论商标权与商号权的冲突与解决

【作者】 宋琴；

【导师】 来小鹏；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 民商法学， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 商标和商号同为企业的商业标识,具有识别作用,由于它们在功能及构成要素上具有相似性,因此很容易被消费者混淆误认。当商标与商号中文字相同或相似,形式合法且归属于不同主体时,就常常导致利益上的冲突。商标权与商号权冲突的案件,近年来在我国呈增长趋势,不仅损害了权利人的利益,也侵害了消费者的合法权益,同时还破坏了公平有序的市场竞争秩序。所以,无论立法上,还是司法实践中,如何解决商标与商号的权利冲突都是当务之急。找出商标权与商号权冲突的原因,寻求商标权与商号权冲突的解决途径,已经成为理论界和实务界面临的热点和难点。本文试图通过研究商标权与商号权冲突基本理论问题及比较中外关于商标权与商号权冲突立法异同,找出我国立法中的缺陷和司法实践中存在的问题,从而提出解决商标权与商号权冲突的思考和建议,寻找化解和协调商标权与商号权冲突的最佳途径。本文主要分为四个部分对商号权与商标权的冲突与解决进行探讨。第一部分为商标权与商号权的概述,这一部分是本文进行研究的基础和前提。首先对商标与商标权的概念、商号与商号权的概念进行界定,然后主要从功能、权利的取得方式及权利效力范围等方面入手,对商标与商号的异同进行分析。本章明确了商号权的法律性质为知识产权性质。商标权与商号权同属知识产权,二者既存在区别又存在联系,因而二者发生权利冲突成为可能,也成为必然。第二部分是对商标权与商号权冲突相关理论问题的研析。通过对权利冲突、知识产权权利冲突概念和特征的分析,概括出商标权与商号权冲突的定义,明确商标与商号的权利冲突与知识产权侵权行为不同。然后对商标权与商号权冲突的表现形式进行概括,并根据一定标准对商标权与商号权冲突作出分类。不同类型的商标权与商号权冲突,在司法实践中应当适用不同的解决方式。最后从不同的角度对冲突产生的原因进行分析,如权利的性质、功能的相似性、经济利益的驱动、制度的漏洞等等。通过对原因的分析得出商标权与商号权冲突产生的必然性。我国现行立法的漏洞只是众多原因之一,我们不能完全寄希望于通过立法上对权利的初始配置而化解所有的权利冲突,司法途径才是解决商标权与商号权冲突最重要的途径。第三部分是对中外商标权与商号权冲突立法的比较研究。首先,对国际公约及国外解决商标权与商号权冲突立法模式的异同、商标权与商号权的法律地位、冲突解决机制的侧重点进行分析,从而为我国立法的完善寻求可以借鉴的经验。然后,对我国现行立法的相关规定进行探讨,找出我国商标权与商号权冲突立法所存在的缺陷,最终揭示出我国目前解决商标权与商号权冲突面临的主要问题。第四部分是关于对我国商标权与商号权冲突解决的思考和建议。主要从立法完善和司法衡平两个角度提出相关建议。立法上,应将商号权纳入知识产权法律制度保护范围,将商号权有条件的划入商标法中在先权利的范畴,实现商标权与商号权的统一协调保护,并且要注重对驰名商号的特殊保护,这是商标权与商号权冲突解决的基础和前提。司法上,应当用衡平的方式灵活化解商标与商号的权利冲突。笔者对司法实践中应当如何适用保护在先权原则、利益平衡和效益兼顾原则及禁止混淆原则进行分析,主要分析了各个原则适用的条件及适用中应注意的问题。法官在司法审判中可以区分不同的冲突类型,适用不同的解决方式。司法处理方式应当灵活,可以引入新的纠纷解决机制,如区别标示机制、市场补偿机制、强制许可机制等。立法的完善不能完全消除权利冲突,只能在一定程度上预防和缓解,立法上也无法给出具体解决权利冲突的全部法律规则,只能体现出处理权利冲突问题的原则,故法官依据不同原则自由裁量,个案分析才是解决商标权与商号权冲突最重要的途径。更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent years, the cases concerning conflict between trademark and trade name right have been increased day by day. Not only the interests of rights holders have been caused damage, but also the interests of consumers have been compromised, and the fair and orderly market competition order has been disrupted. So, whether legislative, or judicial practice, how to resolve the conflicts are imperative. Looking for a solution to the conflict between trademark and trade name right has become the hot and difficult problems in the theoretical circle and practitioners to discuss. This paper attempts to study the basic theory of conflict ,compare China’s legislation to foreign country’s legislation concerning conflict between trademark and trade name right,identify deficiencies in our legislation and judicial practice, propose thinking and recommendations about solving the conflict between trademark and trade name right and find the best way to resolve and coordinate the conflicts .This paper is divided into four parts.The first part is an overview of trademark and trade name right, mainly on the concept of trademark and trademark right ,trade name and trade name right, and analysis of the similarities and differences between trademark and trade name referring to the functions, the way to obtain the right and the scope of the effectiveness. This chapter defines the legal nature of trade name right. Trademarks and trade names belong to intellectual property rights. There are differences and common points between them. So the conflicts between them are possible and inevitable.The second part researches the theoretical issues of the conflict between trademark and trade name right. By analyzing the conception and characteristics of conflict of rights, intellectual property rights, we can see the conflict between trademark and trade name right are different from violations of intellectual property rights. Then it sums up the forms and classifications of the conflict between trademark and trade name right. Finally from different points of view it analyzes the causes of conflict, such as the nature of the right, the similarity of the right, economic interests and the loopholes in the system, and so on. Through analysis of the reasons, we can see the conflicts between trademark and trade name right generated inevitability.The third part is the comparative study of legislation between China and foreign country. Through analyzing the similarities and differences of other country’s legislation model in international conventions and foreign law, we can learn from experiences to improve our legislation. Then it analyzes relevant provisions of China’s current legislation and finds out shortcomings in legislation.The fourth part is the thinking and recommendations of the resolution of the conflict between trademark and trade name right. Mainly from two points of view: the legislative improved and judicial equity. In legislation we should incorporate the trade name within the legal system of protecting intellectual property rights. In the administration of justice, equitable way is the final settlement of the conflict. Improving legislation can not completely eliminate the conflict of the rights, only coordination, prevention and mitigation. Therefore the ultimate resolution to conflict of the rights is the discretion of the judge based on different principles. Case studies are the most important way.更多还原