论我国驰名商标虚假诉讼的法律对策
发布时间：2019-03-13 10:22
【摘要】：在我国,驰名商标的认定是为了加大商标权的保护力度,引导企业实施商标战略,使用自主商标,丰富商标内涵,重视商标知识产权的创新和保护,从而形成一批拥有自主知识产权和知名品牌、国际竞争力较强的优势企业,促进企业和社会经济发展,推动创新型国家建设。目前,我国驰名商标的认定有行政认定和司法认定两种途径。近年来,随着我国经济增长水平的不断发展,驰名商标成了企业提高市场占有率的砝码,在经济发达的省份,一度出现驰名商标认定热。由于司法认定驰名商标与行政认定相比更加便捷、高效,成本相对低,使一些企业认为通过司法认定驰名商标是一条捷径。于是,在司法实践中,出现了以认定驰名商标为目的的虚假诉讼。 由于普通商标保护范围较小,所以商标法中专门设立驰名商标保护制度,给予商标权利人以特殊保护或更大权利,以解决特定的法律争议或纠纷。而驰名商标司法认定虚假诉讼中,提起诉讼的商标权利人没有正当的理由和依据,蓄意制造商标侵权纠纷,采用虚构诉讼主体、法律事实和伪造证据等手段,以表面合法的形式提起诉讼,申请法院认定自己持有的商标为驰名商标,从而提高企业品牌知名度、打压竞争对手。造成驰名商标认定虚假诉讼持续增多的主要原因有：我国驰名商标制度的异化、驰名商标市场影响力的驱动以及驰名商标认定制度本身的内部诱因等。驰名商标司法认定虚假诉讼危害主要表现为：影响驰名商标司法认定的权威性,损害驰名商标司法认定的公正性,破坏公平竞争的市场秩序。 对于虚假诉讼的行为,两大法系有代表性国家的规制规定虽然有所不同,但都有实体法和程序法两方面的规定。在我国,对于司法认定驰名商标虚假诉讼的现象,已受到各级法院的高度重视。最高人民法院相继出台司法解释,规范驰名商标的司法认定。在此基础上,笔者提出自己的建议,针对驰名商标司法认定虚假诉讼,首先要完善驰名商标保护制度,同时运用程序法规制驰名商标司法认定中的虚假诉讼,建立驰名商标司法认定虚假诉讼的识别机制,还要明确驰名商标虚假诉讼的法律责任,构建驰名商标司法认定虚假诉讼侵权损害赔偿机制。
[Abstract]:In China, the identification of well-known trademarks is to strengthen the protection of trademark rights, guide enterprises to implement trademark strategy, use independent trademarks, enrich the connotation of trademarks, and attach importance to the innovation and protection of trademark intellectual property rights. To form a number of independent intellectual property rights and well-known brands, strong international competitiveness of the advantage of enterprises, promote the development of enterprises and socio-economic, promote the construction of an innovative country. At present, there are two ways to identify well-known trademarks in China: administrative and judicial. In recent years, with the continuous development of China's economic growth level, well-known trademarks have become the weight for enterprises to increase their market share. In economically developed provinces, well-known trademarks have once become a hot cognizance of well-known trademarks. Because judicial cognizance of well-known trademark is more convenient, efficient and relatively low cost, some enterprises think it is a shortcut to identify well-known trademark through judicature. Therefore, in judicial practice, there is a false litigation for the purpose of identifying well-known trademarks. Because the scope of common trademark protection is relatively small, a well-known trademark protection system is specially set up in Trademark Law to give special protection or greater rights to trademark rights holders in order to solve specific legal disputes or disputes. But in the well-known trademark judicial cognizance false lawsuit, the trademark right holder who brought the lawsuit has no legitimate reason and basis, intentionally creates trademark infringement dispute, uses the fictitious lawsuit subject, the legal fact and the forgery evidence and so on means. Sue in a prima facie legal form and apply to the court to identify its trademark as a well-known trademark so as to increase the visibility of the corporate brand and suppress its competitors. The main reasons for the continuous increase of well-known trademark identification false litigation are: the alienation of well-known trademark system in China, the driving force of well-known trademark market influence and the internal inducement of well-known trademark identification system itself. The harm of false litigation in judicial cognizance of well-known trademark is that it affects the authority of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark, impairs the justice of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark, and destroys the market order of fair competition. For the act of false litigation, the regulations of the two representative countries are different, but both have the provisions of substantive law and procedural law. In our country, the phenomenon of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark false litigation has been attached great importance to by all levels of courts. The Supreme people's Court has issued judicial interpretations to standardize the judicial determination of well-known trademarks. On this basis, the author puts forward his own suggestions, in view of the well-known trademark judicial cognizance of false litigation, first of all to improve the well-known trademark protection system, and at the same time use procedures and regulations to make the well-known trademark judicial identification of the false litigation, In order to establish the identification mechanism of well-known trademark judicial cognizance of false litigation, we should make clear the legal liability of well-known trademark false litigation, and construct the compensation mechanism of well-known trademark judicial cognizance of false litigation infringement damage.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.43;D925
本文编号：2439306
[Abstract]:In China, the identification of well-known trademarks is to strengthen the protection of trademark rights, guide enterprises to implement trademark strategy, use independent trademarks, enrich the connotation of trademarks, and attach importance to the innovation and protection of trademark intellectual property rights. To form a number of independent intellectual property rights and well-known brands, strong international competitiveness of the advantage of enterprises, promote the development of enterprises and socio-economic, promote the construction of an innovative country. At present, there are two ways to identify well-known trademarks in China: administrative and judicial. In recent years, with the continuous development of China's economic growth level, well-known trademarks have become the weight for enterprises to increase their market share. In economically developed provinces, well-known trademarks have once become a hot cognizance of well-known trademarks. Because judicial cognizance of well-known trademark is more convenient, efficient and relatively low cost, some enterprises think it is a shortcut to identify well-known trademark through judicature. Therefore, in judicial practice, there is a false litigation for the purpose of identifying well-known trademarks. Because the scope of common trademark protection is relatively small, a well-known trademark protection system is specially set up in Trademark Law to give special protection or greater rights to trademark rights holders in order to solve specific legal disputes or disputes. But in the well-known trademark judicial cognizance false lawsuit, the trademark right holder who brought the lawsuit has no legitimate reason and basis, intentionally creates trademark infringement dispute, uses the fictitious lawsuit subject, the legal fact and the forgery evidence and so on means. Sue in a prima facie legal form and apply to the court to identify its trademark as a well-known trademark so as to increase the visibility of the corporate brand and suppress its competitors. The main reasons for the continuous increase of well-known trademark identification false litigation are: the alienation of well-known trademark system in China, the driving force of well-known trademark market influence and the internal inducement of well-known trademark identification system itself. The harm of false litigation in judicial cognizance of well-known trademark is that it affects the authority of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark, impairs the justice of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark, and destroys the market order of fair competition. For the act of false litigation, the regulations of the two representative countries are different, but both have the provisions of substantive law and procedural law. In our country, the phenomenon of judicial cognizance of well-known trademark false litigation has been attached great importance to by all levels of courts. The Supreme people's Court has issued judicial interpretations to standardize the judicial determination of well-known trademarks. On this basis, the author puts forward his own suggestions, in view of the well-known trademark judicial cognizance of false litigation, first of all to improve the well-known trademark protection system, and at the same time use procedures and regulations to make the well-known trademark judicial identification of the false litigation, In order to establish the identification mechanism of well-known trademark judicial cognizance of false litigation, we should make clear the legal liability of well-known trademark false litigation, and construct the compensation mechanism of well-known trademark judicial cognizance of false litigation infringement damage.
【学位授予单位】：大连海事大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2013
【分类号】：D923.43;D925
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 来小鹏;傅家杰;;论驰名商标司法认定制度的完善[J];电子知识产权;2009年08期
2 张爱国;;论驰名商标司法认定中基础理论的缺失[J];福建政法管理干部学院学报;2009年01期
3 夏君丽;;关于驰名商标司法保护价值取向及制度设置的思考[J];法律适用;2007年12期
4 北京市第一中级人民法院课题组;宿迟;杨柏勇;姜颖;乔平;;驰名商标司法认定若干问题[J];法律适用;2007年12期
5 钟蔚莉;胡昌明;王煜珏;;关于审判监督程序中发现的虚假诉讼的调研报告[J];法律适用;2008年06期
6 徐爱国;;英美法中“滥用法律诉讼”的侵权责任[J];法学家;2000年02期
7 朱兰萍;;我国驰名商标法律制度的完善——以驰名商标权利滥用及规制为视角[J];法制与社会;2011年10期
8 葛志群;;浅析我国驰名商标的认定[J];法制与社会;2012年07期
9 王晓晔;重要的补充——反不正当竞争法与相邻法的关系[J];国际贸易;2004年07期
10 马忠法;王高平;;驰名商标虚假诉讼成因及其应对之探究——由“康王”商标纠纷案引发的思考[J];西部法学评论;2011年01期
，本文编号：2439306
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/zhishichanquanfa/2439306.html
