本文關(guān)鍵詞： 馳名商標(biāo) 司法認(rèn)定 認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn) 制度完善　出處：《湖南大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：商標(biāo)是一種重要的知識產(chǎn)權(quán)，代表了一種服務(wù)與產(chǎn)品的質(zhì)量、信譽(yù)。經(jīng)中華人民共和國國務(wù)院工商行政管理局商標(biāo)局核準(zhǔn)登記的商標(biāo)為中華人民共和國注冊商標(biāo)。自然人、法人或者其他組織,對其生產(chǎn)、制造、加工、揀選或者經(jīng)銷的商品,提供的服務(wù)項(xiàng)目在中國境內(nèi)需要與他人區(qū)別時(shí)，應(yīng)當(dāng)申請商標(biāo)注冊。 2001年7月，最高人民法院發(fā)布了《關(guān)于審理涉及計(jì)算機(jī)網(wǎng)絡(luò)域名民事糾紛案件適用法律若干問題的解釋》，第一次明確規(guī)定了人民法院審理域名糾紛案件，可以根據(jù)當(dāng)事人的請求以及案件的具體情況，對涉及的注冊商標(biāo)是否馳名進(jìn)行認(rèn)定。從此，人民法院擁有了司法認(rèn)定馳名商標(biāo)的權(quán)力，，馳名商標(biāo)認(rèn)定模式由行政認(rèn)定單軌制模式進(jìn)入馳名商標(biāo)行政認(rèn)定和司法認(rèn)定并存的雙軌制模式。 隨著人民法院依法認(rèn)定的馳名商標(biāo)數(shù)量逐年遞增，馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定已成為當(dāng)前我國知識產(chǎn)權(quán)審判工作中的熱點(diǎn)問題，馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定逐漸得到公眾的認(rèn)可。在馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定逐漸得到公眾認(rèn)可的今天，不可否認(rèn)的是，人民法院對馳名商標(biāo)認(rèn)定的審判實(shí)踐仍處于起步階段，總體上的審判經(jīng)驗(yàn)相對缺乏；關(guān)于認(rèn)定馳名商標(biāo)的具體法律規(guī)定原則性相對較強(qiáng)，操作性相對較弱，容易因此產(chǎn)生不同的認(rèn)識；一些商標(biāo)權(quán)利人也試圖通過訴訟將其不具備馳名商標(biāo)條件的商標(biāo)變?yōu)轳Y名商標(biāo)，以此作為其不正當(dāng)擴(kuò)大品牌知名度，打擊排擠現(xiàn)實(shí)或潛在競爭對手的“捷徑”。 在馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定熱潮中，出現(xiàn)了商業(yè)運(yùn)作傾向、地方保護(hù)傾向、虛假訴訟傾向等扭曲傾向。因此，司法實(shí)踐中，必須準(zhǔn)確理解馳名商標(biāo)的內(nèi)涵，嚴(yán)格把握馳名商標(biāo)的認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，避免不當(dāng)認(rèn)定馳名商標(biāo)，確保馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定的嚴(yán)肅性和權(quán)威性。
[Abstract]:Trademark is an important intellectual property, representing the quality of a service and product. The trademark approved and registered by the Trademark Office of the State Council of the people's Republic of China shall be a registered trademark of the people's Republic of China. Natural persons, legal persons or other organizations shall produce, manufacture and process it. If the selected or distributed goods need to be distinguished from others within the territory of China, they shall apply for trademark registration. In July 2001, the Supreme people's Court issued an explanation on the legal issues applicable to the trial of civil disputes involving computer network domain names. For the first time clearly stipulated that the people's court tries the domain name dispute case, may according to the party's request as well as the specific situation of the case, carries on the confirmation to the involved registered trademark to be well-known. The people's court has the power of judicial recognition of well-known trademark, and the pattern of well-known trademark recognition has entered the two-track system of administrative recognition and judicial recognition from the mode of administrative recognition monorail system. With the increasing number of well-known trademarks recognized by the people's courts according to law, judicial recognition of well-known trademarks has become a hot issue in intellectual property trials in our country. The judicial cognizance of well-known trademark is gradually recognized by the public. Today, when the judicial cognizance of well-known trademark is gradually accepted by the public, it is undeniable that the trial practice of the people's court on the recognition of well-known trademark is still in its infancy. On the whole, the trial experience is relatively lacking; The specific legal provisions on the recognition of well-known trademarks are relatively strong in principle and relatively weak in maneuverability, so it is easy to produce different understandings; Some trademark owners also try to change the trademark which does not have the condition of well-known trademark into a well-known trademark through litigation, as its improper expansion of brand awareness. A "shortcut" against crowding out realistic or potential competitors. In the upsurge of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark, there are distorted tendencies such as commercial operation tendency, local protection tendency, false litigation tendency and so on. Therefore, in judicial practice, the connotation of well-known trademark must be accurately understood. Strictly grasp the standard of well-known trademark, avoid improper recognition of well-known trademark, ensure the seriousness and authority of judicial recognition of well-known trademark.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D923.43

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 蔡敬超;;馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定不是“錦上添花”——以“依視路”案為例[J];中華商標(biāo);2007年03期

2 陳玉和;;司法認(rèn)定馳名商標(biāo)有待完善[J];中華商標(biāo);2007年12期

3 劉強(qiáng);;虛構(gòu)事實(shí)申請司法認(rèn)定馳名商標(biāo)的控制[J];中華商標(biāo);2008年06期

4 劉奇;;馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定的實(shí)證分析[J];中華商標(biāo);2009年06期

5 盛杰民;關(guān)于馳名商標(biāo)特殊保護(hù)的法律問題[J];北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1997年05期

6 李慧秋,田大原;談我國馳名商標(biāo)的法律保護(hù)[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);1998年05期

7 蔡敬超;;從一起案例談馳名商標(biāo)司法認(rèn)定的原則[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年04期

8 張玉敏,黃匯;我國馳名商標(biāo)保護(hù)中存在的幾個問題及其完善[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期

9 朱麗亞;王琪生;;論馳名商標(biāo)的特殊法律保護(hù)[J];法學(xué)雜志;1989年01期

10 沈根榮;;關(guān)于商標(biāo)侵權(quán)行為若干問題的認(rèn)識[J];外貿(mào)教學(xué)與研究.上海對外貿(mào)易學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);1984年05期

相關(guān)會議論文 前3條

1 喬冬生;;域名、在先權(quán)利與規(guī)則設(shè)計(jì)[A];中國律師2000年大會論文精選（下卷）[C];2000年

2 蔡恒松;;淺析完善我國馳名商標(biāo)法律制度[A];第三屆貴州法學(xué)論壇文集[C];2001年

3 李靜冰;;知識產(chǎn)權(quán)權(quán)利沖突的成因及處理原則[A];中國律師2000年大會論文精選（下卷）[C];2000年

本文編號：1492200