本文關(guān)鍵詞： 馳名商標(biāo) 淡化 混淆 知名　出處：《上海交通大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：淡化理論與混淆理論一樣存在局限性,在保護(hù)商標(biāo)權(quán)利人的同時(shí)忽略了消費(fèi)者的利益。歐美發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家已經(jīng)認(rèn)識(shí)到了這一點(diǎn),通過(guò)縮小并明確商標(biāo)淡化的范圍,達(dá)到限制商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)不斷擴(kuò)張的目的。此外,淡化理論在我國(guó)的發(fā)展問(wèn)題重重,爭(zhēng)議不斷。本文結(jié)合商標(biāo)淡化理論在歐美發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的發(fā)展,來(lái)剖析淡化理論的全貌,對(duì)淡化理論在我國(guó)的發(fā)展進(jìn)行思考。本文第一章重點(diǎn)討論了淡化理論存在的爭(zhēng)議。商標(biāo)的反淡化保護(hù)確實(shí)有其局限性,但是它們并不是不能克服的,真正的問(wèn)題是如何確定商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)的適用范圍,對(duì)其保護(hù)范圍進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格地限制,力求在商標(biāo)權(quán)人的利益與社會(huì)公共利益之間取得平衡。除了其自身具有局限性以外,淡化理論在我國(guó)的發(fā)展也飽受爭(zhēng)議,究其原因還是因?yàn)槲覈?guó)對(duì)淡化理論缺乏深入研究,未能從根本上理清混淆理論和淡化理論的關(guān)系。本文第二章介紹了商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)在歐美的發(fā)展。兩個(gè)地區(qū)淡化理論不同的發(fā)展路徑給我們提供了兩個(gè)不同的視角。在美國(guó),2006年的《商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)修正案》直接將馳名商標(biāo)的知名度要求提高到全美一般公眾所熟知;而歐洲法院雖然沒(méi)有提高對(duì)馳名商標(biāo)知名度的要求,但是歐洲法院區(qū)分了在單一行業(yè)馳名的商標(biāo)和在多個(gè)行業(yè)馳名的商標(biāo),提高了單一行業(yè)馳名商標(biāo)淡化之訴的舉證責(zé)任,商標(biāo)權(quán)利人需要證明在后商標(biāo)的使用將導(dǎo)致消費(fèi)者經(jīng)濟(jì)行為的改變,或者將來(lái)會(huì)發(fā)生這種改變很大的可能性。本文第三章從商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)的現(xiàn)狀出發(fā),分析我國(guó)商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)陷入困境的原因,重點(diǎn)探討了我國(guó)商標(biāo)反淡化制度的完善。理清混淆理論和淡化理論的關(guān)系是我國(guó)構(gòu)建合理商標(biāo)反淡化保護(hù)制度的前提條件。
[Abstract]:Desalination theory and confusion theory have limitations, in the protection of trademark rights at the same time ignore the interests of consumers. Developed countries in Europe and the United States have recognized this point, by narrowing and clear the scope of trademark desalination. In addition, the development of desalination theory in China is full of problems and disputes. This paper combines trademark desalination theory development in developed countries in Europe and America. The first chapter mainly discusses the disputes existing in the theory of desalination. The protection of trademark anti-desalination does have its limitations. But they are not insurmountable, the real problem is how to determine the scope of application of trademark anti-desalination protection, and strictly limit the scope of protection. Strive to achieve a balance between the interests of trademark owners and social public interests. In addition to its own limitations, the development of desalination theory in China is also controversial. The reason is the lack of in-depth research on the theory of desalination in China. The second chapter introduces the development of trademark anti-desalination protection in Europe and the United States. The different development paths of the two regions' desalination theory provide us with two different views. Horn. In America. In 2006, the "Anti-Desalination Protection Amendment" directly raised the well-known trademark awareness requirements to the general public in the United States familiar; Although the European Court of Justice has not raised the requirements of well-known trademark awareness, but the European Court of Justice distinguishes between well-known trademarks in a single industry and well-known trademarks in many industries. It improves the burden of proof in the case of well-known trademark dilution in a single industry, and the owner of trademark needs to prove that the use of the trademark after the trade mark will lead to the change of consumer economic behavior. The third chapter starts from the current situation of trademark anti-desalination protection and analyzes the reasons why the protection of trademark anti-desalination falls into difficulties. This paper mainly discusses the perfection of trademark anti-desalination system in our country, and clarifies the relationship between confusion theory and desalination theory, which is the precondition of constructing a reasonable trademark anti-desalination protection system in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D923.43

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 陳文煊;;反淡化理論司法適用的新發(fā)展——評(píng)“伊利”商標(biāo)異議復(fù)審行政糾紛案[J];知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2010年06期

2 鄧宏光;;我國(guó)馳名商標(biāo)反淡化制度應(yīng)當(dāng)緩行[J];法學(xué);2010年02期

3 北京市第一中級(jí)人民法院知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)庭課題組;;馳名商標(biāo)司法保護(hù)中存在的問(wèn)題及解決對(duì)策[J];中華商標(biāo);2007年11期

4 杜穎;;商標(biāo)淡化理論及其應(yīng)用[J];法學(xué)研究;2007年06期

5 鄧宏光;;美國(guó)聯(lián)邦商標(biāo)反淡化法的制定與修正[J];電子知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年02期

6 彭學(xué)龍;;商標(biāo)淡化的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)——美國(guó)“維多利亞的秘密”訴莫斯里案評(píng)述[J];法學(xué);2007年02期

7 彭學(xué)龍;;商標(biāo)法基本范疇的符號(hào)學(xué)分析[J];法學(xué)研究;2007年01期

8 雷光程;;混淆保護(hù)還是淡化保護(hù)?[J];中華商標(biāo);2006年06期

9 房芳;馳名商標(biāo)淡化及其對(duì)策[J];法學(xué);1996年09期

，

本文編號(hào)：1442948