【摘要】：國(guó)際社會(huì)圍繞關(guān)于地理標(biāo)志的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)保護(hù)問(wèn)題的爭(zhēng)論，已成為WTO多邊貿(mào)易談判中的焦點(diǎn)議題之一，也成為法學(xué)研究的一個(gè)重要課題。無(wú)論是從地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的歷史層面分析，還是對(duì)現(xiàn)今地理標(biāo)志的國(guó)際立法考察，無(wú)論是僅從TRIPS視角出發(fā)，還是從一國(guó)或一個(gè)地區(qū)的視角出發(fā)，研究地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)問(wèn)題，既具有理論意義又具有現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。 在論文的框架結(jié)構(gòu)與內(nèi)容上，本文分為五章。 本文的第一章，首先是探討了地理標(biāo)志的基本理解，為全文的寫作奠定基礎(chǔ)。就內(nèi)容結(jié)構(gòu)和邏輯線索而言，首先簡(jiǎn)要分析了地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的緣起與演進(jìn)，之后對(duì)地理標(biāo)志的內(nèi)涵進(jìn)行了界定，并分析了地理標(biāo)志的權(quán)屬及保護(hù)要件。應(yīng)該說(shuō)，地理標(biāo)志的相關(guān)問(wèn)題，并不僅僅是一個(gè)法律問(wèn)題，更是一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題和文化問(wèn)題。這部分對(duì)地理標(biāo)志相關(guān)的概念：原產(chǎn)地標(biāo)志、貨源標(biāo)志、原產(chǎn)地名稱、地理標(biāo)識(shí)等等做出了比較分析；并指出：地理標(biāo)志是一種特殊類型的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)其法律屬性具體體現(xiàn)為以下三個(gè)層面：其一，地理標(biāo)志具有私權(quán)屬性；其二，地理標(biāo)志是一種新型的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)；其三，地理標(biāo)志是一種具有集體性質(zhì)的權(quán)利。地理標(biāo)志的認(rèn)定需考慮商品的特定質(zhì)量、聲譽(yù)或其他特征和表示商品來(lái)源的地理來(lái)源，同時(shí)特定的質(zhì)量、聲譽(yù)或其他特征與特定的地理區(qū)域有著來(lái)源的聯(lián)系。 本文的第二章，以標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分析為切入點(diǎn)，探討了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際的保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，在分析地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)的現(xiàn)實(shí)需求的基礎(chǔ)上，論述了地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)從國(guó)內(nèi)法、到雙邊條約，再到區(qū)域性協(xié)定和多邊條約的發(fā)展，論證了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的初步形成，同時(shí)探討了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的發(fā)展及動(dòng)向。專門立法、反不正當(dāng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)法、商標(biāo)法的保護(hù)模式關(guān)注點(diǎn)各有所側(cè)重。無(wú)論是從一國(guó)視角，還是從國(guó)際貿(mào)易視角來(lái)說(shuō)，除了完善和加強(qiáng)地理標(biāo)志國(guó)內(nèi)立法外，與國(guó)際立法接軌并不斷地加強(qiáng)國(guó)際合作與談判是必然趨勢(shì)，這樣就可能突破一國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)立法，這也是地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)體系建立的必然性要求。從TRIPS談判到后TRIPS時(shí)代，地理標(biāo)志的國(guó)際保護(hù)問(wèn)題呈現(xiàn)出不同的表征。后TRIPS時(shí)代地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)逐步發(fā)展，TPP協(xié)定對(duì)地理標(biāo)志規(guī)定，在TRIPS協(xié)定的基礎(chǔ)上更進(jìn)一步，保護(hù)的力度進(jìn)一步加強(qiáng)，標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)一步提高，這充分體現(xiàn)了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)提高的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)。 本文的第三章，深入分析了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)范圍擴(kuò)大的爭(zhēng)論。首先，對(duì)地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)爭(zhēng)論的緣起與表現(xiàn)進(jìn)行了概括，其次，深入探討了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)范圍爭(zhēng)論的經(jīng)濟(jì)、政治以及文化方面的原因，再次，重點(diǎn)論證了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)擴(kuò)大化趨勢(shì)及紛爭(zhēng)，最后，對(duì)地理標(biāo)志一般保護(hù)的充分性、擴(kuò)大化保護(hù)的正當(dāng)性和可行性進(jìn)行了理性分析。TRIPS協(xié)定確立一個(gè)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的最低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，但是相對(duì)于一般保護(hù)，TRIPS協(xié)定所確立的額外保護(hù)能否擴(kuò)大，各國(guó)一直有著不同的主張。爭(zhēng)論的雙方主要以發(fā)達(dá)世界的美國(guó)和歐盟為代表。從當(dāng)前的國(guó)際社會(huì)看，在所有的爭(zhēng)論當(dāng)中，以美國(guó)為代表的利益一方主體和以歐盟為代表的利益一方主體關(guān)于地理標(biāo)志是否應(yīng)得到延伸保護(hù)的爭(zhēng)論是焦點(diǎn)所在。 本文的第四章，，通過(guò)對(duì)地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)最低標(biāo)準(zhǔn)問(wèn)題、保護(hù)擴(kuò)大化問(wèn)題以及協(xié)調(diào)問(wèn)題方面的考察，對(duì)地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行思考。論述了地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的具體適用，并對(duì)地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行了利益平衡分析，探討了地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的延伸，建議TRIPS第23條的保護(hù)應(yīng)適用于所有產(chǎn)品地理標(biāo)志，TRIPS第24條中的例外情形應(yīng)作必要修改。各成員方在地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的具體適用上，首先要履行TRIPS協(xié)定所確定的義務(wù)，既然已經(jīng)加入?yún)f(xié)定，則根據(jù)條約必須信守原則需尊重業(yè)已確定的規(guī)則，而當(dāng)履行出現(xiàn)障礙時(shí)要通過(guò)合法途徑積極尋求解決矛盾與糾紛問(wèn)題的合理對(duì)策；在沒(méi)有達(dá)成一個(gè)新的地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)規(guī)則之前，仍然需遵循原有的制度規(guī)則。要實(shí)現(xiàn)在各成員中在地理標(biāo)志上的利益協(xié)調(diào)，必須考量各成員在地理標(biāo)志國(guó)際貿(mào)易中的基本立場(chǎng)，基于不同的利益基點(diǎn)達(dá)成一致的協(xié)議從而形成基本上被各成員認(rèn)可的保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 本文的第五章，分析了我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的選擇。通過(guò)對(duì)我國(guó)關(guān)于地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的立法及執(zhí)法狀況考察，從而對(duì)我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀與缺陷進(jìn)行了闡述與反思，進(jìn)而探討了我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)與國(guó)際接軌的問(wèn)題，最后從立法模式、保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)定位等方面提出了我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)的應(yīng)對(duì)策略與完善建議。我國(guó)雖然地理標(biāo)志資源豐富，但在保護(hù)上管理混亂，地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)意識(shí)不足，法律層面的保護(hù)分散且水平不高，由此導(dǎo)致我國(guó)的地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)無(wú)法滿足國(guó)際保護(hù)需要。在地理標(biāo)志的制度構(gòu)建與立法銜接，要堅(jiān)持保護(hù)模式選擇與法律本土化相結(jié)合。我國(guó)地理標(biāo)志保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)在定位上需與我國(guó)的國(guó)情相符，同時(shí)考慮到國(guó)際保護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。商標(biāo)法與專門立法相結(jié)合的雙軌制立法保護(hù)模式，考慮得更為全面和細(xì)致，可以作為我國(guó)將來(lái)立法考慮的制度選擇。在執(zhí)法上要協(xié)調(diào)各行政部門，加強(qiáng)執(zhí)法力度，簡(jiǎn)化執(zhí)法程序，注重實(shí)效。對(duì)于地理標(biāo)志的談判，我們必須堅(jiān)持主權(quán)原則，積極參與國(guó)際合作與談判。
[Abstract]:The international community's controversy over the protection of intellectual property rights over geographical indications has become one of the focuses of WTO multilateral trade negotiations and an important topic of legal research. Starting from the point of view of a country or a region, it has both theoretical and practical significance to study the international protection of geographical indications.
In the framework and content of the thesis, this paper is divided into five chapters.
In the first chapter, the author discusses the basic understanding of geographical indications and lays a foundation for the writing of the full text. As far as the content structure and logical clues are concerned, the origin and evolution of the protection of geographical indications are briefly analyzed, and then the connotation of geographical indications is defined, and the ownership and protection requirements of geographical indications are analyzed. This part makes a comparative analysis of the concepts related to geographical indications, such as the indication of origin, the indication of goods origin, the name of origin, the geographical indication and so on, and points out that geographical indication is a special type of intellectual property rights and its law. The attributes are embodied in the following three aspects: firstly, geographical indications have the property of private rights; secondly, geographical indications are a new type of intellectual property rights; thirdly, geographical indications are a kind of collective rights. At the same time, specific quality, reputation or other characteristics are related to specific geographical regions.
In the second chapter of this paper, taking standard analysis as the breakthrough point, the author discusses the international protection standards of geographical indications, discusses the development of the protection of geographical indications from domestic law, bilateral treaties, regional agreements and multilateral treaties, and demonstrates the beginning of the international protection standards of geographical indications. Special legislation, anti-unfair competition law and the protection mode of trademark law have their respective focuses. Whether from the perspective of a country or from the perspective of international trade, in addition to improving and strengthening domestic legislation on geographical indications, they are in line with international legislation and are constantly in line with international legislation. It is an inevitable trend to strengthen international cooperation and negotiation so as to break through a country's domestic legislation, which is also an inevitable requirement for the establishment of an international protection system for geographical indications. As for the provisions of geographical indications, on the basis of TRIPS agreement, the protection is further strengthened and the standards are further improved, which fully reflects the development trend of the international protection standards of geographical indications.
In the third chapter, the dissertation analyzes the debate on the expansion of the international protection scope of geographical indications. Firstly, the dissertation summarizes the causes and manifestations of the dispute on the international protection of geographical indications. Secondly, the dissertation discusses the economic, political and cultural reasons for the dispute on the international protection scope of geographical indications. Thirdly, the dissertation focuses on the international protection of geographical indications. Finally, the paper makes a rational analysis of the adequacy of the general protection of geographical indications, the legitimacy and feasibility of the extended protection. The TRIPS Agreement establishes a minimum standard for the protection of geographical indications. However, compared with the general protection, whether the additional protection established by the TRIPS Agreement can be extended or not has always been the subject of different countries. Zhang. The two sides of the debate are mainly represented by the United States and the European Union in the developed world.
In the fourth chapter of this paper, the author considers the international protection standards of geographical indications by investigating the minimum standards of international protection of geographical indications, the expansion of protection and the coordination of the issues. The author discusses the specific application of the international protection standards of geographical indications, and analyzes the interests balance of the international protection standards of geographical indications. It is suggested that the protection of Article 23 of TRIPS should be applied to all geographical indications of products and that the exceptions in Article 24 of TRIPS should be amended as necessary. To abide by the principle, we should respect the established rules, and actively seek reasonable countermeasures to solve contradictions and disputes through legal channels when obstacles arise in the implementation; we should still follow the original system rules before reaching a new protection rule for geographical indications. Coordination must take into account the basic position of each member in the international trade of geographical indications and reach an agreement on the basis of different interests so as to form a protection standard which is generally accepted by each member.
In the fifth chapter of this paper, the author analyzes the choice of the protection of geographical indications in our country. By investigating the legislation and law enforcement of the protection of geographical indications in our country, the author elaborates and reflects on the present situation and defects of the protection of geographical indications in our country, and then discusses the problems of the protection of geographical indications in our country in line with the international standards. The countermeasures and suggestions for the protection of geographical indications in China are put forward in terms of protection standards and positioning. Although there are abundant resources of geographical indications, the protection of geographical indications in China is confused, the protection consciousness of geographical indications is insufficient, the protection of geographical indications in law is scattered and the level is not high, which leads to the fact that the protection of geographical indications in China can not meet the needs of international protection. The protection standard of geographical indications in China should conform to China's national conditions and take into account international protection standards. The dual-track legislative protection model of trademark law and special legislation should be considered more comprehensively and carefully. In law enforcement, we should coordinate all administrative departments, strengthen law enforcement, simplify law enforcement procedures, and pay attention to actual results. In the negotiation of geographical indications, we must adhere to the principle of sovereignty and actively participate in international cooperation and negotiations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D997.1

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 陳明惠;知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)國(guó)際強(qiáng)保護(hù)趨勢(shì)探究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

本文編號(hào)：2194179