本文選題：知名商品　切入點(diǎn)：相近似　出處：《蘭州大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：近些年來,隨著經(jīng)濟(jì)的發(fā)展,一些老字號(hào)的逐漸的市場(chǎng)化和商業(yè)化,在推動(dòng)了諸多老字號(hào)自身發(fā)展壯大的同時(shí),一些知名商品特有名稱引起的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的糾紛也深刻影響著這些老字號(hào)的發(fā)展。特別是一些未經(jīng)注冊(cè)的知名商品特有名稱,被仿冒、假冒的現(xiàn)象更是層出不窮,嚴(yán)重地破壞了市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)秩序。雖然《反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法》和《商標(biāo)法》規(guī)定了保護(hù)知名商品特有名稱、包裝和裝潢,卻不能滿足司法實(shí)踐中對(duì)于侵權(quán)的確認(rèn)和處罰,更不能有效的預(yù)防侵權(quán)行為的發(fā)生,于是就出現(xiàn)了諸多的案件曠日持久地訴訟和爭(zhēng)議,使得知名商品特有名稱的權(quán)利人維權(quán)艱難。 本文以京津“泥人張”商標(biāo)爭(zhēng)議案為例,以一審、二審和最高人民法院的裁判內(nèi)容為切入點(diǎn),結(jié)合《反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法》和《商標(biāo)法》來分析本案存在的幾個(gè)爭(zhēng)議焦點(diǎn),并對(duì)這些問題進(jìn)一步思考并且提出一些建議。首先,通對(duì)過案情和審判結(jié)果的回顧,對(duì)司法實(shí)踐中北京“泥人張”的行為是否構(gòu)成不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)提出不同觀點(diǎn)。其次,筆者從知名商品特有名稱的認(rèn)定、相同或相近似使用的認(rèn)定和是否造成公眾混淆等問題展開論述,論證北京“泥人張”的行為是否構(gòu)成不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。最后通過對(duì)案件的分析引出思考,對(duì)我國(guó)知名商品認(rèn)定中存在的問題和法律保護(hù)的范圍和力度的不足進(jìn)行探討,提出完善我國(guó)知名商品特有名稱保護(hù)的建議。由于知名商品特有名稱的不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)行為具有標(biāo)準(zhǔn)模糊、不易認(rèn)定的特點(diǎn),筆者希望通過本文對(duì)司法實(shí)踐中存在的一些問題提供一定幫助,從而維護(hù)正常市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)秩序,保護(hù)知名商品的權(quán)利人的合法權(quán)益。
[Abstract]:In recent years, with the development of the economy, the gradual marketization and commercialization of some old brands have promoted the development of many old brands themselves at the same time.The intellectual property disputes caused by the special names of some famous commodities also deeply affect the development of these old brands.In particular, some unregistered special names of well-known commodities are copied and counterfeited, which seriously destroy the order of the market economy.Although the Anti-unfair Competition Law and the Trademark Law provide for the protection of the specific names, packaging and decoration of well-known commodities, they cannot satisfy the recognition and punishment of infringement in judicial practice, let alone effectively prevent the occurrence of infringement.As a result, there are many cases of protracted litigation and controversy, which makes it difficult for the right holders of the special names of well-known commodities to defend their rights.Taking the case of "clay man Zhang" trademark dispute in Beijing and Tianjin as an example, taking the contents of the first instance, the second instance and the Supreme people's Court as the starting point, and combining with the Anti-unfair Competition Law and the Trademark Law, this paper analyzes several controversial points in this case.And to these questions further ponder and put forward some suggestions.First of all, after reviewing the facts of the case and the outcome of the trial, Tong puts forward different views on whether Beijing's "muddy Zhang" behavior constitutes unfair competition in judicial practice.Secondly, the author discusses the identification of the unique name of well-known commodities, the identification of the same or similar use and whether it causes public confusion, and proves whether the behavior of "clay man Zhang" in Beijing constitutes unfair competition.At last, through the analysis of the case, the author discusses the problems existing in the cognizance of well-known commodities in our country and the insufficiency of the scope and intensity of legal protection, and puts forward some suggestions to perfect the protection of the special names of well-known commodities in our country.Because the unfair competition behavior of the special name of well-known commodity has the characteristics of vague standard and difficult to identify, the author hopes to provide some help to some problems in judicial practice through this article, so as to maintain the order of normal market economy.To protect the legitimate rights and interests of the right holders of well-known commodities.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D922.294;D923.43

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 林燕平;德國(guó)反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法的發(fā)展與啟示[J];德國(guó)研究;1996年04期

2 楚歌;;不僅守望傳統(tǒng)，更是守護(hù)文化——“泥人張”案件背后關(guān)于民間藝術(shù)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)的思考[J];雕塑;2008年02期

3 張振中;;注冊(cè)商標(biāo)和未注冊(cè)馳名商標(biāo)沖突的法律解析——iPad商標(biāo)爭(zhēng)議引發(fā)的思考[J];法制與社會(huì);2012年26期

4 孫驍勇;;擅自使用知名商品特有的名稱包裝裝潢行為的認(rèn)定[J];中華商標(biāo);2010年08期

5 張術(shù)麟;論傳統(tǒng)老字號(hào)商號(hào)權(quán)的法律保護(hù)[J];湖北民族學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2004年03期

6 姚圣娟;;關(guān)于振興中華老字號(hào)的思考[J];華東經(jīng)濟(jì)管理;2008年01期

7 彭霏;;論商標(biāo)近似的認(rèn)定——以文字商標(biāo)為視角[J];今日南國(guó)(理論創(chuàng)新版);2009年07期

8 朱國(guó)良;;論民間文學(xué)藝術(shù)法律保護(hù)制度的構(gòu)建[J];山東省青年管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年06期

9 周文一;;中華老字號(hào)企業(yè)再創(chuàng)輝煌的發(fā)展之路[J];上海商業(yè);2009年01期

10 趙寶敏;;從“泥人張”案談我國(guó)對(duì)中華老字號(hào)的法律保護(hù)[J];山西省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2008年01期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 周卿;知名商品特有名稱認(rèn)定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的完善[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2011年

2 楊洪波;論《反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法》關(guān)于知名商品認(rèn)定及法律保護(hù)[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

3 楊德嘉;論通用名稱的認(rèn)定[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2008年

4 張欣;論商標(biāo)近似的認(rèn)定[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：1722284