【作者】 袁真富；

【导师】 陶鑫良；

【作者基本信息】 上海大学 ， 社会学， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 作为一个商标法上的专业术语,驰名商标意味着可以享有更宽的保护范围、更强的法律效力,甚至更多的行政保护。法律赋予驰名商标更高保护水平的本意,是为了克服普通商标保护不足的局限,从而更好地解决商标注册、商标侵权以及相关不正当竞争等法律争议。国家工商行政管理总局和人民法院认定驰名商标,只是解决法律争议的前提和手段,并不是解决法律争议的目的,更不是授予企业以荣誉称号。然而,中国当下的情形却是,一些企业在观念认识上把驰名商标作为荣誉称号,在宣传使用上把驰名商标作为营销工具,在认定策略上故意寻找甚至制造争议来获得驰名商标。诸如此类的情形,我们称之为驰名商标异化,即在驰名商标认定的目标、路径和结果上,采取各种行动和策略来背离或偏离驰名商标立法目的或权利本质的现象。违背法律本意的驰名商标异化,在中国已经演变为一种普遍的社会现象,引起了国家工商总局和最高人民法院的关注,并促使其不断采取措施进行遏制和规范。目前绝大多数研究的视角侧重于从法律层面关注驰名商标的异化问题,探讨驰名商标立法制度上的缺陷、法律执行上的漏洞,并给出制度改革上的解决方案和法律执行上的改进措施。但是,法学研究并不能很好的解释,作为一种已经制度化了的行为,驰名商标异化活动是如何形成和扩散的,支持驰名商标异化及其扩散的逻辑机制是什么。有鉴于此,本文主要以新制度主义理论为分析工具,实证分析驰名商标的异化及其扩散现象,系统考察和梳理驰名商标异化的深层原因和发生机制,从社会学的角度进行合理的解释。从新制度主义的角度来看,地方政府、消费者、其他企业、中介机构、新闻媒体以及驰名商标认定机构等组织,及其建构、实践的制度、观念或做法,共同构造了驰名商标异化行为的制度环境,并从不同角度激励或促进越来越多的企业从事驰名商标的异化行为。一些企业不仅接受了与制度环境一致的驰名商标符号意义理解,而且采取行动和策略从事驰名商标异化活动,以迎合和满足制度环境的要求或期望。作为制度环境的产物,驰名商标的异化表现为三种类型:围绕认定目标的驰名商标异化、围绕路径选择的驰名商标异化和围绕结果利用的驰名商标异化。制度环境主要通过四种机制来影响驰名商标异化及其制度化扩散:(1)诱致性机制,即制度环境通过自身提供强烈诱惑或激励,可以引发企业的驰名商标异化行为。诱致性机制主要来自政府部门的影响,可以解释所有类型的驰名商标异化;(2)模仿性机制,即追求、获取和利用驰名商标的企业的数量、特征或效益,可以对其他企业的驰名商标异化行为的产生影响。模仿性机制主要来自其他企业的影响,也可以解释所有类型的驰名商标异化行为;(3)迎合性机制,即制度环境存在某种认知或期待,可以促使企业从事驰名商标异化行为,以迎合社会认知或社会期待。迎合性机制主要来自消费者和媒体的影响,主要解释围绕认定目标与结果利用的驰名商标异化;(4)规范性机制,即制度环境中的中介机构或专业人员,会运用其专业经验和技巧诱使、推动或协助企业从事驰名商标异化行为。规范性机制主要来自中介机构的影响,主要解释围绕路径选择的驰名商标异化。制度环境的前述影响机制之所以能够发挥作用,是因为这些企业遵从制度环境的要求、期待或认知,从事驰名商标异化行为能够获得他们需要的资源,包括现金奖励和政策支持等政府资源、消费信任和品牌声誉等社会资源、品牌地位与广告资源等竞争资源,以及融资工具等杠杆资源。如果制度环境不能给予其所需要的资源,那么企业从事驰名商标异化活动的意愿就会降低甚至消失。由此可见,在驰名商标异化的扩散过程中,一方面,制度环境的要求和期待激励、促进了企业从事驰名商标异化;另一方面,企业出于争取资源的需要,而愿意甚至主动接受制度环境的影响。因此,单纯规范驰名商标的认定行为,根本无法消除驰名商标异化的行为,惟有消灭或降低制度环境对企业追求驰名商标的影响,尤其是切断制度环境的资源提供,才有可能成功。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a jargon used in the Trademark Law, Well-known Trademark enjoys a wider scope of protection, stronger legal effect and even more administrative protection. The law protects the Well-known Trademark in a higher level, which intends to make up for the limitations of the insufficient normal trademarks protection and thus better address the legal disputes such as trademark registration, infringement and others related to unfair competition. The establishment of the Well-known Trademark by State Administration of Industry and Commerce as well as the People’s Court is the premise and means to resolve the legal disputes rather than the purpose, not to mention it is a title of honor given to the enterprise.However, the contemporary situation in China is that some enterprises consider the Well-known Trademark as the title of honor. They use it as a marketing tool in promotion and in terms of establishment strategy; they deliberately look for or even create disputes to get the Well-known Trademark. We call such circumstances“Well-known Trademark Alienation”, which means the phenomenon of various actions and strategies taken to depart or deviate from the legislative intent and the essence of the rights emerges on the purpose, path and results of Well-known Trademark establishment. Violating the legislative intent, Well-known Trademark Alienation has turned into a widespread social phenomenon. It has also caused great concerns from State Administration of Industry and Commerce as well as the Supreme People’s Court and they have been urged to take measures continuously to make containments and regulations.Currently, the majority of the studies focus on Well-known Trademark Alienation from the perspective of law. They probe into the flaws of the legislative system, the loopholes of the law enforcement and provide solution for the institutional reform as well as improvement measures for law enforcement. However, the legal research cannot well explain that as an institutionalized action, how the alienation of Well-known Trademark forms and spreads and what is the logic mechanism supporting its alienation and proliferation. In view of this, this essay mainly use New Institutionalism as its analysis tool to demonstrate and analyze the alienation and proliferation of Well-known Trademark as well as systematically observe and arrange the deep reasons behind the alienation along with its generating mechanism. It offers reasonable explanations from the perspective of sociology.From the view of the New Institutionalism, local governments, consumers, other enterprises, intermediary agencies, news media, organizations of Well-known Trademark establishment as well as its institution, concept or practices create together an institutional environment for the alienation of Well-known Trademark. They also stimulate or promote more and more enterprises to engage in the alienation from different perspectives. Some enterprises have not only accepted the understanding of the Well-known Trademark’s meaning in line with its institutional environment, but also have taken actions and strategies to engage in the alienation in order to cater for and satisfy the requirements and anticipations of the institutional environment. As the product of the institutional environment, Well-known Trademark Alienation manifests as three various types: alienation centering on established objective; alienation centering on established path and alienation on results utilizing.The institutional environment influences the Well-known Trademark Alienation and its institutionalized proliferation primarily through four mechanisms:(1)Inducement mechanism. It means that the institutional environment provides strong temptations and incentives itself, thus leading to the alienation of the Well-known Trademark in enterprises. Inducement mechanism comes mainly from the influence of the government departments and it can explain all types of alienation.(2)Mimetic mechanism. It means that the amount, features and benefits of enterprises which pursue, gain and utilize Well-known Trademarks will have an impact on the alienation of other enterprises. Mimetic mechanism primarily comes from the influence of other enterprises and can also explain all types of alienaiton.(3)Ingratiatory mechanism. There exists some recognition or anticipation in the institutional environment which can encourage enterprises to engage in Well-known Trademark Alienation in order to cater to social recognition and anticipation. Ingratiatory mechanism comes mainly from the influences of consumers and media. It prevailingly explain the alienation centering on established objective and result utilizing.(4)Normative mechanism. Intermediary agencies and professionals in the institutional environment will induce, prompt and assist the enterprises to engage in alienation through their professional experience and skills. Normative mechanism mostly comes from the influences of the intermediary agencies and mainly explains the alienation centering on path choosing.Why the above influential mechanisms of the institutional environment are able to play a role is because these enterprises complying with the requirements, anticipation and recognition of the institutional environment can have access to the resources they need through Well-known Trademark Alienation, including government resources such as money rewards and policy supports, social resources such as consumer’s trusts and brand reputation, competitive resources such as brand status and advertisement resources, and leverage resources such as financing instruments. If institutional environment fails to provide the resources they need, the will of enterprises to participate in Well-known Trademark alienation activities will be reduced or even disappear.So it can be seen from that in the process of the proliferation of Well-known Trademark Alienation, on one hand, the requirements and anticipations of the institutional environment stimulate and promote enterprises from engaging in alienation; on the other hand, the enterprises are willing to or even take initiative to accept the influence of the institutional environment for their need to seek resources. Therefore, regulating the establishment of Well-known Trademark simply from the perspective of the legal practice can not eliminate Well-known Trademark Alienation. Only eliminating or reducing the influence from the institutional environment on enterprises in pursuit of Well-known Trademark, especially cutting off the resources offered by institutional environment can make a success of it.更多还原