我国商标侵权判定之现状考察与对策思考

发布时间：2018-05-04 09:00

本文选题：商标侵权 + 司法判定　；参考：《湘潭大学》2013年硕士论文

【摘要】：社会经济的不断发展，商标的价值功能日益彰显。伴随商标侵权数量的日益增多，侵权形式复杂和多样化，，如何判定商标侵权行为已成为司法机关审理商标侵权案件的关键。我国商标侵权行为的判定源于1982年《商标法》的规定，1993年和2001年两次修订均未作实质性的修改。且前两次修订很大程度上是受到外来压力的影响，而非基于商标法原理和自身国情的选择结果。而本次《商标法》的修订是在贯彻知识产权战略下的自发行为，因此有必要对不符合我国国情和国际发展趋势、背离商标法基本原理的相关制度进行完善。而商标侵权行为的判定作为商标法的重要组成部分，其判定主体、判定标准和判定因素一直是司法实践的难题。本文通过样本案例的实证分析，对商标侵权理论的应用和操作进行研究，对商标侵权有关法律实施效果的进行测量，同时通过比较研究的方法，对国外商标侵权判定的法律经验进行总结归纳和对比分析，进而对我国商标侵权判定进行多维度剖析和评判，发现存在的问题及其原因。对各国商标侵权行为判定的立法模式进行总结，并对我国商标侵权行为判定立法沿革进行梳理，发现目前对商标侵权行为的判定主要有列举式、概括式和双轨制三种立法模式。从我国的立法沿革看，我国一直采用列举式模式。针对样本案例从发案时间和地点、案件主体与客体、案件判定三个大方面进行实证分析，重点从判定主体、判定标准、判定因素和援引法条对案件判定部分进行详细论述。研究表明，目前我国商标侵权案件起诉的数量仍处于不断增长的阶段，但从最终判定来看，商标侵权判定数量较为平稳，案件和解与撤诉比重不断增加，并且这一趋势在沿海发达地区更为明显。此外，判定商标侵权的比重远远高于判定商标不侵权的比重，侵权案件主要集中于企业与企业、企业与个人之间的诉讼。而且，我国的商标侵权判定的主体还不规范，标准还未统一，侵权认判定的标准还存在较为严重的逻辑问题，司法实践操作存在难题，这种情形在《商标法修正案（草案）》中仍没有解决。重点需要从商标侵权判定主体、侵权判定的标准和侵权判定的因素三个方面进行制度的完善。提出要统一规范商标侵权判定主体，以“相关公众”作为侵权判定主体，同时调整商标侵权判定的标准，解决目前商标近似与混淆之间的逻辑错误，以“混淆可能性”作为商标侵权判定的标准。并且通过司法解释等途径对商标侵权行为判定因素进行补充，增强商标行为侵权判定的可操作性。
[Abstract]:With the development of social economy, the value function of trademark is becoming more and more obvious. With the increasing number of trademark infringement and the complexity and diversification of infringement forms, how to judge trademark infringement has become the key of judicial organs to try trademark infringement cases. The judgment of trademark infringement in our country originates from the provisions of the Trademark Law in 1982. The first two revisions are influenced by external pressure to a great extent, not based on the principles of trademark law and the selection of their own national conditions. The revision of the Trademark Law is a spontaneous act under the implementation of the intellectual property strategy, so it is necessary to perfect the relevant system which does not conform to the national conditions of our country and the international development trend and deviates from the basic principles of the Trademark Law. As an important part of trademark law, the judgment of trademark infringement is a difficult problem in judicial practice. Through the empirical analysis of sample cases, this paper studies the application and operation of trademark infringement theory, measures the effect of law enforcement of trademark infringement, and at the same time, through the method of comparative study, This paper sums up and contrasts the legal experience of foreign trademark infringement adjudication, and then analyzes and judges the trademark infringement judgment in our country in many dimensions, and finds out the existing problems and their causes. This paper summarizes the legislative model of trademark infringement judgment in various countries, and combs the legislative evolution of trademark infringement judgment in our country, and finds that there are three kinds of legislative models for judging trademark infringement at present: enumeration, generalization and dual track system. From the legislative evolution of our country, our country has been using the enumeration model. According to the sample case from the time and place of the case, the subject and object of the case, the case of three major aspects of empirical analysis, mainly from the judgment of the main body, judging criteria, judging factors and invoking the law to determine the part of the case is discussed in detail. The research shows that the number of trademark infringement cases in China is still growing, but judging from the final judgment, the number of trademark infringement judgments is relatively stable, and the proportion of cases reconciliation and withdrawal is increasing. And this trend is more obvious in developed coastal areas. In addition, the proportion of judgment trademark infringement is far higher than the proportion of judgment trademark non-infringement, tort cases mainly focus on the litigation between enterprises and enterprises, enterprises and individuals. Moreover, the main body of trademark infringement judgment in our country is not standardized, the standard is not unified, the standard of tort recognition judgment still has serious logic problems, and the judicial practice operation is difficult. This situation remains unresolved in the Trademark Law Amendment (draft). It is necessary to perfect the system from three aspects: the main body of trademark infringement judgment, the standard of infringement judgment and the factors of infringement judgment. It is proposed that the judgment subject of trademark infringement should be unified and the relevant public should be used as the judgment subject of infringement. At the same time, the standard of judgment of trademark infringement should be adjusted to solve the logic error between trademark approximation and confusion. Taking the possibility of confusion as the criterion of trademark infringement. And through judicial interpretation and other means of trademark infringement judgment factors are supplemented to enhance the operability of trademark infringement determination.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.43

【参考文献】