网络平台服务商商标侵权法律问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-10 09:16

本文选题：网络平台服务商 + 网络平台服务商商标侵权　；参考：《南京师范大学》2015年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着互联网技术的飞速发展,淘宝、京东商城等B2B、B2C模式已成为消费者日常生活的一部分并显现出其巨大的行业优势。随之而来的是法律与新兴产业之间的冲突,当前出现的网络平台服务商商标侵权行为就是其中一个较为棘手的问题。实体法上如何认定、人民法院如何依据现有法律规定妥善处理等问题不仅给司法实践操作带来一定困难,也给理论界提出了新的论题。本文主要从以下几个部分展开：第一部分是对网络平台服务商商标侵权问题的概述。从几种对网络平台服务商的定义着手,对网络平台服务商进行定性,最终得出网络平台服务商应当是网络中介服务商这一结论。第二部分主要介绍了国外有关网络平台服务的主要理论和典型案例。目前,间接侵权理论采用的国家和地区较多,这些国外的重要理论和经典案例给我国的司法实践带来重要启示,需要我们对大陆法系和英美法系的相关法律规定和司法实践案例进行分析比较的基础之上,并结合我国网络交易发展的实际情况,在将来的网络立法规范中进行更为细致的规范。第三部分阐述了我国网络平台服务商侵权责任制度存在的问题,通过对今年来几个典型案例的分析,可以发现当前我国司法实践中存在的问题。这些问题主要体现在：适用的商标侵权理论模糊、要求网络平台服务商承担审查义务和责任的判断标准不明确、判断网络平台服务商主观过错依据的标准不一致这三个方面。第四部分是对我国网络平台服务商商标侵权责任认定的制度完善和司法建议。首先要构建网络平台服务商间接侵权制度,其次是要正确理解和适用《侵权责任法》第36条的规定,对法条中关键词语、对网络平台服务商审查义务和对网络平台服务商放任网络用户侵权三方面的认定。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of Internet technology, the B2B B2C model, such as Taobao, JingDong Mall, has become a part of the daily life of consumers and has shown its huge industry advantages. Then comes the conflict between the law and the new industry. The trademark infringement of network platform service provider is one of the thorny problems. How to determine in the substantive law and how the people's court deal with the problems according to the existing law not only brings some difficulties to the judicial practice, but also puts forward a new topic to the theorists. This article mainly from the following several parts: the first part is the network platform service provider trademark infringement summary. Starting from several definitions of network platform service provider, this paper analyzes the nature of network platform service provider, and finally comes to the conclusion that network platform service provider should be network intermediary service provider. The second part mainly introduces the main theories and typical cases about network platform service abroad. At present, there are many countries and regions using indirect tort theory. These important foreign theories and classic cases bring important enlightenment to the judicial practice of our country. On the basis of the analysis and comparison of the relevant legal provisions and judicial practice cases between the civil law system and the common law system, and in combination with the actual situation of the development of the network transaction in our country, In the future network legislation norms for more detailed specification. The third part expounds the problems existing in the tort liability system of our country's network platform service providers. Through the analysis of several typical cases this year, we can find the problems existing in the current judicial practice of our country. These problems are mainly reflected in the following three aspects: the applicable trademark infringement theory is vague, the judgment standard for requiring the network platform service provider to undertake the obligation and responsibility to examine is not clear, and the criterion for judging the subjective fault of the network platform service provider is inconsistent. The fourth part is the system perfection and judicial suggestion of trademark tort liability of network platform service provider in our country. First of all, we should construct the indirect tort system of network platform service provider, and secondly, we should correctly understand and apply the provisions of Article 36 of the Tort liability Law. The obligation to examine the network platform service provider and the network platform service provider to allow the network user to infringe the rights.
【学位授予单位】：南京师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D923.43

【参考文献】