registered by the trademark authority in our country. Because the way of obtaining trademark in our country is convenient and not jumbled, in our social practice, there are many domestic market main bodies to rush the trademark and so on to obtain the tort compensation through the trademark user infringement. Some market subjects register a large number of trademarks in order to obtain high transfer fees through transfer in later social activities, while others only register but do not use. This kind of behavior is not conducive to market competition, resulting in the waste of social resources and violating the principle of good faith. The Trademark Law of our country has set up the system of not using the registered trademark for three consecutive years. Any unit or individual may apply for revocation of the trademark if the registered trademark is not used for three consecutive years and without proper reasons. This system is of great significance to solve the malpractice brought by trademark registration principle. However, the regulation of this system in our country is not detailed, the theoretical research in the system is not very thorough. The most basic function of trademark is the recognition function. The recognition function of trademark is embodied in the process of trademark use, and the value of trademark is accumulated in the process of trademark use. The use of trademarks is of great significance to registered trademarks. This paper makes a deep study on the system of non-use and revocation of registered trademark by means of comparative study. It is clear that the use of trademark must be based on the real intention of use rather than symbolic use, which should be judicially interpreted or legislated to perfect. The law of our country explicitly stipulates that if there is a legitimate reason, it can be opposed to this system. In response to this, it is necessary to further refine the justification. At the same time, on the basis of legislative practice, when the application does not use revocation, In the process of explaining the legitimate reasons, the registered trademark owner should also prove that the application for the withdrawal of three starting and ending time extrapolates the use of the trademark for two years. Improve the principle of trademark registration, effectively use the relevant provisions of the trademark law of the United States, in the process of applying for trademark registration, the applicant is required to prove the intention to use. In the stage of trademark renewal, the obligee shall submit the specific situation of trademark use, according to the legislative practice, the application for renewal can be made within two years before the date of application for renewal. In addition, the competent trademark authority of our country may set up a special department to examine the use of trademark. For the registered trademark that belongs to the situation of revocation stipulated by law, the registered trademark should be revoked not only in time, but also in time to update the trademark name alternative library. At present, the utilization rate of the system in our country is still very low, we should publicize the system timely. The study of this system is not only of great significance to the legislative practice of our country, but also to the fair competition of the market economy order. Here, the author hopes to have certain reference significance to our country later legislation, the judicial practice.
【學位授予單位】:山西財經(jīng)大學
【學位級別】:碩士
【學位授予年份】:2017
【分類號】:D923.43
【相似文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 成國俊;“蘇三零”商標搶注風波[J];中華商標;2000年06期
2 ;企業(yè)如何避免商標搶注[J];管理科學文摘;2000年10期
3 于麗華 ,趙書斌;商標未在國外注冊痛失韓國市場[J];光彩;2001年05期
4 劉超;商標搶注案背后[J];世界知識;2005年07期
5 ;商標搶注=風險投資?[J];法人雜志;2006年01期
6 ;嚴防商標搶注事件[J];職業(yè)圈.好財路;2006年11期
7 李郁莎;;經(jīng)濟時評:遏住商標搶注之風蔓延[J];寧波通訊;2007年08期
8 陳曉華;;商標的力量——紀念《商標法》頒布30周年電視紀錄片創(chuàng)作手記[J];中華商標;2012年09期
9 ;企業(yè)何時走出商標誤區(qū)?[J];廣告大觀;1996年10期
10 小溪;;誰先爬上我替誰先裝 法律該對商標搶注亮紅燈[J];楚天主人;1996年10期
相關會議論文 前1條
1 王斐;;著作權在商標異議復審案和訴訟案件中的主張 以及訴訟中新證據(jù)的采信問題[A];2014年中華全國專利代理人協(xié)會年會第五屆知識產(chǎn)權論壇論文(第二部分)[C];2014年
相關重要報紙文章 前10條
1 鐘商 趙靖;商標拍賣的“冰火兩重天”[N];中國工商報;2007年
2 本報記者 陳昌成;“惡意惡化”風暴席卷商標搶注[N];中國企業(yè)報;2006年
3 本報記者 喻寧;商標搶注熱潮趨向惡化 專家呼吁各方冷靜應對[N];經(jīng)理日報;2006年
4 劉云錄;商標搶注 喜乎憂乎?[N];中國消費者報;2006年
5 池墨;給商標搶注熱潑盆“冷水”[N];中國消費者報;2003年
6 江蘇新黃埔農(nóng)業(yè)科技有限公司總經(jīng)理 楊國英;“商標捷徑”思維模式是把雙刃劍[N];消費日報;2012年
7 蔡清清 蔡瓊華 翁斌星;18家莆田企業(yè)抱團阻擊商標搶注[N];中國工商報;2013年
8 仇曉東 段任飛;知產(chǎn)保護再擴容 聲音可成為商標[N];中國商報;2013年
9 北京商報記者 崇曉萌 盧亦杉;“雙十一”誰的商標誰的節(jié)[N];北京商報;2014年
10 文學;惡意商標異議行為及其對策[N];中國工商報;2000年
相關碩士學位論文 前10條
1 朱炳宇;由王老吉商標案論我國商標增值歸屬法律的完善[D];甘肅政法學院;2013年
2 薛剛;商標搶注行為認定之研究[D];華東政法大學;2016年
3 鄭佳;商標搶注行為的認定及法律規(guī)制研究[D];清華大學;2015年
4 李娟;姓名商標法律問題研究[D];南昌大學;2016年
5 武靚波;注冊商標不使用撤銷制度的研究[D];山西財經(jīng)大學;2017年
6 肖競;商標搶注法律規(guī)制研究[D];貴州大學;2009年
7 鄭寧;中日防止商標搶注法律制度的比較研究[D];中國政法大學;2011年
8 易俊雄;商標共存法律問題研究[D];湘潭大學;2012年
9 楊分成;論我國商標搶注的法律規(guī)制[D];寧波大學;2014年
10 袁謙;商標搶注行為法律規(guī)制探究[D];南京大學;2013年
,本文編號:2327658
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/minfalunwen/2327658.html