我国商标法上惩罚性赔偿适用研究

发布时间：2018-04-26 15:43

本文选题：商标侵权 + 侵权损害赔偿　；参考：《华东政法大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：普遍的商标侵权行为对市场稳定和公平竞争造成了严重的危害，并逐渐由对个体利益的侵犯演化成为一种对社会共同利益的侵害。由于商标侵权容易救济难的特点，，以及现行法律制度对商标救济实现度低的现状，亟需强化商标的事先防御功能、加强对商标侵权行为的惩治力度。惩罚性赔偿在制裁和遏制多发的商标侵权行为方面具有功能上的优势，并且符合社会正义观变革的要求以及现代侵权责任法“社会本位”的理念，能够适应社会形势的需要，强化对商标权的保护。同时，商标法引入惩罚性赔偿符合强化信息资本保护的需要，并且通过成本收益的利益机制，能够对侵权行为进行遏制，具有法经济学上的立足点。因此，在我国商标法中引入惩罚性赔偿具有合理性和必要性。惩罚性赔偿有助于解决传统补偿性赔偿救济不足的问题，能够对现行商标侵权损害赔偿制度的缺陷起到修正作用；同时能对商标行政保护和刑事保护的空隙起到恰到好处的补充作用，一方面有助于商标行政执法完善社会管理机制，另一方面能够补充商标刑事保护适用的局限、填补刑事法和民事法之间相对空白，从而完善商标侵权责任体系，使不法侵权者有效承担侵权责任。惩罚性赔偿制度在各地区知识产权领域的广泛适用以及我国侵权责任法上对惩罚性赔偿的移植所取得的显著的效果，为我国商标法中建立惩罚性赔偿制度提供了有效的借鉴。为了避免过度使用惩罚性赔偿可能造成的反社会效果和新的不公平，在适用惩罚性赔偿时应注意对其进行合理限制。商标法中适用惩罚性赔偿主要应针对主观故意性强、情节严重的侵权行为，同时还要考虑到补偿性赔偿对损害的弥补程度，对于惩罚性赔偿数额的确定可以按照实际损害的适当比例进行计算，也可以根据对侵权情节的考量直接判定。现阶段想要谋求一种精确地计算方式并不现实，合理的惩罚性赔偿数额应以能够反映社会公众一般理性认知和价值判断能力为评价标准，应符合公平原则和利益平衡的主旨。
[Abstract]:The universal trademark infringement has caused serious harm to the market stability and fair competition, and has gradually evolved from the infringement of individual interests into a kind of infringement on the common interests of society. Due to the characteristics that trademark infringement is easy to remedy and relief is difficult, and the current legal system has a low degree of trademark relief, it is urgent to strengthen the trademark pre-defense function and strengthen the punishment of trademark infringement. Punitive damages have the function advantage in sanctioning and restraining the frequent trademark infringement, and accord with the demand of social justice and the concept of "social standard" of modern tort liability law, which can meet the needs of the social situation. Strengthen the protection of trademark rights. At the same time, the introduction of punitive damages in trademark law meets the need to strengthen the protection of information capital, and through the benefit mechanism of cost and income, it can contain the tort, which has the foothold of law and economics. Therefore, it is reasonable and necessary to introduce punitive damages into our trademark law. Punitive damages are helpful to solve the problem of inadequate remedy of traditional compensatory damages, and can correct the defects of the current system of trademark infringement damages. At the same time, it can complement the gap of trademark administrative protection and criminal protection, on the one hand, it helps to perfect the social management mechanism of trademark administrative law enforcement, on the other hand, it can supplement the limitation of the application of trademark criminal protection. Fill in the relative blank between criminal law and civil law, thus perfect trademark tort liability system, make illegal infringer bear tort liability effectively. The extensive application of the punitive damages system in the field of intellectual property in various regions and the remarkable effect of the transplantation of punitive damages in the tort liability law of our country have provided an effective reference for the establishment of punitive damages system in the trademark law of our country. In order to avoid the antisocial effect and new unfairness caused by the excessive use of punitive damages, we should pay attention to the reasonable restriction when applying punitive damages. The application of punitive damages in trademark law should be aimed at the torts with strong subjective intent and serious circumstances, and at the same time take into account the extent to which compensatory damages make up for the damage. The determination of the amount of punitive damages can be calculated according to the appropriate proportion of actual damage, or can be directly determined according to the consideration of tort circumstances. At this stage, it is not realistic to seek a precise calculation method. A reasonable amount of punitive damages should be evaluated according to the general rational cognition and value judgment ability of the public, and should conform to the principle of fairness and the purpose of balancing interests.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.43

【参考文献】