商标持续性侵权责任承担问题

发布时间：2018-05-07 18:16

本文选题：商标持续性侵权 + 法律责任　；参考：《湘潭大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：劈波斩浪30多年,我国经济社会迅速发展,商标在企业中的作用与地位也日益重要。随之而来的商标侵权案件也不断增多。商标的核心是使用。商标通过实际不断的使用发挥着识别商品来源的功能,同时也累积着商家的商誉。这使得商标使用具有持续性,商标侵权也具有持续性。为了解决商标持续性侵权的法律责任分担问题,最高人民法院于2002年出台了《最高人民法院关于审理商标民事纠纷案件适用法律若干问题的解释》,(以下简称《解释》)。虽然在《解释》的第十八条里规定了商标持续性侵权法律责任的分配。但仍存在一些不合理与不完善之处。文章通过对司法实践中商标持续性侵权典型案例进行分析,发现《解释》在司法实践适用中产生了两个问题:一是商标权利人懈怠行使权利;二是商标权利人谋求不正当高额赔偿。针对以上出现的新问题,应根据不同案件的类型有条件地合理限制商标使用人的停止侵害责任,并且应该进行不完全侵权损害赔偿。因为从信赖利益原则和效率原则的角度看,商标使用人的继续使用商标能够有效维护市场经济的交易秩序和节约社会资源实现经济效益的最大化。从法的公平原则和财产权劳动理论角度看,不完全侵权损害赔偿,能公平分担责任,劳有所得,从而实现法的公平与正义。因此,商标使用人继续使用争议商标以及不完全侵权损害赔偿都具有一定的正当性。所以,在具体解决商标持续性侵权责任承担问题时,限制停止侵害责任应当充分考虑双方商誉的差异、社会公共利益及侵权人的主观善意等因素,针对不同的案件类型确定限制停止侵害责任的具体条件。不完全侵权损害赔偿的适用,则应当考虑故意侵权与过失侵权、善意侵权的差异来确定具体的区别适用条件。由于限制停止侵害责任是更多的保护了商标侵权人的利益,为达到利益平衡的状态,还需要合理地适用不停止侵权替代补偿。
[Abstract]:With the rapid development of economy and society in China, the role and status of trademark in enterprises is becoming more and more important. The following trademark infringement cases are also increasing. The core of a trademark is its use. Trademark through the actual continuous use of the function of identifying the source of goods, but also accumulated the goodwill of the business. This makes the trademark use has the continuity, the trademark infringement also has the continuity. In order to solve the problem of legal liability sharing in trademark infringement, in 2002, the Supreme people's Court issued the interpretation of several issues concerning the applicable Law of the Supreme people's Court on handling Trademark Civil dispute cases (hereinafter referred to as "interpretation"). Although Article 18 of the interpretation provides for the distribution of continuing liability for trademark infringement. However, there are still some unreasonable and imperfect places. Based on the analysis of typical cases of trademark persistent infringement in judicial practice, this paper finds that interpretation has produced two problems in the judicial practice: first, the trademark obligee slacked off to exercise his right; Second, trademark owners seek improper and high compensation. In view of the above new problems, we should restrict the liability of trademark users to stop infringement according to the types of different cases, and should compensate for incomplete infringement damages. From the perspective of the principle of trust benefit and the principle of efficiency, the continued use of trademark by trademark users can effectively maintain the order of market economy and save social resources to maximize economic benefits. From the angle of the principle of justice of law and the labor theory of property right, the incomplete tort damages can share the responsibility fairly and the labor has income, so as to realize the fairness and justice of law. Therefore, trademark users continue to use the disputed trademark and incomplete tort damages have a certain legitimacy. Therefore, when we specifically solve the problem of bearing the liability for continuing infringement of trademarks, we should take into account the differences of goodwill, the social public interest and the subjective goodwill of the infringers in order to limit the liability to stop infringement. According to different types of cases to determine the specific conditions for limitation of liability for infringement. The application of incomplete tort damages should consider the differences between intentional tort and negligence tort and bona fide tort to determine the specific conditions of application. As the limitation of stop infringement liability is more to protect the interests of trademark infringers, in order to achieve a balance of interests, it is also necessary to reasonably apply the compensation instead of non-stop infringement.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.43

【参考文献】