涉外定牌加工商标侵权纠纷法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-01-13 12:34

本文关键词：涉外定牌加工商标侵权纠纷法律问题研究　出处：《大连海事大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：国内生产商依照境外企业的委托,加工和出口贴附指定商标商品的行为近年来屡见不鲜;而该行为是否有商标侵权之虞,则一直未有定论。尽管实践中已经出现由"侵权"向"不侵权"转变的趋势,但理论上尚未形成逻辑严密而合理的解释;这不仅影响了法律实施的稳定性,也对国内以定牌生产为主业的企业造成了困扰。本文基于实证分析的方法,收集和整理了近几年来的相关案例;同时结合《中华人民共和国商标法》(2013修正)(以下简称新《商标法》)中的相关变化,对该类纠纷中涉及的主要法律问题进行分析,以期明晰涉外定牌加工商标纠纷的性质,明确解决途径。涉外定牌加工商标侵权纠纷问题之所以一直以来争议不断,主要是因为定牌加工的涉外性暴露出了我国商标侵权行为构成要件中存在的问题,具体来说涉及到三个方面:第一,何为商标性使用;第二,混淆或混淆可能性与商标侵权认定的关系;第三,合理审查义务或合理注意义务的地位和作用。是否构成商标性使用是考虑商标侵权的前置问题,混淆理论、合理审查义务等问题都需建立在商标性使用的基础上才存在讨论的意义。新《商标法》对商标性使用增加了识别商品或服务来源的限制,"识别来源"本为商标制度的应有之意,该种表述只是对商标核心功能的强调,而并非是新的"限制"。商标的识别功能在生产阶段和流通消费阶段都同样存在;商业活动的意义在于产生商业影响而非单纯营利,作为一个完整交易链条上的不同步骤,无论是生产加工还是出口都是商业活动的组成部分。涉外定牌加工中的商标同时满足识别来源和商业活动的要求,是为商标意义上的使用。是否侵犯商标权的核心判断要素当为混淆或混淆可能性。新法对混淆原理的引入尚不成熟,产生了商标商品双重相同情形下"推定混淆"与"绝对混淆"的理论分歧,以及非双重相同情形下相似性认定和侵权认定中的逻辑矛盾。从商标基本理论和我国实践需求来看,"推定混淆"理论是更为合理和灵活的选择;而采用以物理相似性为前提的混淆判断标准也更适于我国现状。在此情形下,涉外定牌加工没有导致混淆的可能。"合理注意义务"无论是在认定构成侵权还是不构成侵权的案件中出现频率都很高,该义务根本上意在考察加工方在主观上是否善意。笔者认为无论加工方是否履行该义务,履行到何种程度,都不影响对涉外定牌加工行为的定性;以"合理注意义务"为标准适当提供反不正当竞争保护,对商标法难以调整的商标不正当竞争行为进行限制,以此实现《商标法》与反不正当竞争保护的衔接,才是有利于对外贸易健康发展的合理路径。
[Abstract]:According to the entrustment, processing and export of designated trademark commodities by domestic producers are common in recent years; However, whether the act is in danger of trademark infringement has not been concluded. Although there has been a trend from "infringement" to "non-infringement" in practice, there has not been a logical and reasonable explanation in theory. This not only affects the stability of the implementation of the law, but also makes trouble for domestic enterprises whose main business is the licensing production. Based on the empirical analysis method, this paper collects and collates the relevant cases in recent years; At the same time, combined with the relevant changes in the "Trademark Law of the people's Republic of China" / 2013 Amendment (hereinafter referred to as the "New Trademark Law"), the main legal issues involved in this kind of disputes are analyzed. The purpose is to clarify the nature of trademark disputes concerning foreign licensing and to clear the way to resolve them. The main reason is that the foreign-related nature of the licensing process exposes the problems existing in the constitutive elements of trademark infringement in China, specifically involving three aspects: first, what is trademark use; Second, the relationship between the possibility of confusion and the recognition of trademark infringement; Third, the status and role of the duty of reasonable examination or the duty of reasonable care. Whether the use of trademark constitutes trademark is to consider the pre-issue of trademark infringement, confusion theory. Reasonable examination obligation and other issues need to be discussed on the basis of trademark use. The new Trademark Law increases the limitation of identifying the source of goods or services for trademark use. "identify the source" is the proper meaning of trademark system, this kind of expression only emphasizes the core function of trademark. It is not a new "restriction". The function of trademark recognition also exists in the stage of production and circulation and consumption. The significance of commercial activities is to produce commercial effects rather than simply making profits as a different step in a complete chain of transactions. Whether the production or export is a part of commercial activities. The trademark in the processing of foreign licensing meets the requirements of identifying the source and commercial activities at the same time. It is for the use of trademark meaning. Whether the core judgment element of infringement of trademark rights should be confusion or obfuscation possibility. The introduction of the new law to the principle of confusion is not yet mature. There is a theoretical difference between "presumption confusion" and "absolute confusion" in the case of double identical trademark goods. From the basic theory of trademark and the practical demand of our country, the theory of "presumption confusion" is a more reasonable and flexible choice. In this case, the confusion criterion based on physical similarity is more suitable for the present situation of our country. There is no possibility of confusion caused by the processing of foreign license plate. The "reasonable duty of care" appears very frequently in the case of whether it is found to constitute an infringement or does not constitute an infringement. The purpose of this obligation is to investigate whether the processing party is in good faith subjectively. The author thinks that no matter whether or not the processing party fulfils this obligation and to what extent it is fulfilled, it will not affect the characterization of the foreign licensed processing behavior; Taking "reasonable duty of care" as the standard, we should provide appropriate protection against unfair competition, restrict the unfair competition behavior of trademark that is difficult to adjust in trademark law, so as to realize the connection between trademark law and anti-unfair competition protection. Only then is beneficial to the foreign trade healthy development the reasonable path.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.43

【相似文献】