商标显著性:一个概念的澄清与制度体系的改造

发布时间：2018-08-18 08:07

【摘要】：商标显著性的制度目的是防止以商标权的方式独占通用性、描述性与功能性标志以保护公平竞争,其本质是与所指定商品或服务之间的区别性。我国学界将商标显著性界定为"来源识别性"是理论上的误读,这种误读导致显著性与来源识别性的制度体系杂混,以及显著性被误解为创造性。显著性与来源识别性的制度体系应各自归位,对于显著性的制度体系,应将第11条通用性标志调整为不可通过使用获得显著性的标志,将第12条功能性标志限于的三维标志扩展到所有标志,并增加兜底性的规定,以应对市场可能出现的其他功能性标志。而第13条第2款、第30条以及第32条后半段应回归"来源识别性"的制度范畴,将其中的规则统一调整为"相似性"商标申请的拒绝或使用的禁止以混淆可能性为条件、"相同性"商标申请的拒绝或使用的禁止无需混淆可能性。
[Abstract]:The institutional purpose of trademark salience is to prevent the exclusive use of trademark rights and to protect fair competition by descriptive and functional marks. The essence of the system is the distinction between the trademark and the designated goods or services. In Chinese academic circles, trademark distinctiveness is defined as "source recognition" as a theoretical misreading, which leads to a mixed system of salience and source recognition, and is misunderstood as creativity. The system of salience and source identification should be placed in their own place, and for the system of salience, the universal mark of Article 11 should be adjusted to the mark which can not be obtained by use. Extend Article 12 functional Marks to all signs by limiting them to three dimensions, and add bottom-line provisions in response to other functional signs that may appear on the market. Article 13, paragraph 2, article 30 and the second half of article 32 should return to the institutional scope of "source identification", The prohibition of refusal or use of "similarity" trademark application is conditioned by the possibility of confusion, and the prohibition of refusal or use of "identical" trademark application is not obfuscated.
【作者单位】：湘潭大学法学院;湖南省知识产权司法保护理论研究基地;
【基金】：中国法学会2016年度部级法学研究课题“商标法基本范畴制度的体系化解释与改造”(课题编号:CLS(2016)D133)的阶段性成果
【分类号】：D923.43

【相似文献】