从“无印良品”案到“PRETUL”案:涉外定牌加工的法律性质

发布时间：2018-09-03 09:43

【摘要】：尽管均涉及涉外定牌加工,但最高法院的"无印良品"案和"PRETUL"案涉及的商标法具体制度和法律问题完全不同,涉外定牌加工是否构成商标使用的法律意义也完全不同。"无印良品"案涉及的是商标形成和维持意义上的商标使用,在该案适用的商标法第32条后半段以及第59条第3款、第49条第2款的制度背景下,涉外定牌加工不构成商标使用。"PRETUL"案涉及的则是商标侵权判断意义上的商标使用,在该案适用的商标法第57条第1项和第2项的制度背景下,涉外定牌加工是否构成商标使用完全是政策选择的结果。不同制度背景下商标使用的法律意义和商标使用的构成均各不相同。涉外定牌加工是否构成商标使用取决于所涉及的法律制度和法律问题,涉外定牌加工原则上不构成
[Abstract]:Although all of them involve foreign licensing, the Supreme Court's "good products without Printing" case and the "PRETUL" case deal with completely different specific systems and legal issues of trademark law, and the legal significance of whether the foreign licensing process constitutes the use of trademarks is completely different. " The case concerning the use of a trademark in the sense of the formation and maintenance of a trademark, in the context of the system of article 32, paragraph 3, and article 49, paragraph 2, of the Trademark Law applicable in that case, The "PRETUL" case involves the use of trademarks in the sense of judgment of trademark infringement. In the context of Article 57, items 1 and 2 of the Trademark Law applicable in this case, It is the result of policy choice to determine whether trademark processing constitutes trademark use. The legal significance of trademark use and the composition of trademark use are different under different system background. Whether the processing of foreign licensing constitutes the use of a trademark depends on the legal system and legal issues involved, and in principle does not constitute a foreign licensing process.
【作者单位】：广东外语外贸大学法学院;
【基金】：广东外语外贸大学高层次人才项目“商标法专题研究”(GWTP-YG-2015-05)阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D923.43

【相似文献】