摘要  

我国于 2013 年进行《商标法》的第三次修改,新《商标法》一大特色在于第 57 条中 引入了混淆可能性理论,这被视为是我国商标法立法领域的一大进步。混淆可能性理论源 于经济社会不断发展中的商标侵权纠纷,完善于立法实践与司法判例之中。其中,美国在 该领域取得的成就尤为丰富。混淆可能性的概念经历了漫长的发展过程,在混淆的时间、 内容或类型以及混淆的主体上都有了扩大。美国以《兰哈姆法》确立了其混淆可能性作为 商标侵权的认定标准,而在《反不正当竞争法重述》以及行政机构的《商标审查指南》中 则更为详细的规定了认定混淆可能性“多因素检测标准”。我国虽然在立法上确立了混淆 可能性作为商标侵权判定标准之一,但是并未确立统一且行之有效的混淆可能性的检测标 准。文章试图在类比的基础之上,探究混淆可能性的发展历程,理清混淆可能性在商标侵 权认定中的作用,同时寻找我国混淆可能性的研究不足之处,并简单 出完善建议。

  文章采用比较法以及案例分析的方式来研究混淆可能性及其与商标侵权判定的关系。 文章在结构上分为四部分。

  第一部分引言,由我国《商标法》的修改引出混淆可能性理论的研究意义以及研究方 法;第二部分从混淆可能性的概念出发,理清混淆可能性的起源以及发展扩张的过程,通 过欧盟以及美国的立法例来说明混淆可能性理论的确立;第三部分探寻混淆可能性与商标 侵权的关系,通过混淆可能性在商标侵权判定中的作用以及混淆可能性的具体适用来论证 混淆可能性在商标侵权中的基准性地位;第四部分总结我国混淆可能性的立法与司法实践, 发现其中存在的不足, 出完善意见。

关键词：商标法; 商标侵权判定; 混淆可能性; 多因素监测标准

Abstract

In 2013, the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress amended and passed the third version of “The Trademark Law”. One of the most distinctive features is that the “Likelihood of Confusion Theories” was introduced in Article 57, which has been regarded as a great step forward in Trademark law legislation. Likelihood of Confusion theories derived from the trademark infringement along with the continuous development of social economy, and improved through legislative and judicial practices. The United States has made great achievements in the Likelihood of Confusion theories. The current concept of Likelihood of Confusion went through a long historical process; with regard to the duration, contents or types, and the subjects of Likelihood of Confusion, the scope of concepts has extended. The United States, in Lanham Act, established that the Likelihood of Confusion is the standard of trademark infringement. The Restatement (Third) of Unfair Competition and the administrative Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure have explained in detail the standard of trademark infringement, as well as the factors relevant to a determination of Likelihood of Confusion. Even though the Chinese legislature has regarded the Likelihood of Confusion as one of the trademark infringement standards, it hasn’t yet provided the uniform and effective Factors in terms of determining and articulating the Likelihood of Confusion. Based on comparison, the paper mainly explores the history of Likelihood of Confusion, finds out the function of Likelihood of Confusion in determining trademark infringement, and searches the deficiencies of Likelihood of Confusion studies so as to bring forward suggestions of improvement. 

The paper applies the comparative law and case study to discuss the relationship between Likelihood of Confusion and trademark infringement. It is divided into four parts: 

Part One is the Introduction, in which explains the significance and methods of research. Part Two, based on the concepts of Likelihood of Confusion, the paper explores the origin and development or expansion of Likelihood of Confusion, and demonstrate the establishment of this theory according to the legislation of European Union and the United States. Part Three of the paper primarily illustrates the relationship between likelihood of confusion and trademark infringement, by the function of likelihood of confusion and the application of likelihood of confusion in trademark infringement. Part Four summarizes Chinese legislative and judicial practices of likelihood of confusion, identifies the shortcomings and gives advice of perfection in this field. 

Key words: Trademark Law; Trademark Infringement; Likelihood of Confusion; Multi-factor Test of Likelihood of Confusion 

[1] 杜颖.商标法(第二版)[M]. 北京:北京大学出版社,2014:24,34,53,93, 127,130.

[2] 张体锐. 商标法上混淆可能性研究[M]. 北京:知识产权出版社,2014:24,62.

[3] 姚鹤徽. 商标混淆可能性研究[M]. 北京:知识产权出版社,2015:84,293,314,

324.

[4] 美国商标法[M].杜颖译. 北京:知识产权出版社,2013:6-7.

[5] 美国商标审查指南[M].美国专利商标局译,中国工商总局商标局校. 北京:商务

印书馆,2008:序言 2,262-263.

[6] 黄晖. 驰名商标和著名商标的法律保护[M].北京:法律出版社,2001:61.

[7] 韩赤风,冷罗生,孙宁等. 中外商标法经典案例[M]. 北京:知识产权出版社,2010:

195-204.

[8] 北京市高级人民法院知识产权庭编. 北京法院商标疑难案件法官评述[M]. 北京:

法律出版社,2014:序 2-3,175-177.

[9] 金海军. 调查统计方法在商标诉讼案件中的应用——以商标混淆可能性的认定为视

角[J]. 知识产权,2011,(6).

[10] 彭学龙. 论“混淆可能性”——兼评《中华人民共和国商标法修改草案》(征求意见

稿)[J]. 法律科学(西南政法大学学报),2008,(1):130-133,139.

[11] 强世功,张平等.知识产权与法律移植[J]. 读书,2004,(8):3-4.

[12] 董晓敏.美国的《反不正当竞争法重述》[J]. 中国公证,2002,(5):43-45.

[13] 王太平. 商标侵权的判断标准——相似性与混淆可能性之关系[J]. 法学研究,2014,

(6):163-163.

[14] 黄晖译. 协调成员国商标法 1988 年 12 约 21 日欧洲共同体理事会第一号指令

89/104/CEE[J]. 中华商标,1999,(1).

[15] 易树钊.商标混淆的法律研究[D]. 广州:华南理工大学硕士论文,2013:7,12.

[16] 裘静. 我国商标混淆侵权的认定研究[D]. 广州:广东外语外贸大学硕士论文,

2015:34-35.

[17] 张慧萍. 商标混淆理论研究[D]. 郑州:郑州大学硕士论文,2013:39.