著名商標混淆誤認及減損之研究-以台灣案例為中心

Abstract

我國商標法對於商標的保護一直都是以混淆理論為中心，一直到民國92年修正時正式將商標減損納入規範，對著名商標又多加了一層保護。現行商標法第30條第1 項第11 款前段的規範是基於傳統混淆誤認理論，後段的規範則基於減損理論，而商標減損又可進一步區分為「減損著名商標的識別性」及「減損著名商標的信譽」。然而，商標法第30條第1項第11款規定的共同要件，均為商標「相同或近似」，使得實務上對於前段與後段的適用區分不夠明顯，而判斷商標減損的認定因素為何，也不容易具體掌握。\n\n本文先從介紹著名商標開始，說明著名商標的定義以及判斷方式、官方審核和管理程序，再參酌巴黎公約、TRIPS等國際條約、歐盟及美國於商標混淆誤認與減損理論的法制與實務運作及我國商標法因應國際條約的修法延革，整理分析商標第30條第1項第11款規定中有關「混淆誤認」與「減損」之適用關係，從混淆誤認，其侵害消費者權益，延伸至減損，其侵害著名商標的知名顯著性和信譽，保護的對象從消費者轉變成著名商標的所有權人，進而探討其中保護型態的轉變過程。最後，透過台灣的案例來暸解商標混淆以及淡化理論的保護範圍、實務上所遇到的問題以及提出本文針對商標混淆、減損的法制及審查實務的建議。

The protection of trademarks under Taiwan trademarks law had been based on” likelihood of confusion theory” until “dilution theory” was applied in 2003, and well-known trademarks started to get further protection. The former section of Article 30-1-11 of the Trademark Act is based on” likelihood of confusion theory” and the latter one is based on “dilution theory”. Moreover, the latter one can be divided into " dilution of the distinctiveness of well-known trademarks " and " dilution of the reputation of well-known trademarks “. However, the common element of Article 30-1-11 of the Trademark Act is the “identical or similar” trademarks, thereby it difficult for practice to distinguish the former one from the later one precisely. In addition, it is also difficult to determine the judging factors of trademark dilution.\n\n This thesis in the beginning interprets the definition of well-known trademarks, the ways of judgment under the definition, governmental administration of trademark , then integrates and analyzes the relationship between “likelihood of confusion” and “dilution” under the Article 30-1-11 of the Trademark Act by referring to the regulations of the Paris Convention , TRIPS and WIPO, the legislation and practice of EU and the United States, the development of domestic trademark law in response to international treaties, and then explains the transformation process from the confusion which causes damage of the interests of consumers extending to the dilution which causes damage of the distinctiveness and reputation of well-known trademark，the former mainly protects consumers, and the latter protects owners of trademarks. Lastly through the studies of suit cases in Taiwan, explores the relative issues in practice based on the two kinds of theory, and give constructive suggestions for the direction of legislation and practice as well.