法学研究

文章摘要

集体商标和证明商标保护体系的重构

Reconstruction of the Protection System for Collective Trademarks and Certification Trademarks

DOI：

英文关键词: collective trademark; certification trademark; distinctiveness; source confusion

基金项目:

作者	单位
王迁	华东政法大学

摘要点击次数: 25

全文下载次数: 0

中文摘要:

集体商标、证明商标不具有区分商品或服务经营者的功能,只分别具有表明经营者在某一组织中的成员身份和证明商品或服务具有特定特征的功能。商标法没有在体系上区分对普通商标的保护与对集体商标、证明商标的保护,所有商标在注册时均要求显著性的做法导致了逻辑错位。为此提供正当性解释的“显著性含义扩大说”“获得显著性说”“标识本身显著性说”均不能成立。对集体商标、证明商标的司法保护也与其注册标准相脱节,造成了对显著性要求的虚置或对注册效力的虚置。应建立保护集体商标、证明商标的特殊体系,其核心是将其注册条件与显著性脱钩,并以破坏这两种商标的独特功能为其侵权认定标准,从而与来源混淆脱钩。

英文摘要:

Collective trademarks or certification trademarks do not have the function of distinguishing providers of goods or services, but only indicate the identity of the provider as a member of a particular organization or certify the specific feature of the goods or services, respectively. The Trademark Law does not systematically differentiate the protection of ordinary trademarks from the protection of collective trademarks and certification trademarks. The requirement for distinctiveness for all trademarks for registration has led to a logical misalignment. The justifications for this requirement provided by the theories of “expanded meaning of distinctiveness”, “acquired distinctiveness”, and “inherent distinctiveness of the mark itself”, are all untenable. Judicial protection for collective and certification trademarks is also disconnected from registration standards, causing the requirement for distinctiveness to be ignored or the effect of registration to be undermined. It is necessary to establish a special system for the protection of collective trademarks and certification trademarks. The core of this system is to decouple the registration conditions from distinctiveness, so that infringement is determined based on the standard of damaging the unique functions of these two types of trademarks, thus disconnecting infringement standard from source confusion.

查看全文下载PDF阅读器

关闭