本文關(guān)鍵詞： 注冊(cè)商標(biāo) 識(shí)別功能 商標(biāo)使用 商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：我國(guó)注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度尚未健全，《商標(biāo)法》第44條、45條及《商標(biāo)法實(shí)施條例》的相關(guān)規(guī)定只構(gòu)建了該制度的雛形。2012年12月28日全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)通過(guò)了《商標(biāo)法修正案（草案）》，草案對(duì)該制度的撤銷(xiāo)事由進(jìn)行修改與完善，然而現(xiàn)行商標(biāo)立法中仍存在“撤銷(xiāo)”一詞含義不明、撤銷(xiāo)事由不準(zhǔn)確不全面等問(wèn)題，這些問(wèn)題的存在影響了法律的正確適用，不利于對(duì)商標(biāo)權(quán)人、消費(fèi)者及公共利益的保護(hù)。 本文在梳理我國(guó)現(xiàn)行注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度存在問(wèn)題的基礎(chǔ)上，結(jié)合對(duì)我國(guó)現(xiàn)行立法和相關(guān)司法判例的分析，同時(shí)借鑒國(guó)際立法規(guī)定和相關(guān)判例，對(duì)注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度進(jìn)行了全面系統(tǒng)的梳理和分析，并將商標(biāo)識(shí)別功能確認(rèn)為構(gòu)建注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度的基礎(chǔ)，將是否能夠發(fā)揮商標(biāo)識(shí)別功能或是否妨礙識(shí)別功能發(fā)揮作為注冊(cè)商標(biāo)是否應(yīng)當(dāng)被撤銷(xiāo)的根本判斷依據(jù)。本文分為五個(gè)部分： 第一部分，對(duì)我國(guó)注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度存在的問(wèn)題進(jìn)行梳理。根據(jù)我國(guó)現(xiàn)行立法和相關(guān)司法判決，梳理出我國(guó)撤銷(xiāo)制度存在制度外延界定不明、未以商標(biāo)識(shí)別功能為基礎(chǔ)、未明晰商標(biāo)使用、撤銷(xiāo)事由不準(zhǔn)確不全面、正當(dāng)理由條款缺位及撤銷(xiāo)程序?qū)徖碇芷谶^(guò)長(zhǎng)等問(wèn)題。 第二部分，對(duì)注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度中的商標(biāo)使用問(wèn)題進(jìn)行分析。界定商標(biāo)維持使用的外延，認(rèn)定商標(biāo)權(quán)人應(yīng)當(dāng)在商業(yè)活動(dòng)中真實(shí)、合法、公開(kāi)使用其注冊(cè)商標(biāo)并且明確撤銷(xiāo)制度中合格的商標(biāo)使用主體。 第三部分，對(duì)注冊(cè)商標(biāo)的撤銷(xiāo)事由進(jìn)行分析。將撤銷(xiāo)事由分類(lèi)，包括商標(biāo)不使用的撤銷(xiāo)、不規(guī)范使用的撤銷(xiāo)、涉及商標(biāo)品質(zhì)保證功能的撤銷(xiāo)及其他的撤銷(xiāo)事由四類(lèi)。針對(duì)不同類(lèi)型的撤銷(xiāo)事由進(jìn)行具體分析，進(jìn)而明確注冊(cè)商標(biāo)的撤銷(xiāo)事由及相關(guān)規(guī)定。 第四部分，對(duì)注冊(cè)商標(biāo)的撤銷(xiāo)程序問(wèn)題進(jìn)行分析。理順注冊(cè)商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)制度的整體程序，分析現(xiàn)行立法采用的“兩行兩審”的模式，并分析提起撤銷(xiāo)申請(qǐng)的主體、商標(biāo)撤銷(xiāo)的考察期、責(zé)令限期改正的適用及撤銷(xiāo)裁定的法律效力等具體問(wèn)題。 第五部分，在提出問(wèn)題、分析問(wèn)題的基礎(chǔ)上總結(jié)出設(shè)立撤銷(xiāo)、無(wú)效和注銷(xiāo)程序?qū)Ｕ录熬唧w立法規(guī)范完善兩方面的立法建議，具體立法規(guī)范的建議包括明確商標(biāo)維持使用的范圍，完善撤銷(xiāo)事由，增加正當(dāng)理由條款，，健全撤銷(xiāo)制度程序內(nèi)容等。
[Abstract]:The system of revocation of registered trademarks in China is not yet perfect, Article 44 of the Trademark Law. In December 28th 2012, the standing Committee of the National people's Congress adopted the Trademark Law Amendment (draft). The draft revised and perfected the reasons for revocation of the system. However, there are still some problems in the current trademark legislation, such as the ambiguity of the meaning of the term "revocation" and the inaccuracy and incompleteness of the reason of revocation. The existence of these problems affects the correct application of the law and is not conducive to the protection of trademark owners, consumers and public interests. On the basis of combing the existing problems of the revocation system of the registered trademark in our country, this paper analyzes the current legislation and relevant judicial cases of our country, and draws lessons from the international legislative provisions and relevant precedents at the same time. This paper makes a comprehensive and systematic analysis of the revocation system of registered trademarks, and confirms the function of trademark recognition as the basis for the establishment of the revocation system of registered trademarks. Whether the trademark recognition function can be played or whether the recognition function can be obstructed is regarded as the fundamental basis of whether the registered trademark should be revoked. This paper is divided into five parts: The first part combs the problems existing in the revocation system of registered trademarks in China. According to the current legislation and relevant judicial decisions, the author sorts out that the extension of the revocation system of our country is not clear. It is not based on the function of trademark recognition, does not clarify the use of trademark, the reason of revocation is inaccurate and incomplete, the clause of justification is absent and the trial period of revocation procedure is too long. The second part analyzes the use of trademark in the system of revocation of registered trademark. It defines the extension of trademark maintenance and determines that the trademark owner should be true and legal in commercial activities. Public use of its registered trademark and clear revocation of qualified trademark users. The third part analyzes the reasons of the revocation of registered trademark. It classifies the reasons of revocation, including the withdrawal of non-use of trademark and the revocation of non-standard use. There are four categories of revocation related to the function of trademark quality assurance and other reasons of revocation. The specific analysis of different types of revocation is carried out, and the reasons for revocation of registered trademarks and related regulations are clarified. Part 4th analyzes the procedure of revocation of registered trademark, straightens out the whole procedure of revocation system of registered trademark, and analyzes the mode of "two lines and two trials" adopted in current legislation. It also analyzes the subject of the application for revocation, the investigation period of trademark revocation, the application of the order deadline for correction and the legal effect of the revocation ruling. In the 5th part, on the basis of putting forward questions and analyzing the problems, the author summarizes two legislative suggestions on the establishment, revocation, invalidation and cancellation procedures and the improvement of specific legislative norms. The suggestions of specific legislative norms include clarifying the scope of trademark maintenance and use, perfecting the reasons for revocation, adding clauses of justifiable reasons, perfecting the procedural content of revocation system, and so on.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.43

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 汪澤;;商標(biāo)權(quán)撤銷(xiāo)和無(wú)效制度之區(qū)分及其意義[J];中華商標(biāo);2007年10期

本文編號(hào)：1459665