论商标普通被许可人之诉讼地位

On Litigious Status of the Licensee to the Contract for Ordinary Licensed Use of Registered Trademarks

传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者:

张体锐

作者:

张体锐

导师:

李雨峰

学位:

硕士

语种:

中文

关键词:

普通被许可人;诉权;诉讼地位

摘要:

当注册商标专用权被侵害时,通说认为:商标普通被许可人只有经商标权人明确授权才可以提起诉讼。诚然,多数情形下商标权人会对该侵害行为进行制止、诉讼或授权普通被许可人进行诉讼。但如果其担心侵害人提出撤销注册商标的反诉或顾忌到商标普通被许可人会滥用诉权,则可能不仅自己不起诉亦不授权商标普通被许可人起诉。此情形下,商标普通被许可人权利将很难得到保障,属于典型的“有权利无救济”。笔者通过对商标普通被许可人诉讼地位现状及其产生原因分析后,从学理上论证赋予其诉讼地位之必要性与可行性。并在对国外前沿学说及立法例比较研究后提出“赋予商标普通被许可人诉讼地位”之立法建议。 本文共分五个部分,总的思路是遵循“原权→救济权”的私权构造模式,当原权遭到侵害时产生救济权。 第一部分,介绍商标普通使用许可合同的概念、特征等,进而引出了商标普通被许可人诉讼地位问题。 第二部分,介绍商标普通被许可人诉讼地位之现状;分析产生现状之原因;指出现状之不足。阐明商标普通被许可人之“不排他”是对商标权人“再许可他人使用”的“不排他”,而非对侵害注册商标行为的“不排他”;诉讼权是基于实体权受到侵害产生,而非基于“约定”、“授权”产生,如果许可使用合同中没有明确约定放弃诉讼权的,应当视为享有诉讼权利。 第三部分,论述赋予商标普通被许可人诉讼地位之必要性及可行性。在必要性上选择“商标价值形成特点”与“诚实信用原则”为切入点;在可行性上选择“侵权之诉”与“不当得利返还请求权之诉”之行使为切入点。 第四部分,介绍日本学说对商标普通被许可人诉讼地位之研究状况及《英国商标法》之相关立法。日本法律虽未明确赋予商标普通被许可人诉权,但学说上已经承认其享有诉讼地位,且亦有类似判例。《英国商标法》规定商标普通被许可人享有诉权,该诉权并非完全诉权,而是经法院同意或商标权人两个月内不诉讼之下才享有的诉权。笔者认为《英国商标法》与他国立法相比有其进步性,亦有局限性,应该直接赋予商标普通被许可人独立诉讼地位。 第五部分,首先指出我国现行司法解释不足之处,提出“赋予商标普通被许可人诉讼地位”立法建议。其次对其具体诉讼请求之行使进行了阐述,指出应当将我国行政救济中的“废弃侵权物”纳入到民事救济中,给予商标普通被许可人停止侵害、废弃侵权物、赔偿损失、消除影响的民事救济。

学科:

诉讼法学; 民商法学

提交日期

2018-01-11

引用参考

张体锐. 论商标普通被许可人之诉讼地位[D]. 西南政法大学,2009.

全文附件授权许可

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 论商标普通被许可人之诉讼地位
  • dc.title
  • On Litigious Status of the Licensee to the Contract for Ordinary Licensed Use of Registered Trademarks
  • dc.contributor.schoolno
  • 20060301050265
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 张体锐
  • dc.contributor.degree
  • 硕士
  • dc.contributor.degreeConferringInstitution
  • 西南政法大学
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2009
  • dc.contributor.advisor
  • 李雨峰
  • dc.language.iso
  • 中文
  • dc.subject
  • 普通被许可人;;诉权;;诉讼地位
  • dc.subject
  • Ordinary Licensee;; Procedural Right;; Litigious Status
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 当注册商标专用权被侵害时,通说认为:商标普通被许可人只有经商标权人明确授权才可以提起诉讼。诚然,多数情形下商标权人会对该侵害行为进行制止、诉讼或授权普通被许可人进行诉讼。但如果其担心侵害人提出撤销注册商标的反诉或顾忌到商标普通被许可人会滥用诉权,则可能不仅自己不起诉亦不授权商标普通被许可人起诉。此情形下,商标普通被许可人权利将很难得到保障,属于典型的“有权利无救济”。笔者通过对商标普通被许可人诉讼地位现状及其产生原因分析后,从学理上论证赋予其诉讼地位之必要性与可行性。并在对国外前沿学说及立法例比较研究后提出“赋予商标普通被许可人诉讼地位”之立法建议。 本文共分五个部分,总的思路是遵循“原权→救济权”的私权构造模式,当原权遭到侵害时产生救济权。 第一部分,介绍商标普通使用许可合同的概念、特征等,进而引出了商标普通被许可人诉讼地位问题。 第二部分,介绍商标普通被许可人诉讼地位之现状;分析产生现状之原因;指出现状之不足。阐明商标普通被许可人之“不排他”是对商标权人“再许可他人使用”的“不排他”,而非对侵害注册商标行为的“不排他”;诉讼权是基于实体权受到侵害产生,而非基于“约定”、“授权”产生,如果许可使用合同中没有明确约定放弃诉讼权的,应当视为享有诉讼权利。 第三部分,论述赋予商标普通被许可人诉讼地位之必要性及可行性。在必要性上选择“商标价值形成特点”与“诚实信用原则”为切入点;在可行性上选择“侵权之诉”与“不当得利返还请求权之诉”之行使为切入点。 第四部分,介绍日本学说对商标普通被许可人诉讼地位之研究状况及《英国商标法》之相关立法。日本法律虽未明确赋予商标普通被许可人诉权,但学说上已经承认其享有诉讼地位,且亦有类似判例。《英国商标法》规定商标普通被许可人享有诉权,该诉权并非完全诉权,而是经法院同意或商标权人两个月内不诉讼之下才享有的诉权。笔者认为《英国商标法》与他国立法相比有其进步性,亦有局限性,应该直接赋予商标普通被许可人独立诉讼地位。 第五部分,首先指出我国现行司法解释不足之处,提出“赋予商标普通被许可人诉讼地位”立法建议。其次对其具体诉讼请求之行使进行了阐述,指出应当将我国行政救济中的“废弃侵权物”纳入到民事救济中,给予商标普通被许可人停止侵害、废弃侵权物、赔偿损失、消除影响的民事救济。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • When the exclusive right to use registered trademarks has been infringed, it is generally believed that: the Licensee to the contract for ordinary licensed use of registered trademarks (hereinafter referred as Licensee for short) can not lodge a suit unless being allowed and authorized by trademark registrant. It is true that most of the time trademark registrant may take measures to stop the infringement, litigate or authorize licensee to conduct of the procedures of legislation. But if worrying about the countercharge by the defendant or abuse use of procedural right by Licensee, trademark registrant may neither lodge a suit personally nor authorized the licensee for the accusation. Under such circumstance, the Licensee's right is probably not safeguarded, which is a typical phenomenon of "having no right to relief". In the paper, through analyzing the actual litigious status of the Licensee and the reasons for such status, the author proved the necessity and feasibility to endow the Licensee with litigious status from the perspective of theory. Based on the study of foreign pilot research and cases of legislation, the author also provided some suggestions of legislation on endowing the Licensee with litigious status. Totally this paper consists of five parts. The general development of this paper is following the private right mode of "antecedent right→right of relief, right of relief is produced when antecedent right gets infringements. In the first part, the concept and features of the contract for ordinary licensed use of registered trademarks were introduced in order to come to the issue of litigious status of the Licensee. The second part analyzed the actual litigious status of the Licensee and the reasons for such status. Insufficiencies for actual situation were also pointed out. Moreover, it also clarified that non-exclusive Licensee to the contract for ordinary licensed use of registered trademarks means that it is non-exclusive for trademark registrant to allow other to use the trade mark but not stand for permit of infringement of trademark. Procedural right is also generated with the infringement of substantial rights but is not produced by commitment or authorization. If the article in the contract for Ordinary Licensed Use of Registered Trademarks has not specified the abandon of Procedural right, the Licensee shall be deemed to enjoy the right litigation. In the third part, the necessity and feasibility to endow the Licensee with litigious status were discussed. As for the discussion of necessity, the paper started from features of trademark and the principles of honesty and credibility. Concerning its feasibility, it is discussed from the litigation of right infringement and the right of claim of restitution of unjust enrichment. The fourth part introduced the research progress in Japan and the performance of "Trademark Law of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" on the litigious status of the Licensee. The law in Japan has not clearly specified that the licensee is granted the procedural right, but its litigious status has been common recognized theoretically, and similar cases has occurred before, "Trademark Law of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" stipulates that the Licensee enjoy procedural right, which is a conditional right approved by court and the trademark registrant's abandon of such right within two months. The author believes that "Trademark Law of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is in a leading position compared with other countries' legislation. Still it also has limitations because the Licensee should be directly endowed with independent procedural right. The fifth part firstly indicated the current inadequacies of judicial interpretation in our country and proposed that the Licensee should be granted with procedural right". Then it explained the detailed implementation of claim, and suggested that the "abandoned infringing material" specified in administrative relief should be listed in civil relief in order to offer the Licensee civil relief like halting of infringement, abandon of infringed objects, compensation for damages, elimination of the effects of civil relief.
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D925.1;D923.4
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2009-04-10
回到顶部