网络环境下地理标志侵权责任主体研究
|
摘要
地理标志指示了产品的来源地,表彰了产品的独特品质,是知识产权的重要类型之一。借助互联网发展地理标志产业,是发展县域经济的重要途径,互联网在推进地理标志产品交易的同时,也产生了假冒地理标志产品充斥网络市场的负面效应。因此,我们要追踪互联网环境下地理标志侵权的责任主体,寻找侵权责任承担的应然状态。就网络商品经营者而言,认定其侵权行为要考虑被控侵权人是否对地理标志进行了商标意义上的使用,以及是否造成了混淆产品来源地的效果,同时还要排除地理标志名称的合理使用。就网络交易平台提供商而言,认定其侵权行为要考虑其对他人的地理标志侵权行为是否尽了合理的注意义务,以及接到侵权投诉通知后的后续补救措施。就搜索引擎服务商而言,认定地理标志侵权时应保持更宽松态度,谨慎适用地理标志商业性使用和初始兴趣混淆标准,为搜索引擎服务商提供更大的发展空间。
The geographical indication is one of the important types of intellectual property, which indicates the origin of the product and recognizes the unique quality of the product. Using the Internet to develop geographical indication industry is an important way to develop regional economy. The Internet has created a negative effect of fake geographical indications flooding in the Internet market while promoting the trading of geographic marker products. Therefore, we should trace the liability subject of geographical indications infringement in the Internet environment, then find out the state which the tort liability ought to be. In the case of the network commodity operator, the infringement should be considered whether the infringer has made use of the trademark meaning of the geographical indications, As well as the effect of confusing the source of the product and the reasonable use of the geographical indication name. For Internet trading platform providers, determining its infringement behavior should consider the reasonable duty of attention to the other people's geographical indications infringement and the following remedial measures after notification of the infringement complaint. As far as search engine service providers are concerned, we should maintain a more relaxed attitude when determining the infringement of geographical indications. We should be cautious in applying commercial use and initial interest confusions standard, so as to provide it a more development space.
The geographical indication is one of the important types of intellectual property, which indicates the origin of the product and recognizes the unique quality of the product. Using the Internet to develop geographical indication industry is an important way to develop regional economy. The Internet has created a negative effect of fake geographical indications flooding in the Internet market while promoting the trading of geographic marker products. Therefore, we should trace the liability subject of geographical indications infringement in the Internet environment, then find out the state which the tort liability ought to be. In the case of the network commodity operator, the infringement should be considered whether the infringer has made use of the trademark meaning of the geographical indications, As well as the effect of confusing the source of the product and the reasonable use of the geographical indication name. For Internet trading platform providers, determining its infringement behavior should consider the reasonable duty of attention to the other people's geographical indications infringement and the following remedial measures after notification of the infringement complaint. As far as search engine service providers are concerned, we should maintain a more relaxed attitude when determining the infringement of geographical indications. We should be cautious in applying commercial use and initial interest confusions standard, so as to provide it a more development space.
引文
[1]祝宏辉,牟笛瑞.“互联网+农产品地理标志”模式发展状况及问题研究[J].价格月刊,2016(4):54-57.
[2]张成立.侵犯地理标志权的法律救济[J].齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(5):28-30.
[3]孔祥俊.商标法适用的基本问题[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2012:72.
[4]苏志甫.地理标志证明商标司法保护中的侵权判定标准[J].中华商标,2016(1):30-36.
[5]冯术杰.论地理标志的法律性质、功能与侵权认定[J].知识产权,2017(8):3-10.
[6]A.M.Honorè.International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law[J].Vol.4,Tort,Law,Chapter 7,Caustion and Remoteness of Damage,J.C.B.(Paul siebeck,Tübingen),1975,99:11-20.
[7]王利明.侵权责任法研究(上)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2016:381.
[8]亓蕾.商标行政案件中地理标志司法保护的新动向[J].法律适用,2017(17):9-15.
[9]史新章.商评委首次在商标争议案件中认定地理标志[J].中华商标,2009(1):19-20.
[10]威廉·M.兰德斯.知识产权法的经济结构[M].金海军,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2016:26.
[11]胡开忠.网络服务提供商在商标侵权中的责任[J].法学,2011(2):135-144.
[12]王利明.侵权责任法研究(上)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2016:346-349.
[13]邓宏光,周园.网络商标侵权的最新发展[J].重庆社会科学,2008(5):59-64.
[14]阳东辉.论互联网关键词广告的商标侵权认定规则[J].政治与法律,2016(9):118-125.
[15]周樨平.商业标识保护中“搭便车”理论的运用[ED/OL].(2017-07-28)[2018-12-01].知产力微信公众号www.zhichanli.com.
[16]张体锐.追踪网络商标侵权责任主体研究[J].东南学术.2014(3):144-149.
(1)参见南京市中级人民法院(2016)苏01民终10680号。
(2)参见南通市中级人民法院(2016)苏06民初133号。
(3)参见北京市知识产权法院(2015)京知民终字第1196号。
(4)参见北京市高级人民法院(2009)高行终字第1437号。
(5)参见北京市高级人民法院(2013)高行终字第1318号。
(6)参见徐州市中级人民法院(2012)徐知民初字第232号。
(7)See Doreen Carvajal,eBay Ordered to Pay MYM61 Million in Sale of Counterfeit Goods,N.Y.Times,July 1,2008,at 3。
(8)See Eric Auchard,eBay Dealt Blowon Fake Rolexes BY German Court,Reuters,July 27,2007。
(9)See Tiffany (NJ) Inc.v.eBay,Inc.,576 F.Supp.2d 463,472 (S.D.N.Y.2008)。
(10)参见浙江省杭州市中级人民法院(2005)杭民三初字第367号。
(11)参见上海市第一中级人民法院[2011]沪一中民五(知)终字第40号。
(12)See Brookfield Commc′ns,Inc.v.W.Coast Entm′t Corp.,174 F 3d 1036(9th Cir 1999 )。
(13) See Google Inc.v.Am.Blind & Wallpaper,No.03-5340 JF(RS),2007 WL 1159950,at6(N.D Cal Apr.18,2007).
(14)参见广州市中级人民法院民事判决书(2008)穗中法民三终字第119号。
(15)参见深圳市中级人民法院民事判决书(2011)深中法民知终字第651号。
[2]张成立.侵犯地理标志权的法律救济[J].齐齐哈尔大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2005(5):28-30.
[3]孔祥俊.商标法适用的基本问题[M].北京:中国法制出版社,2012:72.
[4]苏志甫.地理标志证明商标司法保护中的侵权判定标准[J].中华商标,2016(1):30-36.
[5]冯术杰.论地理标志的法律性质、功能与侵权认定[J].知识产权,2017(8):3-10.
[6]A.M.Honorè.International Encyclopedia of Comparative Law[J].Vol.4,Tort,Law,Chapter 7,Caustion and Remoteness of Damage,J.C.B.(Paul siebeck,Tübingen),1975,99:11-20.
[7]王利明.侵权责任法研究(上)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2016:381.
[8]亓蕾.商标行政案件中地理标志司法保护的新动向[J].法律适用,2017(17):9-15.
[9]史新章.商评委首次在商标争议案件中认定地理标志[J].中华商标,2009(1):19-20.
[10]威廉·M.兰德斯.知识产权法的经济结构[M].金海军,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2016:26.
[11]胡开忠.网络服务提供商在商标侵权中的责任[J].法学,2011(2):135-144.
[12]王利明.侵权责任法研究(上)[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2016:346-349.
[13]邓宏光,周园.网络商标侵权的最新发展[J].重庆社会科学,2008(5):59-64.
[14]阳东辉.论互联网关键词广告的商标侵权认定规则[J].政治与法律,2016(9):118-125.
[15]周樨平.商业标识保护中“搭便车”理论的运用[ED/OL].(2017-07-28)[2018-12-01].知产力微信公众号www.zhichanli.com.
[16]张体锐.追踪网络商标侵权责任主体研究[J].东南学术.2014(3):144-149.
(1)参见南京市中级人民法院(2016)苏01民终10680号。
(2)参见南通市中级人民法院(2016)苏06民初133号。
(3)参见北京市知识产权法院(2015)京知民终字第1196号。
(4)参见北京市高级人民法院(2009)高行终字第1437号。
(5)参见北京市高级人民法院(2013)高行终字第1318号。
(6)参见徐州市中级人民法院(2012)徐知民初字第232号。
(7)See Doreen Carvajal,eBay Ordered to Pay MYM61 Million in Sale of Counterfeit Goods,N.Y.Times,July 1,2008,at 3。
(8)See Eric Auchard,eBay Dealt Blowon Fake Rolexes BY German Court,Reuters,July 27,2007。
(9)See Tiffany (NJ) Inc.v.eBay,Inc.,576 F.Supp.2d 463,472 (S.D.N.Y.2008)。
(10)参见浙江省杭州市中级人民法院(2005)杭民三初字第367号。
(11)参见上海市第一中级人民法院[2011]沪一中民五(知)终字第40号。
(12)See Brookfield Commc′ns,Inc.v.W.Coast Entm′t Corp.,174 F 3d 1036(9th Cir 1999 )。
(13) See Google Inc.v.Am.Blind & Wallpaper,No.03-5340 JF(RS),2007 WL 1159950,at6(N.D Cal Apr.18,2007).
(14)参见广州市中级人民法院民事判决书(2008)穗中法民三终字第119号。
(15)参见深圳市中级人民法院民事判决书(2011)深中法民知终字第651号。