學術產出-學位論文
文章檢視/開啟
書目匯出
-
題名 商標之戲謔仿作─對既存秩序的「有理」取鬧？
Trademark Parody – A Practical Joke to the Existing Order作者 吳佩凌 貢獻者 李治安
吳佩凌關鍵詞 戲謔仿作
言論自由
混淆可能性
淡化
parody
freedom of speech
likelihood of confusion
dilution日期 2013 上傳時間 10-二月-2014 14:57:57 (UTC+8) 摘要 隨著現代市場經濟的快速發展，商標在現代意義下成為一種無形資產，其所蘊含的商業價值也隨著社會經濟的發展不斷地攀升，商標從一個區別和表彰商品來源的簡單符號演變成為大眾文化中的一個具有豐富含意的象徵，使得商標自然而然成為戲謔仿作者模仿的對象；藉由模仿並添加新的表達，以對原商標所代表的某種社會價值或社會現象進行評論，因而造就了商標戲謔仿作。所謂「戲謔仿作」，是自原作中擷取材料，以誇張、荒誕之形式加以運用和重新組合，以批判及諷刺原作。故商標的戲謔仿作，既要以原商標為基礎或依據，同時，模仿者亦須加入新的素材、或在原商標的基礎上增加與原商標明顯不同的特性或風格，以對原商標所代表的某種社會價值或社會現象進行評論。 然而，戲謔仿作在其內容及行為模式上，均可能涉及商標侵權問題。如果戲謔仿作對原作的使用甚少，根本無法讓人將新作與原作聯繫起來，則不可能實現對原作進行批判和諷刺的目的，也就難以成為成功的戲謔仿作作品。但是模仿、使用原作內容之行為，又難以避免會侵犯原作的商標權。另一方面，在現代社會中，法院已認知到，家喻戶曉的商標不僅指代某種產品，更象徵一定的社會文化，成為人們思想交流和觀點表達的工具，若禁止這些商標或商標名稱進入公共談話之中，便形同使商標所有人得以在公眾領域圈地為王、蠶食鯨吞掉原本屬於公眾的言論表達範圍。言論自由幾乎是世界各國普遍認可的憲法權利，被認為是民主社會的基石，因為它可以促進社會的發展，保證個人自我價值的實現。而對商標自由評論的表現形式之一便是戲謔仿作。如果認為只要未經授權使用他人商標、造成冒犯便構成侵害，無疑是壓制了不同的聲音、也限制了思想的交流。因此，戲謔仿作長久以來形成法律上的難題，面對公民的言論自由與商標權人的商標權衝突，法律需要對兩者進行利益平衡。如何恰當地協調這些利益就成為本文之研究目標。 首先，本文將從戲謔仿作之起源與定義出發，觀察國內外的戲謔仿作現象，接著分析商標戲謔仿作實為現代公民言論自由與文化論述權的落實態樣之一，因而產生了商標權與言論自由權間之拉鋸與矛盾。第三章及第四章則介紹美國1960年代以來著名的戲謔仿作實務案例，並分析美國法院對於商標戲謔仿作案件所採取之平衡測試標準，最後將收集之書籍、期刊、學位論文等，與法院判決作一統合整理，逐步統合分析後提出本研究心得，進一步整理可行的方法，希望可以找出具體之解決方式。
As the modern economy booms rapidly, trademark has become a valuable intangible asset which has sky-rocketed continuously. Trademark has evolved from merely an icon to distinguish and show the source of products, to an more enriched symbol that represents public culture. This is also the reason why trademark has become the target for parodies.Parody is an imitation of the original work plus adding several elements into it for the purpose to mock or to make fun of the work itself or its author and so on. Although at some point it no longer stands for the original work itself, the connection to the original work remains strong enough to create the point of parody. This may lead to the unauthorized use of the trademark, which is how trademark infringement issues occur.Despite the fact that trademark protection is pertinent, it is also believed that the right to freedom of speech may not be completely compromised. In our modern society, well known trademarks don’t merely refer to certain product, but also resemble certain social culture and becomes an essential part of people’s interaction and sharing of thoughts. If we place too much barrier on this matter, it will create a phenomenon that trademark owners may hold a dominant position in public domain and deprive others from their right to freedom of speech, which is a globally recognized human right principle.This thesis will be focusing on the analysis of the conflicting ideas of trademark right protection and the right to freedom of speech intertwined in parodies on both domestic and international aspect. In the first few chapters of the thesis, the author will be talking about the origin and definition of parody; in Chapter three and four, the author will be talking about famous parodies cases in the US since 1960 along with the analysis; lastly, there will be a complete compilation of the treaties, articles, thesis, and court judgments at the back, so that a plausible solution may be formulated to resolve this matter in a practical fashion.參考文獻 壹、中文文獻一、書籍1.謝銘洋，智慧財產權入門，2011。2.馮象，政法筆記， 2004。3.曾陳明汝著/蔡明誠續著，商標法原理，2007。4.黃暉，馳名商標與著名商標的法律保護，2001。二、期刊、論文、研究報告1.康兆春，戲仿：再回首抑或創新的無奈，廣東工業大學學報，5卷4期，頁72， 2005年12月。2.亞里斯多德(Aristotle)著；劉效鵬譯著，詩學，2012。3.吳介祥，藝術商標戲謔仿作之問題研究，藝術評論，20期，頁238-239， 2010。4.陳寬育，為註解的「國家」主題：彭弘智「兩百年」個展的一些延伸。今藝 術，202期，頁102-104，2009。5.陳曉童，著作權商標權領域中的滑稽模仿問題，華中科技大學經濟法學碩士論 文，頁21，2007。6.吳志輝，馳名商標滑稽模仿的利益平衡，暨南大學民商法學碩士論文，頁12， 2010。7.王霞、梁嗣雯，滑稽模仿者的公平遊戲——論美國著作權法中滑稽模仿抗辯的有 效成立，真理財經法學，9期，頁137-152，2012年9月。8.林昱梅，藝術自由與嘲諷性模仿之著作權侵害判斷，成大法學，7期，頁129- 234，2004年6月。9.林利芝，Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.（上）─著作權法「合 理使用」原則的經典案例，台灣法學雜誌，124期，頁213-234，2009年3 月。10.李雨峰，企業商標權與言論自由的界線─以美國商標法上的戲仿為視角，環球 法律評論，4期，2011。11.張心全，商標「戲仿」─LV訴HDD商標侵權案，中華商標，01期，頁26， 2008。12.董曉敏，美國法下對商標的滑稽模仿─從Mattel v. MCA Records案談起， 載：北大知識產權評論，頁247，2002。13.趙寧寧，商標滑稽模仿的侵權認定，中國政法大學法律碩士論文，頁9， 2007。14.施品安，著名商標之淡化保護v.s.嘲諷性使用著名商標之言論自由保障─從美 國商標法及判決評析，載：科技法律透析，頁7，2010年7月。15.陳昭華，減損著名商標之識別性或信譽，月旦法學教室，77期，頁36-37， 2009年3月。16.許忠信，論著名商標之沖淡行為與作商標使用行為之區別─九十四年度智上易 字第五號判決評析，月旦裁判時報，4期，頁93-101，2010年8月。17.張瑞星，論嬌蕉包與愛馬仕柏金包糾紛之商標侵權爭議，興大法學，12期， 2012年11月。18.張瑞星，論嬌蕉包轉印愛馬仕柏金包外觀之著作權侵權爭議及仿作之合理使用 抗辯，科技法律評析，5期，2012年12月。三、判決1.智慧財產法院第100年度行商訴字第104號行政判決。2.智慧財產法院第100年度行商訴字第104號行政判決。3.臺北地方法院刑事簡易判決102年度智簡字第30號。4.智慧財產法院第101年民商訴字第29號民事判決。四、網路資源1. 胡永芬-派樂地 The Simple Art of Parody， http://artemperor.tw/news/85 (last visited: 2013.05.18).2. 土洋包大戰！愛馬仕跨海提告仿冒 嬌蕉包敗訴， http://www.nownews.com/2011/12/03/pda-138-2763303.htm (last visited: 2013.05.19).3. 嬌蕉包是否侵權 智財局：法官定奪， http://news.rti.org.tw/index_newsContent.aspx?nid=290526 (last visited: 2013.05.18)4. 嬌蕉包商標侵權案之討論，http://iip.nccu.edu.tw/app/news.php? Sn=313#_ftn2 (last visited: 2013.05.19).5. 嬌蕉包訴訟和解！向愛馬仕賠錢道歉， http://video.chinatimes.com/video-cate-cnt.aspx? cid=4&nid=93412 (last visited: 2013.05.19).6. 嬌蕉包風波 外觀未註冊「愛馬仕未必贏」， http://mag.udn.com/mag/happylife/storypage.jsp? f_ART_ID=311718 (last visited: 2013.05.19).7. 戲仿的西方傳統 一種令人開心的降格遊戲， http://club.kdnet.net/dispbbs.asp? f=w&ctid=79553&BoardID=2&ID=8562421 (last visited: 2013.05.03)8. 台北當代藝術館， http://www.mocataipei.org.tw/blog/category/1406167 (last visited: 2013.05.10)。9. 維基百科：惡搞文化，http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%83%A1% E6%90%9E%E6%96%87%E5%8C%96 (last visited: 2013.05.03).10.The simple art of parody, http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ShowRAUL/32852124 (last visited: 2013.05.17).11.台灣當代藝術 春天來了， http://money.chinatimes.com/96rp/09art/news30.html (last visited: 2012.12.06)12.池中藝術網專訪：黃沛涵─肉身童話的美好殘酷， http://www.wretch.cc/blog/peihang/15540860 (last visited:2012.12.06).13.宇中怡-雞皮芭比遊世界， http://www.tiec.tp.edu.tw/lifetype/resource/1153/35472 (last visited: 2012.12.06)14.策展工作－南部藝術家蒐集工作， http://blog.roodo.com/super543143/archives/7178183.html (last visited: 2012.12.06).15.只要有消費卷人人都可以是藏家， http://robbiehuang123.blogspot.tw/2008/12/blog- post_23.html (last visited: 2012.12.06)16.夏愛華、邱昭財藝展放異彩，http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_lit/10190966/article-%E5%A4%8F%E6%84%9B%E8%8F%AF%E3%80%81%E9%82%B1%E6%98%AD%E8%B2%A1%E8%97%9D%E5%B1%95%E6%94%BE%E7%95%B0%E5%BD%A9- (last visited: 2012.12.06)17.彭弘智，法福殉難記雕塑，http://www.hihey.com/art-5180.html (last visited: 2012.12.06).18.新苑藝術 Galerie Grand Siècle， https://sites.google.com/site/ggsplatform/artists/-kuo-i- chen/-works (last visited: 2012.12.07).19.好春，這不是仿冒品！， http://mypaper.pchome.com.tw/quink/post/1277922765 (last visited: 2012.12.06).20.創作vs侵權：吉蒂與死人頭， http://www.florencelai.com/2005/09/vs.html (last visited: 2012.11.16).21.好戲量網站，http://show.fmtp.net/kitty/ (last visited: 2012.11.16).22.吉蒂與死人頭，http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%89%E8%92% 82%E8%88%87%E6%AD%BB%E4%BA%BA%E9%A0%AD (last visited: 2013.05.13).23.KUSO版「星趴客杯」！引發侵權爭議， http://www.nownews.com/2009/11/02/138-2527854.htm (last visited: 2012.11.16).24.kuso星巴克 搞笑一下也侵權？，http://www.is- law.com/post/12/350 (last visited: 2012.11.16).25.法藝術家塗鴉CHANEL標誌被捕， http://luxury.qq.com/a/20090724/000012_1.htm (last visited: 2012.11.16).26.熱夫法國名牌塗鴉街頭藝術家Zevs(French, 1977)， http://wen409733.blog.163.com/blog/static/18772827320127163120136/ (last visited: 2012.11.16).27.LV被藝術家惡搞很生氣提出起訴， http://women.sohu.com/20080510/n256772533.shtml (last visited: 2012.11.20).28.章忠信，戲謔仿作是合理使用，不因營利而侵害著作權， http://www.copyrightnote.org/crnote/bbs.php? board=2&act=read&id=61 (last visited: 2013.05.20).29.經濟部智慧財產局，「混淆誤認之虞」審查基準，available at: http://www2.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp? xItem=317110&ctNode=7452&mp=1 (last visited: 2013.05.21).貳、英文文獻一、書籍 1.Lawrence Lessig, FREE CULTURE: HOW BIG MEDIA USES TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW TO LOCK DOWN CULTURE AND CONTROL CREATIVITY (2004).2.Coombe, Rosemary J., THE CULTURAL LIFE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES: AUTHORSHIP, APPROPRIATION, AND THE LAW (1998).3.Thomas McCarthy, MCCARTHY ON TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (4th ed. 1996).4.4 David Nimmer, NIMMER ON COPYRIGHT (Rel. 73-8/2007).5.Thomas McCarthy, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (1984).6.6 J. Thomas McCarthy, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (4th ed. 2007).7.Stacey L. Dogan & Mark A. Lemley, PARODY AS BRAND (2012).8.Thomas McCarthy, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (3d ed. 1992).二、期刊、論文、研究報告1.Rebecca Tushnet, Copy This Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It, 114 Yale L.J. 535(2004).2.Anthony L. Fletcher, The Product with the Parody Trademark: What’s Wrong with Chewy Vuiton?, 100 TRADEMARK REP. 1091 (2010).3.Robert J. Shaughnessy, Trademark Parody: A Fair Use And Amendment Analysis, 72 VA. L. REV. 1079 (1986).4.Frank I. Schechter, The Rational Basis of Trademark Protection, 40 HARV. L. REV. 813 (1927).5.McClure, Trademarks and Unfair Competition: A Critical History of Legal Thought, 69 TRADEMARK REP. 305 (1979).6.Treece, Trademark Licensing and Vertical Restraints in Franchising Arrangements, 116 U. PA. L. REV. 435 (1968).7.Laura E. Little, Regulating Funny: Humor and the Law, 94 CORNELL L. REV. 1235 (2009).8.David M. Kelly, Lynn M. Jordan, Twenty Years of Rogers v. Grimaldi: Balancing the Lanham Act with the First Amendment Rights of Creators of Artistic Works, 99 TRADEMARK REP. 1360 (2009).9.Robert C. Denicola, Trademarks as Speech: Constitutional Implications of the Emerging Rationales for the Protection of Trade Symbols, 1982 WIS.L.REV. 158 (1982).10.Pratheepan Gulasekaram, Policing the Border Between Trademarks and Free Speech: Protecting Unauthorized Trademark Use in Expressive Works, 80 WASH. L. REV. 887 (2005).11.Lawrence Lessig, The Creative Commons, 65 MONT. L. REV. 1 (2004).12.William M. Landes & Richard A. Posner, Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective, 30 J. L. & ECON. 265 (1987).13.Pattishall, Dawning Acceptance of the Dilution Rationale for Trademark-Trade Identity Protection, 74 TRADEMARK REP. 289 (1984).14.Patrick Emerson, “ I’m Litigatin’ It”: Infringement, Dilution, and Parody Under the Lanham Act, 9 NW. J. TECH. & INTELL. PROP. 477 (2011).15.Dorsen, Satiric Appropriation and the Law of Libel, Trademark and Copyright: Remedies Without Wrongs, 65 B.U.L.REV. 923 (1986).16.Corina I. Cacovean, Is Free Riding Aided by Parody to Sneak Between the Cracks of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act?, 31 HASTINGS COMM. & ENT L.J. 441 (2009).17.Steven M. Cordero, Cocaine-Cola, the Velvet Elvis, and Anti-Barbie: Defending the Trademark and Publicity Rights to Cultural Icons, 8 FORDHAM INTELL. PROP. MEDIA & ENT. L.J. 599 (1998).18.Eric Sonju,“ Likelihood of Confusion” is Confusing Enough: Why the Concept of Parody Has No Place in A Likelihood of Confusion Analysis, 38 AIPLA Q.J. 349 (2010).三、判決1.Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co. v. S.S. Kresge Co., 316 U.S. 203 (1942).2.L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 811 F.2d 26 (1st Cir. 1987).3.Prestonettes, Inc., v. Coty, 264 U.S. 359(1924).4.Stop the Olympic Prison v. U.S. Olympic Committee, 489 F. Supp. 1112 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)5.Lucasfilm Ltd. v. High Frontier, 622 F. Supp. 931 (D.D.C. 1985).6.Lighthawk, the Envtl. Air Force v. Robertson, 812 F. Supp. 1095 (W.D. Wash. 1993).7.American Family Life Ins. Co. v. Hagan, 266 F. Supp. 2d 682 (N.D. Ohio 2002).8.Benny v. Loew`s, Inc., 239 F.2d 532 (9th Cir. 1956).9.Berlin v. E.C. Publ`ns, Inc., 329 F.2d 541 (2d Cir. 1964).10.Walt Disney Prods. v. The Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1978).11.Metro-Goldwyn Mayer, Inc. v. Showcase Atlanta Coop. Prods., Inc., 479 F. Supp. 351 (N.D. Ga. 1979).12.Chem. Corp. of Am. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 306 F.2d 433 (5th Cir. 1962).13.Girl Scouts of U.S. v. Personality Posters Mfg. Co., 304 F. Supp. 1228 (S.D.N.Y. 1969).14.The Coca-Cola Co. v. Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183(E.D.N.Y. 1972).15.General Mills, Inc. v. Henry Regnery Co., 421 F. Supp. 359 (N.D. Ill. 1976).16.Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. v. Manns Theatres, 195 U.S.P.Q. 159 (C.D. Cal. 1976).17.Gucci Shops, Inc. v. R.H. Macy & Co., Inc., 446 F. Supp. 838 (S.D.N.Y. 1977).18.Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema, Ltd., 604 F.2d 200 (2d Cir. 1979).19.Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551, 567, 92 S.Ct. 2219, 2228, 33 L.Ed.2d 31 (1972).20.Elsmere Music, Inc. v. Nat`l Broad. Co., 623 F.2d 252 (2d Cir. 1980).21.MCA Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F.2d 180 (2d Cir. 1981).22.DC Comics Inc. v. Crazy Eddie, Inc., 205 U.S.P.Q. 1177 (S.D.N.Y. 1979).23.Warner Bros. Inc. v. Am. Broadcast Cos., Inc., 720 F.2d 231 (2d Cir. 1983).24.DC Comics, Inc. v. Unlimited Monkey Bus., 598 F. Supp. 110 (N.D. Ga. 1984).25.Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., 642 F. Supp. 1031 (N.D.Ga. 1986).26.Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432 (9th Cir. 1986).27.Tin Pan Apple, Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co., Inc., 737 F. Supp. 826 (S.D.N.Y. 1990).28.Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc., 207 U.S.P.Q. 852 (N.D. Ill. 1980).29.Carson v. Here`s Johnny Portable Toilets, Inc., 698 F.2d 831 (6th Cir. 1983).30.Tetley, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., 556 F. Supp. 785 (E.D.N.Y. 1983).31.Wendy`s Int`l, Inc. v. Big Bite, Inc., 576 F. Supp. 816 (S.D. Ohio 1983).32.Central Hudson Gas & Elec. v. Public Serv. Comm`n, 447 U.S. 557, 561, 100 S.Ct. 2343, 2348, 65 L.Ed.2d 341 (1980).33.Jordache Enters., Inc. v. Hogg Wyld, Ltd., 828 F.2d 1482 (10th Cir. 1987).34.Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. v. Novak, 836 F.2d 397 (8th Cir. 1987).35.Lowe v. SEC, 472 U.S. 181, 204–05, 105 S.Ct. 2557, 2570 –71, 86 L.Ed.2d 130 (1985).36.Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994 (2d Cir. 1989).37.Cliff`s Notes. Inc. v. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publ`g Group. Inc., 886 F.2d 490 (2d Cir. 1989).38.Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Electronics Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.).39.Schieffelin & Co. v. Jack Co. of Boca. Inc., 725 F. Supp. 1314 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).40.Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. L & L Wings, Inc., 962 F.2d 316 (4th Cir. 1992).41.Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Balducci Publ`ns, 28 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 1994).42.Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994).43.Harley Davidson, Inc. v. Grottanelli, 164 F.3d 806 (2d Cir. 1999).44.Hormel Foods Corp. v. Jim Henson Prods., Inc., 73 F.3d 497 (2d Cir. 1996).45.Dr. Seuss Enters., L.P. v. Penguin Books, USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997).46.Rogers v. Koons, 960 F.2d 301 (2d Cir.1992).47.Liebovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 137 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. 1998).48.Elvis Presley Enters., Inc. v. Capece, 141 F.3d 188 (5th Cir. 1998).49.Lyons Partnership v. Giannoulas, 179 F.3d 384 (5th Cir. 1999).50.Suntrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2001).51.Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., 296 F.3d 894 (9th Cir. 2002).52.Tommy Hilfiger Licensing, Inc. v. Nature Labs, LLC, 221 F. Supp. 2d 410 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).53.Mattel, Inc. v. Walking Mountain Prods., 353 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003).54.Yankee Publ`g, Inc. v. News Am. Publ`g, Inc., 809 F.Supp. 267(S.D.N.Y.1992).55.World Wrestling Fed`n Entm`t, Inc. v. Big Dog Holdings, Inc., 280 F. Supp. 2d 413 (W.D. Pa. 2003).56.Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. VIP Prods., LLC, 666 F. Supp. 2d 974 (E.D. Mo. 2008).57.Eli Lilly & Co. v. Nat`l Answers, Inc., 233 F.3d 456 (7th Cir. 2000).58.Protectmarriage.com v. Courage Campaign, 680 F. Supp. 2d 1225 (E.D. Cal. 2010).59.Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007).60.Pizzeria Uno Corp. v. Temple, 747 F.2d 1522 (4th Cir.1984).61.Falcon Rice Mill, Inc. v. Community Rice Mill, Inc., 725 F.2d 336 (5th Cir. 1984)62.Surgical Supply Serv., Inc. v. Adler, 321 F.2d 536 (3d Cir. 1963)63.James Burrough Ltd. v. Sign of Beefeater, Inc., 540 F.2d 266(7th Cir. 1976).64.Stork Restaurant, Inc. v. Sahati, 166 F.2d 348 (9th Cir. 1948).65.Anti–Monopoly, Inc. v. General Mills Fun Group, 611 F.2d 296 (9th Cir.1979).66.E.S.S. Entm`t 2000, Inc. v. Rock Star Videos, Inc., 547 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2008).67.Roxbury Entm`t v. Penthouse Media Group Inc., 92 U.S.P.Q.2d 1760 (CD. Cal. 2009).68.HMH Publishing Co., Inc. v. Brincat, 504 F.2d 713 (9th Cir.1974).69.Nike, Inc. v. Just Did It Enterprises, 6 F.3d 1225 (7th Cir. 1993).70.Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co. v. S.S. Kresge Co., 316 U.S. 203 (1942).71.Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Safeway Discount Drugs, Inc., 675 F.2d 1160 (11th Cir. 1982)72.Toys ‘R‘ Us, Inc. v. Canarsie Kiddie Shop, Inc., 559 F. Supp. 1189 (E.D.N.Y. 1983)73.Smith v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 537 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (N.D. Ga. 2008).74.Hoffman v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., 255 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir.2001).75.Kasky v. Nike, Inc., 45 P.3d 243 (Cal. 2002)76.White v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc., 989 F.2d 1512 (9th Cir. 1993).77.Burnett v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 491 F.Supp.2d 962 (C.D. Cal. 2007).78.I.P. Lund Trading ApS v. Kohler Co., 163 F.3d 27 (1st Cir.1998).四、網路資源1.I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold - Charles Demuth(1928), http://dolceaficionada.tumblr.com/post/13495384548/i-saw- the-figure-5-in-gold-charles-demuth-1928 (last visited: 2012.12.06).2.Gaks Designs – Gerrel Saunders， http://benpittdesign.wordpress.com/tag/graphic-design/ (last visited: 2012.12.07).3.Spectacular Attractions, Food Chain Barbie, http://drnorth.wordpress.com/2010/02/10/wholesome-is-out- superstar-the-karen-carpenter-story/food-chain-barbie/. (last visited: 2012.12.06)4.What do Heidi Cody symbols in American Alphabet mean? http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_do_Heidi_Cody_symbols_in_American_Alphabet_mean (last visited: 2012.12.06).5.Heidi Cody, http://weblog.bezembinder.nl/28.htm (last visited: 2012.12.06).6.Play, http://uauage.org/?m=200412 (last visited: 2012.12.06).7.Sad Ronald: Banksy Exhibition, Bristol, http://www.flickr.com/photos/photomequickbooth/3870801228/ (last visited: 2012.12.06)8.Art Student Nadia Plesner`s Giant Louis Vuitton Copyright Suit， http://nymag.com/thecut/2008/05/art_student_nadia_pelsners_gia.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).9.Louis Vuitton Tried to Prevent the Nadia Plesner Lawsuit， http://nymag.com/thecut/2008/05/louis_vuitton_tried_to_prevent.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).10.Louis Vuitton Attempts to Ban Darfurnica, http://aandalawblog.blogspot.tw/2011/03/louis-vuitton-attempts-to-ban-dafurnica.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).11.Darfurnica: Art must offend, shock and disturb, http://southasia.oneworld.net/archive/globalheadlines/darfurnica-art-must-offend-shock-and-disturb (last visited: 2012.11.20).12.Interview with artist Diana Thorneycroft, http://wag.ca/whats-on/blog/display,articles/43/interview-with-artist-diana-thorneycroft (last visited: 2012.11.20).13.Canadian artist Diana Thorneycroft, http://www.detritus.net/contact/rumori/200211/0149.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).14.Latest European Cases on Well-Known Marks, http://www.inta.org/INTABulletin/Pages/LatestEuropeanCasesonWellKnownMarks.aspx (last visited: 2012.11.21).15.Are you Cadbury or Milka ?, http://newmarketingexperience.blogspot.tw/2011/11/cadbury-or-milka.html (last visited: 2012.11.21).16.VIAGRA vs. STYRIAGRA, http://www.boult.com/news/Viagra%20vs%20Styriagra%20BHC%20Feb10.pdf (last visited: 2012.11.21).17.Stop the Olympic Prison poster, http://www.docspopuli.org/articles/STOP/STOP.html (last visited: 2013.04.25).18.Happy 65th Birthday, Smokey Bear: How a new understanding of forest fires has changed the furry mascot`s message, http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=happy-65th-birthday-smokey-bear--ho-2009-07-24 ; http://www.mtmultipleuse.org/fire/smokey_bear_poster.htm (last visited: 2013.05.14).19.Is AFLAC A Good Company To Work For? Or A Hiring Scam?, http://sourceblogger.com/is-aflac-a-scam-or-a-good-company-to-work-for/ (last visited: 2013.04.25).20.Great Lakes/Ohio River Valley Political Report, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2002/regional/gl-orv.html (last visited: 2013.4.25)21.Alcohol Ads of the 1950s, http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/alcohol-ads-1950s/87 (last visited: 2013.04.25).22.Be Prepared Pregnant Girl Scout Original Protest Poster, http://www.dpvintageposters.com/cgi-local/detail.cgi?d=2504 (last visited: 2013.04.25).23.Coca Cola Logo, http://insidetommyshead.wordpress.com/2011/03/27/coca-cola-logo/ (last visited: 2013.04.25).24.Cocaine, http://www.coolchaser.com/graphics/776084 (last visited: 2013.04.25).25.Texas State Fair :Children`s Shoe Art Contest entries ThursdayThirteen, http://joyismygoal.blogspot.tw/2009/10/thursday-texas-state-fair-shoe-art.html (last visited: 2013.04.25).26.Cabbage Patch Kids, http://cn.last.fm/music/Cabbage+Patch+Kids (last visited: 2013.04.25).27.Evidence Of Secondary Meaning In TV Catchphrases?, http://www.schwimmerlegal.com/2006/11/evidence-of-secondary-meaning-in-tv-catchphrases.html (last visited: 2013.04.26).28.Jay-Z and Beyoncé Talk to the Feds, http://artherworldblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/jay-z-and-beyonce-talk-to-the-feds/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).29.Wacky Packages Original Series, http://www.lostwackys.com/Wacky-Packages/15th-series/Petley.htm (last visited: 2013.04.25).30.Welcome Back Mutual of Omaha!, http://www.hathawaysettlements.com/2010/10/28/welcome-back-mutual-of-omaha/ (last visited: 2013.04.26)31.Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Astaire_and_Ginger_Rogers , http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/fred%20astaire%20and%20ginger%20rogers (last visited: 2013.04.26).32.Ginger and Fred, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_and_Fred (last visited: 2013.04.26).33.Good Calories, Bad Calories: Cliffs Notes, http://fitfemaleforty.com/2011/04/09/good-calories-bad-calories-cliffs-notes/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).34.Spy Notes, http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/362694.Spy_Notes (last visited: 2013.04.26).35.Energizer Bunny, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energizer_Bunny (last visited: 2013.04.26).36.Don’t Spam – Keep The Boards Clean!, http://blog.indabamusic.com/2012/11/dont-spam-keep-the-boards-clean/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).37.Muppet PVC figures (Miniland), http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Muppet_PVC_figures_(Miniland) (last visited: 2013.04.26).38.The Cat in the Hat, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cat_in_the_Hat (last visited: 2013.04.26).39.Synchronizing Art to a Sound Recording: Do Financial Incentives Demotivate Creativity and Problem Solving?, http://copyrightlitigation.blogspot.tw/2010/06/synchronizing-art-to-sound-recording-do.html (last visited: 2013.04.26).40.Shirley, That’s a Parody!, http://www.entertainmentlawmatters.com/?p=1147 (last visited: 2013.04.25).41.Barney, http://basicte.blogspot.tw/2013/04/barney-barney- online-fun-for-all.html (last visited: 2013.04.26).42.Chicken trounces Barney again, in federal court, http://www.current.org/wp-content/themes/current/archive-site/ch/ch814b.html ; http://www.flickr.com/photos/latentimage16/4803819199/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).43.Gone with the Wind, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_with_the_Wind (last visited: 2013.04.29).44.Fanfiction before there was fanfiction!, http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/the%20wind%20done%20gone?language=ja_JP (last visited: 2013.04.29).45.Tommy Hilfiger announces 40% off Entire Store in the Black Friday 2012 Ad, http://blackfriday.bradsdeals.com/news/2012/10/23/tommy- hilfiger-black-friday-2012-ad/ (last visited: 2013.04.29).46.Budweiser wins preliminary injunction against Buttwiper dog toy, http://www.vegastrademarkattorney.com/2008/10/budweiser- wins-preliminary-injunction.html (last visited: 2013.04.29).47.My First Chewy Vuitton!, http://www.ellvy.com/2011/06/my- first-chewy-vuitton/ (last visited: 2013.04.29).48.Trade Mark Dilution, http://mowingthelaw.blogspot.tw/2012/02/trade-mark- dilution.html (last visited: 2013.04.29). 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
法律學研究所
99651029
102資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099651029 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 李治安 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (作者) 吳佩凌 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) 吳佩凌 zh_TW dc.date (日期) 2013 en_US dc.date.accessioned 10-二月-2014 14:57:57 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 10-二月-2014 14:57:57 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 10-二月-2014 14:57:57 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (其他 識別碼) G0099651029 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/63715 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 法律學研究所 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 99651029 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 102 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 隨著現代市場經濟的快速發展，商標在現代意義下成為一種無形資產，其所蘊含的商業價值也隨著社會經濟的發展不斷地攀升，商標從一個區別和表彰商品來源的簡單符號演變成為大眾文化中的一個具有豐富含意的象徵，使得商標自然而然成為戲謔仿作者模仿的對象；藉由模仿並添加新的表達，以對原商標所代表的某種社會價值或社會現象進行評論，因而造就了商標戲謔仿作。所謂「戲謔仿作」，是自原作中擷取材料，以誇張、荒誕之形式加以運用和重新組合，以批判及諷刺原作。故商標的戲謔仿作，既要以原商標為基礎或依據，同時，模仿者亦須加入新的素材、或在原商標的基礎上增加與原商標明顯不同的特性或風格，以對原商標所代表的某種社會價值或社會現象進行評論。 然而，戲謔仿作在其內容及行為模式上，均可能涉及商標侵權問題。如果戲謔仿作對原作的使用甚少，根本無法讓人將新作與原作聯繫起來，則不可能實現對原作進行批判和諷刺的目的，也就難以成為成功的戲謔仿作作品。但是模仿、使用原作內容之行為，又難以避免會侵犯原作的商標權。另一方面，在現代社會中，法院已認知到，家喻戶曉的商標不僅指代某種產品，更象徵一定的社會文化，成為人們思想交流和觀點表達的工具，若禁止這些商標或商標名稱進入公共談話之中，便形同使商標所有人得以在公眾領域圈地為王、蠶食鯨吞掉原本屬於公眾的言論表達範圍。言論自由幾乎是世界各國普遍認可的憲法權利，被認為是民主社會的基石，因為它可以促進社會的發展，保證個人自我價值的實現。而對商標自由評論的表現形式之一便是戲謔仿作。如果認為只要未經授權使用他人商標、造成冒犯便構成侵害，無疑是壓制了不同的聲音、也限制了思想的交流。因此，戲謔仿作長久以來形成法律上的難題，面對公民的言論自由與商標權人的商標權衝突，法律需要對兩者進行利益平衡。如何恰當地協調這些利益就成為本文之研究目標。 首先，本文將從戲謔仿作之起源與定義出發，觀察國內外的戲謔仿作現象，接著分析商標戲謔仿作實為現代公民言論自由與文化論述權的落實態樣之一，因而產生了商標權與言論自由權間之拉鋸與矛盾。第三章及第四章則介紹美國1960年代以來著名的戲謔仿作實務案例，並分析美國法院對於商標戲謔仿作案件所採取之平衡測試標準，最後將收集之書籍、期刊、學位論文等，與法院判決作一統合整理，逐步統合分析後提出本研究心得，進一步整理可行的方法，希望可以找出具體之解決方式。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) As the modern economy booms rapidly, trademark has become a valuable intangible asset which has sky-rocketed continuously. Trademark has evolved from merely an icon to distinguish and show the source of products, to an more enriched symbol that represents public culture. This is also the reason why trademark has become the target for parodies.Parody is an imitation of the original work plus adding several elements into it for the purpose to mock or to make fun of the work itself or its author and so on. Although at some point it no longer stands for the original work itself, the connection to the original work remains strong enough to create the point of parody. This may lead to the unauthorized use of the trademark, which is how trademark infringement issues occur.Despite the fact that trademark protection is pertinent, it is also believed that the right to freedom of speech may not be completely compromised. In our modern society, well known trademarks don’t merely refer to certain product, but also resemble certain social culture and becomes an essential part of people’s interaction and sharing of thoughts. If we place too much barrier on this matter, it will create a phenomenon that trademark owners may hold a dominant position in public domain and deprive others from their right to freedom of speech, which is a globally recognized human right principle.This thesis will be focusing on the analysis of the conflicting ideas of trademark right protection and the right to freedom of speech intertwined in parodies on both domestic and international aspect. In the first few chapters of the thesis, the author will be talking about the origin and definition of parody; in Chapter three and four, the author will be talking about famous parodies cases in the US since 1960 along with the analysis; lastly, there will be a complete compilation of the treaties, articles, thesis, and court judgments at the back, so that a plausible solution may be formulated to resolve this matter in a practical fashion. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 1第一節 研究動機與目的 1第二節 問題之提出與研究方法 4第二章 戲謔仿作的起源、定義與特色 6第一節 戲謔仿作的起源與演變 6第二節 戲謔仿作的定義與特色 8第三節 國內外戲謔仿作之藝術作品 9第一項 國內戲謔仿作之作品 10第二項 國外戲謔仿作之作品 15第四節 國內外戲謔商標的實際現象 17第一項 台灣、中國、香港之案例 18第二項 國外之案例 22第五節 言論自由與文化論述權 26第三章 戲謔仿作於美國法上的實踐 30第一節 政治性自由言論價值勝過商標權利 30第二節 戲謔仿作七0年代後期為止的樣貌 36第一項 1960至1970年戲謔仿作之「著作權法」案例 36第二項 1960至1970年戲謔仿作之「商標法」案例 39第三節 八0年代至九0年代初期：固舊創新 48第一項 著作權案件 48第二項 商標案件 54第四節 從Campbell案 觀察美國最高法院見解 75第五節 Campbell案後 美國法院之後續發展 79第六節 Louis Vuitton v. Haute Diggity Dog 96第四章 商標權與戲謔仿作之間的利益平衡 107第一節 「混淆理論」下商標權與戲謔仿作間之利益平衡 107第一項 混淆理論 107第二項 混淆理論下商標戲謔仿作與商標權之衝突 110第三項 利益平衡 111第四項 小結 122第二節 「反淡化」理論下商標權與戲謔仿作間之利益平衡 124第一項 反淡化理論 124第二項 淡化理論下商標戲謔仿作與商標權之衝突 126第三項 利益平衡 128第四項 小結 133第五章 結論與建議 135第一節 結論 135第二節 研究建議 138參考文獻 144 zh_TW dc.format.extent 6096579 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.language.iso en_US - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099651029 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 戲謔仿作 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 言論自由 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 混淆可能性 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 淡化 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) parody en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) freedom of speech en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) likelihood of confusion en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) dilution en_US dc.title (題名) 商標之戲謔仿作─對既存秩序的「有理」取鬧？ zh_TW dc.title (題名) Trademark Parody – A Practical Joke to the Existing Order en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 壹、中文文獻一、書籍1.謝銘洋，智慧財產權入門，2011。2.馮象，政法筆記， 2004。3.曾陳明汝著/蔡明誠續著，商標法原理，2007。4.黃暉，馳名商標與著名商標的法律保護，2001。二、期刊、論文、研究報告1.康兆春，戲仿：再回首抑或創新的無奈，廣東工業大學學報，5卷4期，頁72， 2005年12月。2.亞里斯多德(Aristotle)著；劉效鵬譯著，詩學，2012。3.吳介祥，藝術商標戲謔仿作之問題研究，藝術評論，20期，頁238-239， 2010。4.陳寬育，為註解的「國家」主題：彭弘智「兩百年」個展的一些延伸。今藝 術，202期，頁102-104，2009。5.陳曉童，著作權商標權領域中的滑稽模仿問題，華中科技大學經濟法學碩士論 文，頁21，2007。6.吳志輝，馳名商標滑稽模仿的利益平衡，暨南大學民商法學碩士論文，頁12， 2010。7.王霞、梁嗣雯，滑稽模仿者的公平遊戲——論美國著作權法中滑稽模仿抗辯的有 效成立，真理財經法學，9期，頁137-152，2012年9月。8.林昱梅，藝術自由與嘲諷性模仿之著作權侵害判斷，成大法學，7期，頁129- 234，2004年6月。9.林利芝，Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.（上）─著作權法「合 理使用」原則的經典案例，台灣法學雜誌，124期，頁213-234，2009年3 月。10.李雨峰，企業商標權與言論自由的界線─以美國商標法上的戲仿為視角，環球 法律評論，4期，2011。11.張心全，商標「戲仿」─LV訴HDD商標侵權案，中華商標，01期，頁26， 2008。12.董曉敏，美國法下對商標的滑稽模仿─從Mattel v. MCA Records案談起， 載：北大知識產權評論，頁247，2002。13.趙寧寧，商標滑稽模仿的侵權認定，中國政法大學法律碩士論文，頁9， 2007。14.施品安，著名商標之淡化保護v.s.嘲諷性使用著名商標之言論自由保障─從美 國商標法及判決評析，載：科技法律透析，頁7，2010年7月。15.陳昭華，減損著名商標之識別性或信譽，月旦法學教室，77期，頁36-37， 2009年3月。16.許忠信，論著名商標之沖淡行為與作商標使用行為之區別─九十四年度智上易 字第五號判決評析，月旦裁判時報，4期，頁93-101，2010年8月。17.張瑞星，論嬌蕉包與愛馬仕柏金包糾紛之商標侵權爭議，興大法學，12期， 2012年11月。18.張瑞星，論嬌蕉包轉印愛馬仕柏金包外觀之著作權侵權爭議及仿作之合理使用 抗辯，科技法律評析，5期，2012年12月。三、判決1.智慧財產法院第100年度行商訴字第104號行政判決。2.智慧財產法院第100年度行商訴字第104號行政判決。3.臺北地方法院刑事簡易判決102年度智簡字第30號。4.智慧財產法院第101年民商訴字第29號民事判決。四、網路資源1. 胡永芬-派樂地 The Simple Art of Parody， http://artemperor.tw/news/85 (last visited: 2013.05.18).2. 土洋包大戰！愛馬仕跨海提告仿冒 嬌蕉包敗訴， http://www.nownews.com/2011/12/03/pda-138-2763303.htm (last visited: 2013.05.19).3. 嬌蕉包是否侵權 智財局：法官定奪， http://news.rti.org.tw/index_newsContent.aspx?nid=290526 (last visited: 2013.05.18)4. 嬌蕉包商標侵權案之討論，http://iip.nccu.edu.tw/app/news.php? Sn=313#_ftn2 (last visited: 2013.05.19).5. 嬌蕉包訴訟和解！向愛馬仕賠錢道歉， http://video.chinatimes.com/video-cate-cnt.aspx? cid=4&nid=93412 (last visited: 2013.05.19).6. 嬌蕉包風波 外觀未註冊「愛馬仕未必贏」， http://mag.udn.com/mag/happylife/storypage.jsp? f_ART_ID=311718 (last visited: 2013.05.19).7. 戲仿的西方傳統 一種令人開心的降格遊戲， http://club.kdnet.net/dispbbs.asp? f=w&ctid=79553&BoardID=2&ID=8562421 (last visited: 2013.05.03)8. 台北當代藝術館， http://www.mocataipei.org.tw/blog/category/1406167 (last visited: 2013.05.10)。9. 維基百科：惡搞文化，http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%83%A1% E6%90%9E%E6%96%87%E5%8C%96 (last visited: 2013.05.03).10.The simple art of parody, http://www.wretch.cc/blog/ShowRAUL/32852124 (last visited: 2013.05.17).11.台灣當代藝術 春天來了， http://money.chinatimes.com/96rp/09art/news30.html (last visited: 2012.12.06)12.池中藝術網專訪：黃沛涵─肉身童話的美好殘酷， http://www.wretch.cc/blog/peihang/15540860 (last visited:2012.12.06).13.宇中怡-雞皮芭比遊世界， http://www.tiec.tp.edu.tw/lifetype/resource/1153/35472 (last visited: 2012.12.06)14.策展工作－南部藝術家蒐集工作， http://blog.roodo.com/super543143/archives/7178183.html (last visited: 2012.12.06).15.只要有消費卷人人都可以是藏家， http://robbiehuang123.blogspot.tw/2008/12/blog- post_23.html (last visited: 2012.12.06)16.夏愛華、邱昭財藝展放異彩，http://www.worldjournal.com/view/full_lit/10190966/article-%E5%A4%8F%E6%84%9B%E8%8F%AF%E3%80%81%E9%82%B1%E6%98%AD%E8%B2%A1%E8%97%9D%E5%B1%95%E6%94%BE%E7%95%B0%E5%BD%A9- (last visited: 2012.12.06)17.彭弘智，法福殉難記雕塑，http://www.hihey.com/art-5180.html (last visited: 2012.12.06).18.新苑藝術 Galerie Grand Siècle， https://sites.google.com/site/ggsplatform/artists/-kuo-i- chen/-works (last visited: 2012.12.07).19.好春，這不是仿冒品！， http://mypaper.pchome.com.tw/quink/post/1277922765 (last visited: 2012.12.06).20.創作vs侵權：吉蒂與死人頭， http://www.florencelai.com/2005/09/vs.html (last visited: 2012.11.16).21.好戲量網站，http://show.fmtp.net/kitty/ (last visited: 2012.11.16).22.吉蒂與死人頭，http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%90%89%E8%92% 82%E8%88%87%E6%AD%BB%E4%BA%BA%E9%A0%AD (last visited: 2013.05.13).23.KUSO版「星趴客杯」！引發侵權爭議， http://www.nownews.com/2009/11/02/138-2527854.htm (last visited: 2012.11.16).24.kuso星巴克 搞笑一下也侵權？，http://www.is- law.com/post/12/350 (last visited: 2012.11.16).25.法藝術家塗鴉CHANEL標誌被捕， http://luxury.qq.com/a/20090724/000012_1.htm (last visited: 2012.11.16).26.熱夫法國名牌塗鴉街頭藝術家Zevs(French, 1977)， http://wen409733.blog.163.com/blog/static/18772827320127163120136/ (last visited: 2012.11.16).27.LV被藝術家惡搞很生氣提出起訴， http://women.sohu.com/20080510/n256772533.shtml (last visited: 2012.11.20).28.章忠信，戲謔仿作是合理使用，不因營利而侵害著作權， http://www.copyrightnote.org/crnote/bbs.php? board=2&act=read&id=61 (last visited: 2013.05.20).29.經濟部智慧財產局，「混淆誤認之虞」審查基準，available at: http://www2.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp? xItem=317110&ctNode=7452&mp=1 (last visited: 2013.05.21).貳、英文文獻一、書籍 1.Lawrence Lessig, FREE CULTURE: HOW BIG MEDIA USES TECHNOLOGY AND THE LAW TO LOCK DOWN CULTURE AND CONTROL CREATIVITY (2004).2.Coombe, Rosemary J., THE CULTURAL LIFE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTIES: AUTHORSHIP, APPROPRIATION, AND THE LAW (1998).3.Thomas McCarthy, MCCARTHY ON TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (4th ed. 1996).4.4 David Nimmer, NIMMER ON COPYRIGHT (Rel. 73-8/2007).5.Thomas McCarthy, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (1984).6.6 J. Thomas McCarthy, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (4th ed. 2007).7.Stacey L. Dogan & Mark A. Lemley, PARODY AS BRAND (2012).8.Thomas McCarthy, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (3d ed. 1992).二、期刊、論文、研究報告1.Rebecca Tushnet, Copy This Essay: How Fair Use Doctrine Harms Free Speech and How Copying Serves It, 114 Yale L.J. 535(2004).2.Anthony L. Fletcher, The Product with the Parody Trademark: What’s Wrong with Chewy Vuiton?, 100 TRADEMARK REP. 1091 (2010).3.Robert J. Shaughnessy, Trademark Parody: A Fair Use And Amendment Analysis, 72 VA. L. REV. 1079 (1986).4.Frank I. Schechter, The Rational Basis of Trademark Protection, 40 HARV. L. REV. 813 (1927).5.McClure, Trademarks and Unfair Competition: A Critical History of Legal Thought, 69 TRADEMARK REP. 305 (1979).6.Treece, Trademark Licensing and Vertical Restraints in Franchising Arrangements, 116 U. PA. L. REV. 435 (1968).7.Laura E. Little, Regulating Funny: Humor and the Law, 94 CORNELL L. REV. 1235 (2009).8.David M. Kelly, Lynn M. Jordan, Twenty Years of Rogers v. Grimaldi: Balancing the Lanham Act with the First Amendment Rights of Creators of Artistic Works, 99 TRADEMARK REP. 1360 (2009).9.Robert C. Denicola, Trademarks as Speech: Constitutional Implications of the Emerging Rationales for the Protection of Trade Symbols, 1982 WIS.L.REV. 158 (1982).10.Pratheepan Gulasekaram, Policing the Border Between Trademarks and Free Speech: Protecting Unauthorized Trademark Use in Expressive Works, 80 WASH. L. REV. 887 (2005).11.Lawrence Lessig, The Creative Commons, 65 MONT. L. REV. 1 (2004).12.William M. Landes & Richard A. Posner, Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective, 30 J. L. & ECON. 265 (1987).13.Pattishall, Dawning Acceptance of the Dilution Rationale for Trademark-Trade Identity Protection, 74 TRADEMARK REP. 289 (1984).14.Patrick Emerson, “ I’m Litigatin’ It”: Infringement, Dilution, and Parody Under the Lanham Act, 9 NW. J. TECH. & INTELL. PROP. 477 (2011).15.Dorsen, Satiric Appropriation and the Law of Libel, Trademark and Copyright: Remedies Without Wrongs, 65 B.U.L.REV. 923 (1986).16.Corina I. Cacovean, Is Free Riding Aided by Parody to Sneak Between the Cracks of the Trademark Dilution Revision Act?, 31 HASTINGS COMM. & ENT L.J. 441 (2009).17.Steven M. Cordero, Cocaine-Cola, the Velvet Elvis, and Anti-Barbie: Defending the Trademark and Publicity Rights to Cultural Icons, 8 FORDHAM INTELL. PROP. MEDIA & ENT. L.J. 599 (1998).18.Eric Sonju,“ Likelihood of Confusion” is Confusing Enough: Why the Concept of Parody Has No Place in A Likelihood of Confusion Analysis, 38 AIPLA Q.J. 349 (2010).三、判決1.Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co. v. S.S. Kresge Co., 316 U.S. 203 (1942).2.L.L. Bean, Inc. v. Drake Publishers, Inc., 811 F.2d 26 (1st Cir. 1987).3.Prestonettes, Inc., v. Coty, 264 U.S. 359(1924).4.Stop the Olympic Prison v. U.S. Olympic Committee, 489 F. Supp. 1112 (S.D.N.Y. 1980)5.Lucasfilm Ltd. v. High Frontier, 622 F. Supp. 931 (D.D.C. 1985).6.Lighthawk, the Envtl. Air Force v. Robertson, 812 F. Supp. 1095 (W.D. Wash. 1993).7.American Family Life Ins. Co. v. Hagan, 266 F. Supp. 2d 682 (N.D. Ohio 2002).8.Benny v. Loew`s, Inc., 239 F.2d 532 (9th Cir. 1956).9.Berlin v. E.C. Publ`ns, Inc., 329 F.2d 541 (2d Cir. 1964).10.Walt Disney Prods. v. The Air Pirates, 581 F.2d 751 (9th Cir. 1978).11.Metro-Goldwyn Mayer, Inc. v. Showcase Atlanta Coop. Prods., Inc., 479 F. Supp. 351 (N.D. Ga. 1979).12.Chem. Corp. of Am. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 306 F.2d 433 (5th Cir. 1962).13.Girl Scouts of U.S. v. Personality Posters Mfg. Co., 304 F. Supp. 1228 (S.D.N.Y. 1969).14.The Coca-Cola Co. v. Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183(E.D.N.Y. 1972).15.General Mills, Inc. v. Henry Regnery Co., 421 F. Supp. 359 (N.D. Ill. 1976).16.Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc. v. Manns Theatres, 195 U.S.P.Q. 159 (C.D. Cal. 1976).17.Gucci Shops, Inc. v. R.H. Macy & Co., Inc., 446 F. Supp. 838 (S.D.N.Y. 1977).18.Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema, Ltd., 604 F.2d 200 (2d Cir. 1979).19.Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, 407 U.S. 551, 567, 92 S.Ct. 2219, 2228, 33 L.Ed.2d 31 (1972).20.Elsmere Music, Inc. v. Nat`l Broad. Co., 623 F.2d 252 (2d Cir. 1980).21.MCA Inc. v. Wilson, 677 F.2d 180 (2d Cir. 1981).22.DC Comics Inc. v. Crazy Eddie, Inc., 205 U.S.P.Q. 1177 (S.D.N.Y. 1979).23.Warner Bros. Inc. v. Am. Broadcast Cos., Inc., 720 F.2d 231 (2d Cir. 1983).24.DC Comics, Inc. v. Unlimited Monkey Bus., 598 F. Supp. 110 (N.D. Ga. 1984).25.Original Appalachian Artworks, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., 642 F. Supp. 1031 (N.D.Ga. 1986).26.Fisher v. Dees, 794 F.2d 432 (9th Cir. 1986).27.Tin Pan Apple, Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co., Inc., 737 F. Supp. 826 (S.D.N.Y. 1990).28.Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc., 207 U.S.P.Q. 852 (N.D. Ill. 1980).29.Carson v. Here`s Johnny Portable Toilets, Inc., 698 F.2d 831 (6th Cir. 1983).30.Tetley, Inc. v. Topps Chewing Gum, Inc., 556 F. Supp. 785 (E.D.N.Y. 1983).31.Wendy`s Int`l, Inc. v. Big Bite, Inc., 576 F. Supp. 816 (S.D. Ohio 1983).32.Central Hudson Gas & Elec. v. Public Serv. Comm`n, 447 U.S. 557, 561, 100 S.Ct. 2343, 2348, 65 L.Ed.2d 341 (1980).33.Jordache Enters., Inc. v. Hogg Wyld, Ltd., 828 F.2d 1482 (10th Cir. 1987).34.Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. v. Novak, 836 F.2d 397 (8th Cir. 1987).35.Lowe v. SEC, 472 U.S. 181, 204–05, 105 S.Ct. 2557, 2570 –71, 86 L.Ed.2d 130 (1985).36.Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994 (2d Cir. 1989).37.Cliff`s Notes. Inc. v. Bantam Doubleday Dell Publ`g Group. Inc., 886 F.2d 490 (2d Cir. 1989).38.Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Electronics Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir.).39.Schieffelin & Co. v. Jack Co. of Boca. Inc., 725 F. Supp. 1314 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).40.Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. L & L Wings, Inc., 962 F.2d 316 (4th Cir. 1992).41.Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Balducci Publ`ns, 28 F.3d 769 (8th Cir. 1994).42.Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc., 510 U.S. 569 (1994).43.Harley Davidson, Inc. v. Grottanelli, 164 F.3d 806 (2d Cir. 1999).44.Hormel Foods Corp. v. Jim Henson Prods., Inc., 73 F.3d 497 (2d Cir. 1996).45.Dr. Seuss Enters., L.P. v. Penguin Books, USA, Inc., 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997).46.Rogers v. Koons, 960 F.2d 301 (2d Cir.1992).47.Liebovitz v. Paramount Pictures Corp., 137 F.3d 109 (2d Cir. 1998).48.Elvis Presley Enters., Inc. v. Capece, 141 F.3d 188 (5th Cir. 1998).49.Lyons Partnership v. Giannoulas, 179 F.3d 384 (5th Cir. 1999).50.Suntrust Bank v. Houghton Mifflin Co., 268 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2001).51.Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., 296 F.3d 894 (9th Cir. 2002).52.Tommy Hilfiger Licensing, Inc. v. Nature Labs, LLC, 221 F. Supp. 2d 410 (S.D.N.Y. 2002).53.Mattel, Inc. v. Walking Mountain Prods., 353 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003).54.Yankee Publ`g, Inc. v. News Am. Publ`g, Inc., 809 F.Supp. 267(S.D.N.Y.1992).55.World Wrestling Fed`n Entm`t, Inc. v. Big Dog Holdings, Inc., 280 F. Supp. 2d 413 (W.D. Pa. 2003).56.Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. VIP Prods., LLC, 666 F. Supp. 2d 974 (E.D. Mo. 2008).57.Eli Lilly & Co. v. Nat`l Answers, Inc., 233 F.3d 456 (7th Cir. 2000).58.Protectmarriage.com v. Courage Campaign, 680 F. Supp. 2d 1225 (E.D. Cal. 2010).59.Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007).60.Pizzeria Uno Corp. v. Temple, 747 F.2d 1522 (4th Cir.1984).61.Falcon Rice Mill, Inc. v. Community Rice Mill, Inc., 725 F.2d 336 (5th Cir. 1984)62.Surgical Supply Serv., Inc. v. Adler, 321 F.2d 536 (3d Cir. 1963)63.James Burrough Ltd. v. Sign of Beefeater, Inc., 540 F.2d 266(7th Cir. 1976).64.Stork Restaurant, Inc. v. Sahati, 166 F.2d 348 (9th Cir. 1948).65.Anti–Monopoly, Inc. v. General Mills Fun Group, 611 F.2d 296 (9th Cir.1979).66.E.S.S. Entm`t 2000, Inc. v. Rock Star Videos, Inc., 547 F.3d 1095 (9th Cir. 2008).67.Roxbury Entm`t v. Penthouse Media Group Inc., 92 U.S.P.Q.2d 1760 (CD. Cal. 2009).68.HMH Publishing Co., Inc. v. Brincat, 504 F.2d 713 (9th Cir.1974).69.Nike, Inc. v. Just Did It Enterprises, 6 F.3d 1225 (7th Cir. 1993).70.Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Mfg. Co. v. S.S. Kresge Co., 316 U.S. 203 (1942).71.Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Safeway Discount Drugs, Inc., 675 F.2d 1160 (11th Cir. 1982)72.Toys ‘R‘ Us, Inc. v. Canarsie Kiddie Shop, Inc., 559 F. Supp. 1189 (E.D.N.Y. 1983)73.Smith v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 537 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (N.D. Ga. 2008).74.Hoffman v. Capital Cities/ABC, Inc., 255 F.3d 1180 (9th Cir.2001).75.Kasky v. Nike, Inc., 45 P.3d 243 (Cal. 2002)76.White v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Inc., 989 F.2d 1512 (9th Cir. 1993).77.Burnett v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp., 491 F.Supp.2d 962 (C.D. Cal. 2007).78.I.P. Lund Trading ApS v. Kohler Co., 163 F.3d 27 (1st Cir.1998).四、網路資源1.I Saw the Figure 5 in Gold - Charles Demuth(1928), http://dolceaficionada.tumblr.com/post/13495384548/i-saw- the-figure-5-in-gold-charles-demuth-1928 (last visited: 2012.12.06).2.Gaks Designs – Gerrel Saunders， http://benpittdesign.wordpress.com/tag/graphic-design/ (last visited: 2012.12.07).3.Spectacular Attractions, Food Chain Barbie, http://drnorth.wordpress.com/2010/02/10/wholesome-is-out- superstar-the-karen-carpenter-story/food-chain-barbie/. (last visited: 2012.12.06)4.What do Heidi Cody symbols in American Alphabet mean? http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_do_Heidi_Cody_symbols_in_American_Alphabet_mean (last visited: 2012.12.06).5.Heidi Cody, http://weblog.bezembinder.nl/28.htm (last visited: 2012.12.06).6.Play, http://uauage.org/?m=200412 (last visited: 2012.12.06).7.Sad Ronald: Banksy Exhibition, Bristol, http://www.flickr.com/photos/photomequickbooth/3870801228/ (last visited: 2012.12.06)8.Art Student Nadia Plesner`s Giant Louis Vuitton Copyright Suit， http://nymag.com/thecut/2008/05/art_student_nadia_pelsners_gia.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).9.Louis Vuitton Tried to Prevent the Nadia Plesner Lawsuit， http://nymag.com/thecut/2008/05/louis_vuitton_tried_to_prevent.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).10.Louis Vuitton Attempts to Ban Darfurnica, http://aandalawblog.blogspot.tw/2011/03/louis-vuitton-attempts-to-ban-dafurnica.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).11.Darfurnica: Art must offend, shock and disturb, http://southasia.oneworld.net/archive/globalheadlines/darfurnica-art-must-offend-shock-and-disturb (last visited: 2012.11.20).12.Interview with artist Diana Thorneycroft, http://wag.ca/whats-on/blog/display,articles/43/interview-with-artist-diana-thorneycroft (last visited: 2012.11.20).13.Canadian artist Diana Thorneycroft, http://www.detritus.net/contact/rumori/200211/0149.html (last visited: 2012.11.20).14.Latest European Cases on Well-Known Marks, http://www.inta.org/INTABulletin/Pages/LatestEuropeanCasesonWellKnownMarks.aspx (last visited: 2012.11.21).15.Are you Cadbury or Milka ?, http://newmarketingexperience.blogspot.tw/2011/11/cadbury-or-milka.html (last visited: 2012.11.21).16.VIAGRA vs. STYRIAGRA, http://www.boult.com/news/Viagra%20vs%20Styriagra%20BHC%20Feb10.pdf (last visited: 2012.11.21).17.Stop the Olympic Prison poster, http://www.docspopuli.org/articles/STOP/STOP.html (last visited: 2013.04.25).18.Happy 65th Birthday, Smokey Bear: How a new understanding of forest fires has changed the furry mascot`s message, http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=happy-65th-birthday-smokey-bear--ho-2009-07-24 ; http://www.mtmultipleuse.org/fire/smokey_bear_poster.htm (last visited: 2013.05.14).19.Is AFLAC A Good Company To Work For? Or A Hiring Scam?, http://sourceblogger.com/is-aflac-a-scam-or-a-good-company-to-work-for/ (last visited: 2013.04.25).20.Great Lakes/Ohio River Valley Political Report, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2002/regional/gl-orv.html (last visited: 2013.4.25)21.Alcohol Ads of the 1950s, http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/alcohol-ads-1950s/87 (last visited: 2013.04.25).22.Be Prepared Pregnant Girl Scout Original Protest Poster, http://www.dpvintageposters.com/cgi-local/detail.cgi?d=2504 (last visited: 2013.04.25).23.Coca Cola Logo, http://insidetommyshead.wordpress.com/2011/03/27/coca-cola-logo/ (last visited: 2013.04.25).24.Cocaine, http://www.coolchaser.com/graphics/776084 (last visited: 2013.04.25).25.Texas State Fair :Children`s Shoe Art Contest entries ThursdayThirteen, http://joyismygoal.blogspot.tw/2009/10/thursday-texas-state-fair-shoe-art.html (last visited: 2013.04.25).26.Cabbage Patch Kids, http://cn.last.fm/music/Cabbage+Patch+Kids (last visited: 2013.04.25).27.Evidence Of Secondary Meaning In TV Catchphrases?, http://www.schwimmerlegal.com/2006/11/evidence-of-secondary-meaning-in-tv-catchphrases.html (last visited: 2013.04.26).28.Jay-Z and Beyoncé Talk to the Feds, http://artherworldblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/09/jay-z-and-beyonce-talk-to-the-feds/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).29.Wacky Packages Original Series, http://www.lostwackys.com/Wacky-Packages/15th-series/Petley.htm (last visited: 2013.04.25).30.Welcome Back Mutual of Omaha!, http://www.hathawaysettlements.com/2010/10/28/welcome-back-mutual-of-omaha/ (last visited: 2013.04.26)31.Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Astaire_and_Ginger_Rogers , http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/fred%20astaire%20and%20ginger%20rogers (last visited: 2013.04.26).32.Ginger and Fred, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ginger_and_Fred (last visited: 2013.04.26).33.Good Calories, Bad Calories: Cliffs Notes, http://fitfemaleforty.com/2011/04/09/good-calories-bad-calories-cliffs-notes/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).34.Spy Notes, http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/362694.Spy_Notes (last visited: 2013.04.26).35.Energizer Bunny, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energizer_Bunny (last visited: 2013.04.26).36.Don’t Spam – Keep The Boards Clean!, http://blog.indabamusic.com/2012/11/dont-spam-keep-the-boards-clean/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).37.Muppet PVC figures (Miniland), http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Muppet_PVC_figures_(Miniland) (last visited: 2013.04.26).38.The Cat in the Hat, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cat_in_the_Hat (last visited: 2013.04.26).39.Synchronizing Art to a Sound Recording: Do Financial Incentives Demotivate Creativity and Problem Solving?, http://copyrightlitigation.blogspot.tw/2010/06/synchronizing-art-to-sound-recording-do.html (last visited: 2013.04.26).40.Shirley, That’s a Parody!, http://www.entertainmentlawmatters.com/?p=1147 (last visited: 2013.04.25).41.Barney, http://basicte.blogspot.tw/2013/04/barney-barney- online-fun-for-all.html (last visited: 2013.04.26).42.Chicken trounces Barney again, in federal court, http://www.current.org/wp-content/themes/current/archive-site/ch/ch814b.html ; http://www.flickr.com/photos/latentimage16/4803819199/ (last visited: 2013.04.26).43.Gone with the Wind, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_with_the_Wind (last visited: 2013.04.29).44.Fanfiction before there was fanfiction!, http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/the%20wind%20done%20gone?language=ja_JP (last visited: 2013.04.29).45.Tommy Hilfiger announces 40% off Entire Store in the Black Friday 2012 Ad, http://blackfriday.bradsdeals.com/news/2012/10/23/tommy- hilfiger-black-friday-2012-ad/ (last visited: 2013.04.29).46.Budweiser wins preliminary injunction against Buttwiper dog toy, http://www.vegastrademarkattorney.com/2008/10/budweiser- wins-preliminary-injunction.html (last visited: 2013.04.29).47.My First Chewy Vuitton!, http://www.ellvy.com/2011/06/my- first-chewy-vuitton/ (last visited: 2013.04.29).48.Trade Mark Dilution, http://mowingthelaw.blogspot.tw/2012/02/trade-mark- dilution.html (last visited: 2013.04.29). zh_TW
