知名商品外观设计的多重保护问题研究

发布时间：2018-02-20 21:59

本文关键词： 知名商品外观设计多重保护价值利益平衡不正当竞争　出处：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：2010年，上海中韩晨光公司起诉宁波微亚达公司侵犯外观设计知识产权。这一案件不仅被纳入2010年知识产权十大案件之中产生较大的影响，也牵扯出关于知名商品外观设计多重保护问题的讨论。从理论角度分析，知名商品外观设计的多重保护具有正当性。有学者依据知识产权选择原则提出：权利人的选择只能是唯一的，如果选择一种权利保护形式，就必须放弃其他权利保护形式。因为各个知识产权在保护对象的范围、保护时间和保护方式等方面是重叠的，所以多重保护是重复保护，不具有正当性。实质上重复保护的观点并不正确，各个知识产权的权利取得方式、保护角度、权利效力强度并不相同。并且即使存在重叠，可知名商品外观设计也具有内涵不同法益的可能，而各个知识产权单行法是从不同法益出发对外观设计进行保护，所以多重保护仍具有正当性。并且知名商品的外观设计相较普通外观设计具有识别商品的显著性，这一显著性使得商品从同类产品中脱颖而出，获得了更大的竞争优势。即使该设计曾经以专利权的形式获得保护，但由显著性带来的竞争优势并没有随专利保护期届满而消失，所以仍需其他知识产权继续予以保护。专利法为外观设计设定保护期的目的在于保持权利主体之间、信息创造与推广之间的平衡机制。知名商品外观设计的多重保护看似破坏了利益平衡。可是实质上，多重保护避免了不正当竞争，保持了权利人与社会公众间的利益平衡，维护了消费者的合法权益。即使多重保护有设计创新长期掌握在权利人手中的形式特征，也并没有阻碍技术进步和市场竞争。因为外观设计属于设计方案，是对美的表达的有形形式，而人们对于美的感受千差万别，不存在一种设计可以成为基础设计而阻碍其他竞争者进入市场的情况。从实证角度研究，也能得出多重保护在法律实践中是获得支持的。我国国内法院对类似的知名商品外观设计的多重保护纠纷做出过支持的判决，知识产权局和一些学者也纷纷提出支持的观点。国外，如知识产权法比较完善的美国以及几个知识经济高速发展的欧洲发达国家都存在支持多重保护的法律或者案例。不管是理论研究还是实证分析，目的都是为了解决现实中的纠纷。再次审视本文的案例，可以得出这样的结论：K-35型中性笔既然符合多重保护的条件，满足特有包装装潢权的构成要件，即便曾受专利权的保护，可是K-35型中性笔的外观设计的竞争价值仍然存在，所以应以特有包装装潢权的形式继续予以保护。
[Abstract]:In 2010, Shanghai Zhonghan Chenguang Company sued Ningbo Wei Yada Company for infringement of design intellectual property rights. This case was not only included in the 10 IPR cases of 2010, but also had a greater impact. Also involved in the well-known commodity design multiple protection of the discussion. From a theoretical point of view, the multiple protection of well-known commodity designs is justified. According to the principle of intellectual property selection, some scholars have proposed that the right holder's choice can only be unique, if he chooses a form of right protection, It is necessary to give up other forms of protection of rights. Because each intellectual property right overlaps in terms of the scope of the object of protection, the time of protection and the mode of protection, so multiple protection is repetitive protection. It is not justified. The view of repeated protection in essence is not correct. The way in which each intellectual property right is acquired, the angle of protection, and the intensity of the power of the right are not the same. And even if there is overlap, However, the appearance design of well-known goods also has the possibility of different legal interests, and the individual laws of intellectual property rights protect the design from different legal interests. So the multiple protection still has legitimacy. And the appearance design of the well-known goods has the significance of identifying the goods compared with the ordinary designs, which makes the goods stand out from the same kind of products. Gain a greater competitive advantage. Even though the design was protected in the form of a patent, the significant competitive advantage did not disappear with the expiration of the patent protection period, So there is still a need for other intellectual property rights to continue to be protected. The purpose of the patent law to set a protection period for designs is to keep the rights between the subjects. The balance mechanism between information creation and promotion. The multiple protection of well-known commodity design seems to destroy the balance of interests. But in essence, the multiple protection avoids unfair competition and maintains the balance of interests between the right holder and the public. Protecting the legitimate rights and interests of consumers. Even if there is a formal feature of design innovation that has long been in the hands of the right holder, it does not hinder technological progress and market competition. It is a tangible form of expression of beauty, and the perception of beauty varies widely, and there is no such thing as a design that can become the basis of design and prevent other competitors from entering the market. From an empirical point of view, it can also be concluded that multiple protection is supported in legal practice. The domestic courts of our country have made a decision in support of multiple protection disputes over similar well-known commodity designs. The intellectual property Office and some scholars have also put forward the point of support. Foreign countries, such as the United States with relatively perfect intellectual property law and several European developed countries with the rapid development of knowledge economy, all have laws or cases in support of multiple protection. Whether it is theoretical research or empirical analysis, the purpose is to solve disputes in reality. After reviewing the case of this paper, we can draw such a conclusion that since the neutral pen of the type of ": K-35" meets the condition of multiple protection, Even though it has been protected by patent right, the competitive value of the design of K-35 neutral pen still exists, so we should continue to protect it in the form of special packaging and decoration right.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D923.4

【参考文献】