论商标法上的美学功能性

发布时间：2018-09-13 16:06

【摘要】：功能性制度是商标法上已经得到世界普遍采纳的一项重要制度,在防止商标权人垄断具有实际功能的商业标识,维护公平竞争秩序上具有十分重要的作用。但是,传统的关注点往往主要集中在实用功能性,对美学功能性的涉及较少。本文的核心是研究商标法上的美学功能性制度。首先,本文梳理了美学功能性的概念和内涵,明确美学功能性和实用功能性同属于法律功能性,商标法规制的只是法律功能性,而非囊括了法律功能性的所有事实功能性。其次,介绍美学功能性理论的发展历程。功能性肇始于美国,是与“商业外观”相伴随的一个概念,而且实用功能性产生在前,美学功能性产生相对较晚,美国法院通过判例相继确立了“过期专利排除”、“实用标准”、“竞争标准”等判断标准来界定实用功能性和美学功能性,但是采用相互独立的判断标准;我国现行商标法第十二条确立了实用功能性,但是对于美学功能性没有做出明确规定。再次,论述美学功能性的理论价值和实践价值,以及分析美学功能性制度对商标注册和商标保护的影响。在理论价值方面,一方面,美学功能性制度可以捍卫商标的公共领域,防止垄断,并促进公平竞争;另一方面,促进功能性理论的分类细化研究,将美学功能性与实用功能性并列,增进对功能性的认知。在实践价值方面,美学功能性不但可以完善商标注册的限定条件,保护竞争者的美学利益;而且有助于厘清商标与外观设计专利的关系。在商标注册方面,功能性区别于显著性,比后者具有更强的抵御性,应当优先审查一个标志是否具有功能性,若不具有功能性再审查其显著性;此外,实用功能性的审查标准较为客观,而美学功能性的审查相比更主观,更不易操作,需要考虑对竞争的潜在影响。在商标保护方面,同实用功能性一样,美学功能性不适用商标不可争议性原则;商标续展时可以重新审查是否具有美学功能性;建立美学功能性制度在一定程度上可以减少不必要的侵权行为;此外,在举证上,一般遵循“谁主张、谁举证”,对于过期专利由原告负担举证该过期专利不具有美学功能性。最后,以我国商标法为背景,对构建美学功能性制度提出自己的一些建议。第一,在《商标法》、《反不正当竞争法》中明确美学功能性制度及其适用情形和判断标准。目前,只有在涉及立体商标时才存在美学功能性问题,而在判断标准上可以借鉴美国的“竞争标准”,即(1)是否是竞争所必须,有无替代性设计,以及(2)是否会导致其他竞争者出于与其商誉无关的显著劣势地位。第二,协调美学功能性制度与显著性以及举证制度。第三,在司法过程中积累对美学功能性的具体判断方法。
[Abstract]:The functional system is an important system which has been widely adopted in the trademark law. It plays an important role in preventing the trademark owners from monopolizing the commercial signs with actual functions and maintaining the fair competition order. However, the traditional focus is mainly on practical function, but less on aesthetic function. The core of this paper is to study the aesthetic functional system in trademark law. First of all, this paper combs the concept and connotation of aesthetic function, and clarifies that aesthetic function and practical function both belong to legal function, and trademark law only regulates the legal function, not including all the fact function of legal function. Secondly, it introduces the development of aesthetic functional theory. Function originated in the United States, and it is a concept accompanying with "commercial appearance". Moreover, the practical function comes into being before and the aesthetic function is relatively late. The American courts have established the "patent exclusions of expired patent" in succession through the case law. "practical standard", "competition standard" and other judgment criteria are used to define practical function and aesthetic function, but independent judgment standard is adopted; Article 12 of current Trademark Law of our country establishes practical function, But there is no clear stipulation about aesthetic function. Thirdly, it discusses the theoretical and practical value of aesthetic function, and analyzes the influence of aesthetic functional system on trademark registration and trademark protection. In terms of theoretical value, on the one hand, the aesthetic functional system can defend the public domain of trademark, prevent monopoly and promote fair competition; on the other hand, it can promote the research of classification and refinement of functional theory. The aesthetic function and the practical function are juxtaposed to enhance the cognition of the function. In terms of practical value, aesthetic function can not only perfect the limited conditions of trademark registration and protect the aesthetic interests of competitors, but also help to clarify the relationship between trademark and design patent. In the area of trademark registration, the functionality is different from that of significance and is more resistant than the latter. Priority should be given to examining whether a logo is functional and, if not functional, reviewing its significance; The examination standard of practical function is more objective, but the examination of aesthetic function is more subjective and difficult to operate, so the potential influence on competition needs to be considered. In the aspect of trademark protection, aesthetic function, like practical function, does not apply to the principle of indisputability of trademark, and whether it has aesthetic function or not can be re-examined when the trademark is renewed. To a certain extent, the establishment of aesthetic functional system can reduce the unnecessary infringement; in addition, in the case of proof, generally follow the "who claims, who to prove", for the expired patent by the plaintiff to prove that the expired patent does not have aesthetic functionality. Finally, taking the trademark law of our country as the background, some suggestions are put forward to construct the aesthetic functional system. Firstly, in the Trademark Law and the Anti-unfair Competition Law, it is clear that the aesthetic functional system, its application and judgment standard. At present, there is a functional aesthetic problem only when it comes to three-dimensional trademarks. In judging standards, we can learn from the "competition standards" of the United States, that is, (1) whether it is necessary for competition and whether there is alternative design. And (2) whether or not other competitors are at a significant disadvantage not related to their goodwill. Second, the coordination of aesthetic functional system and salience as well as the system of proof. Third, in the judicial process accumulates to the esthetics function concrete judgment method.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D913

【相似文献】