【摘要】：本文以地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)制度為議題，于世界范圍內(nèi)，介紹地理標(biāo)志立法主要模式，即以法國(guó)為代表的專門(mén)法保護(hù)模式、美國(guó)為代表的商標(biāo)法保護(hù)模式以及以1995年前德國(guó)為代表的反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法保護(hù)模式；于我國(guó)以內(nèi)，總結(jié)“三權(quán)分立”地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)局面，即工商部主導(dǎo)的商標(biāo)法保護(hù)模式、國(guó)家質(zhì)量監(jiān)督局主導(dǎo)的地理標(biāo)志產(chǎn)品保護(hù)模式以及農(nóng)業(yè)部主導(dǎo)的農(nóng)產(chǎn)品地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)模式。結(jié)合國(guó)外立法經(jīng)驗(yàn)、我國(guó)國(guó)情，本文提出重構(gòu)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)制度的設(shè)想。較之其他關(guān)于地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的學(xué)術(shù)論文，本文之創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)在于視角不同，即以國(guó)家品牌為導(dǎo)向，，析地理標(biāo)志制度之利弊。本文主體分四個(gè)部分對(duì)上述地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)的研究。 文章第一部分對(duì)地理標(biāo)志予以概述，簡(jiǎn)要說(shuō)明地理標(biāo)志概念后，對(duì)地理標(biāo)志的性質(zhì)也予以了闡述，并分析地理標(biāo)志與國(guó)家品牌之間的關(guān)聯(lián)互動(dòng)關(guān)系。文章第二部分在世界范圍內(nèi)介紹地理標(biāo)志立法主要模式，即專門(mén)法保護(hù)模式、商標(biāo)法保護(hù)模式以及反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法保護(hù)模式。在論述商標(biāo)法保護(hù)模式的同時(shí)也對(duì)加拿大國(guó)家品牌戰(zhàn)略也作了簡(jiǎn)要說(shuō)明。文章第三部分引出了國(guó)家品牌為導(dǎo)向知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)制度，并重點(diǎn)就為什么要從實(shí)現(xiàn)國(guó)家品牌產(chǎn)業(yè)政策的角度分析我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志制度作了法哲學(xué)上的合理性分析，而論述主要是通過(guò)兩個(gè)途徑進(jìn)行的，即分別從洛克的勞動(dòng)財(cái)產(chǎn)理論與彼得的工具主義理論對(duì)國(guó)家品牌視角作合理性論證。 本文最主要的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)在第四部分。文章第四部分在“以國(guó)家品牌為導(dǎo)向”的正當(dāng)性得證的基礎(chǔ)上，根據(jù)我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)立法，首次提出“三權(quán)分立”地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)局面的觀點(diǎn)，并就其“三權(quán)分立而混亂”現(xiàn)狀予以說(shuō)明分析。同時(shí)，以國(guó)家品牌為導(dǎo)向，論證我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志重構(gòu)的必然性，不在于其“混亂”，而在于“不整合”，不符合國(guó)家品牌產(chǎn)業(yè)政策對(duì)于品牌資源整合的需求。本文所主張的以國(guó)家品牌為導(dǎo)向的地理標(biāo)志制度，核心為保護(hù)模式的“雙軌制”，即對(duì)于“有潛質(zhì)加入國(guó)家品牌戰(zhàn)略計(jì)劃”的地理標(biāo)志，予以地理標(biāo)志特別法保護(hù)，其余地理標(biāo)志則通過(guò)商標(biāo)法予以保護(hù)。除此以外，“雙軌制”之下關(guān)于制度衡平、立法層級(jí)及主管機(jī)關(guān)的三個(gè)基本問(wèn)題，本文也予以闡明。 限于寫(xiě)作目的，本文僅能勾勒出以國(guó)家品牌為導(dǎo)向的地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)制度的藍(lán)圖，但誠(chéng)如法學(xué)家理查德·波斯納所言，“法學(xué)從不是一門(mén)可以自給自足的學(xué)科”，從法學(xué)之外分析“法之理”，想必也應(yīng)當(dāng)是有意義的了。
[Abstract]:Taking the protection system of geographical indications as the topic, this paper introduces the main mode of legislation of geographical indications in the world, that is, the special law protection mode represented by France. The trademark law protection model represented by the United States and the anti-unfair competition law protection model represented by Germany before 1995. Within our country, the situation of "separation of powers" geographical indication protection, that is, the trademark law protection mode led by the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, is summarized. The national quality supervision bureau led the geographical indication product protection mode and the agriculture department led the agricultural product geographical indication protection pattern. Combining with the foreign legislative experience and the national conditions of our country, this paper puts forward the idea of reconstructing the protection system of geographical indications. Compared with other academic papers on the protection of geographical indications, the innovation of this paper lies in the different perspectives, that is, the advantages and disadvantages of the geographical indication system are analyzed under the guidance of national brand. This paper is divided into four parts to study the protection of geographical indications. The first part of the article gives an overview of geographical indications, a brief description of the concept of geographical indications, the nature of geographical indications is also elaborated, and the relationship between geographical indications and national brands is analyzed. The second part of the article introduces the main models of geographical indication legislation in the world, that is, special law protection mode, trademark law protection model and anti-unfair competition law protection model. At the same time, it also gives a brief explanation of Canadian national brand strategy. The third part of the article introduces the national brand oriented intellectual property system, and focuses on why to realize the national brand industry policy from the point of view of the geographical indication system in China for the legal philosophy of rationality analysis. The discussion is mainly through two ways, namely, from Locke's theory of labor property and Peter's theory of instrumentalism to the rationality of the national brand. The main innovation of this paper is in the fourth part. In the fourth part of the article, on the basis of the justification of "taking the national brand as the guide" and according to the legislation of geographical indication protection in China, the author puts forward for the first time the viewpoint of "separation of powers" in the protection of geographical indications. And to its "separation of powers and chaos" to explain and analyze the status quo. At the same time, taking the national brand as the guide, it proves that the necessity of the reconstruction of China's geographical indications lies not in its "confusion", but in its "unconformity", which does not meet the needs of the national brand industry policy for the integration of brand resources. The national brand oriented geographical indication system advocated in this paper is the "dual track system" of the protection mode, that is, the special law of geographical indication should be given to the geographical indication which has the potential to join the national brand strategic plan. The remaining geographical indications are protected by trademark law. In addition, three basic issues of institutional balance, legislative hierarchy and competent authorities under the "dual track system" are also expounded in this paper. For the purpose of writing, this paper can only outline the blueprint of the national brand oriented geographical indication protection system, but as the jurist Richard Posner put it, "Law is never a self-sufficient discipline." It must be meaningful to analyze the principle of law from outside of law.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.43;D922.4

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 王蔚;法國(guó)原產(chǎn)地名稱立法的變革[J];中華商標(biāo);2000年03期

2 馬曉莉;地理標(biāo)志立法模式之比較分析——兼論我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志的立法模式[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2003年01期

3 王笑冰;;法國(guó)對(duì)地理標(biāo)志的法律保護(hù)[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2006年04期

4 楊曉燕;;國(guó)家品牌效應(yīng):歐盟品牌全球營(yíng)銷(xiāo)的利器[J];國(guó)際經(jīng)貿(mào)探索;2007年07期

5 王志本;我國(guó)傳統(tǒng)名特優(yōu)農(nóng)產(chǎn)品的地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)[J];農(nóng)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題;2005年04期

6 劉英杰;吳良;;新階段農(nóng)業(yè)品牌化戰(zhàn)略研究與探討——新疆的實(shí)踐與借鑒[J];農(nóng)業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì)與管理;2011年06期

7 許文溫;;美國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)法律制度研究[J];山西煤炭管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

8 侯仰坤;論知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的權(quán)利結(jié)構(gòu)和權(quán)利形成[J];中國(guó)科技論壇;2003年03期

9 張玉敏;我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志法律保護(hù)的制度選擇[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2005年01期

本文編號(hào)：2144535