1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Law
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 智慧財產權與產業濳規則
Law-Based v. Norm-Based IP: Intellectual Production with Limitied IP Protection
作者 羅方妤
貢獻者 李治安
Jyh An, Lee
羅方妤
關鍵詞 產業濳規則
知慧財產權
著作權
專利權
商標權
營業秘密
social norms
intellectual property system
copyright
patent
trademark
trade secret
日期 2014
上傳時間 3-Feb-2016 12:16:47 (UTC+8)
摘要 對於當代社會而言，法律與社會規範均是不可缺少的重要部分。產業濳規則得以有效取代並制衡部份無法受智慧財產權保護的產業。透過交互運用智慧財產權法及產業濳規則的規範，將可以提供更好的功能，進而更完善的維護智慧財產。 在某些產業中，濳規則之存在是不容置疑的。從部份無法受智慧財產權保護的產業觀之，產業濳規則之規範可達到相似於智慧財產權法規範之保護目的及功效。
     
      本文之核心問題在於若無 proprietary IP system 的情況下，智慧財產如何受產業濳規則之保護並達到相同之功效及結果。文章中的 Part II, Part III 和 Part IV 探討Culinary、Fashion 以及 Stand-up Comedy之產業，分別檢視 proprietary system 在各產業中應如何應用，以及其成效。另從各產業之傳統文化及歷史背景所形成之濳規則中，研究濳規則是如何提供產業之成員有效的保護。
     
      模仿、抄襲是如何影響並促進創新; 一個產業又如何在不受智慧財產權法規範的保障下蓬勃發展。前述的三個產業，均證實其產業之濳規則得以有效並取代智慧財產權之規範。在 Stand-up Comedy 的產業裡，明顯的顯現出產業濳規則之存在與作用。反之，於 Fashion 產業中基於其他因素，產業濳規則之規範較不明顯。由於上述之三個產業均無法受智慧財產權完整之保護，利用各產業之濳規則加以規範成為各產業之常態。隨著時代之變遷，產業之濳規則雖無法提供滴水不漏之把關，惟仍需給予肯定，濳規則之存在得以維持產業之秩序並適當規範並制止恣意之侵權者。
Law and social norms are two indispensable components that are quintessential to modern civilization; the absence of proprietary IP systems in certain industries is likely to be replaced by equally effective governing industry norms. Improvement upon IP protections can be made through promoting the co-existence of both proprietary and nonproprietary IP systems working together in harmony. In certain industries, the existence of nonproprietary IP systems is indisputable. In fact, the fundamental values of nonproprietary IP systems do provide similar protection to contemporary proprietary IP system.
     
      Questions arise from whether the absence of proprietary IP system would have had produced the same effects and results. Part II, Part III and Part IV of this article each features culinary industry, fashion industry, and stand-up comedy industry respectively to examine the applications of proprietary system in each industries and to validate the effectiveness of different nonproprietary systems. Specifically, they focus on the traditional culture of each industry and how the industry social norms can offer efficient protection to members of the industry.
     
      How imitation influence innovation, and how an industry thrives without complete IP regulations. All three industries show that social norms can effectively substitute legal IP systems. While social norms in the comedy world have a strong presence, in contrast, they are comparably less prominent in the fashion industry. Due to the lack of legal protection across all three creative industries, using informal norms to regulate against appropriation becomes a common practice. Although from time to time social norms are not always the failsafe regulator, they certainly assert the much-needed order through their own system of dealing with violators.
"I. INTRODUCTION 1
     A. Purpose and Motives 1
     B. Social Norms 2
     C. The Fitting of Social Norms in Creative Industries 3
     D. The Structure of Present Thesis 4
     II. CULINARY INDUSTRY 6
     A. Background and Overview 6
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 6
     1. Patent 7
     2. Copyright 10
     3. Trademark 12
     4. Trade Secret 14
     C. Industry Norms 15
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 18
     III. FASHION INDUSTRY 21
     A. Background and Overview 21
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 25
     1. Patent 25
     2. Copyright 28
     3. Trademark and Trade Dress 31
     4. Trade Secret 33
     C. Industry Norms 34
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 35
     IV. STAND-UP COMEDY 37
     A. Background and Overview 37
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 37
     1. Patent 38
     2. Copyright 38
     3. Trademark 40
     C. Industry Norms 41
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 44
     V. Conclusion 46
     Appendix I 48
     References 49
     
     "
參考文獻 Books
     
     1.CHRISTOPHER ARUP AND WILLIAM VAN CAENEGEM, INTELLECTUAL POLICY REFORM: FOSTERING INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT (2009).
     2.KAL RAUSTIALA AND CHRISTOPHER SPRIGMAN, THE KOCKOFF ECONOMY: HOW IMITATION SPARKS INNOVATION (2012).
     3.LANNING G. BRYER, SCOTT J. LEBSON AND MATTHEW D. ASBELL, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STRATEGIES FOR THE 21ST CENTURY CORPORATION: A SHIT IN STRATEGIC AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (Lanning G. Bryer et al. eds., 1st ed. 2011).
     4.RICHARD STIM, PATENT, COPYRIGHT & TRADEMARK 6-7 (Robert Wells eds., 12th ed 2012).
     
     Periodicals
     
     1.Austin J. Broussard, An Intellectual Property Food Fight: Why Copyright Law Should Embrace Culinary Innovation, 10 VANDERBILT J. OF ENTERTAINMENT AND TECH. L. 691 (2008).
     2.Christopher J. Buccafusco, On the Legal Consequences of Sauces: Should Thomas Keller’s Recipes be Per Se Copyrightable?, 24 CARDOZO ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT 1121 (2007).
     3.Daniel C. Feldman, The Development and Enforcement of Group Norms, 9 ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT R. 47 (1984).
     4.Dotan Oliar and Christopher Sprigman, There’s No Free Laugh (Anymore): The Emergence of Intellectual Property Norms and the Transformation of Stand-Up Comedy, 94 VIRGINIA L. REV. 1787 (2008).
     5.Emily Cunningham, Protecting Cuisine under the Rubic of Intellectual Property Law: Should the Law Play a Bigger Role in the Kitchen?, 9 J. HIGH TECH. L. 21 (2009).
     6.Emmanuelle Fauchart and Eric von Hippel, Norms-Based Intellectual Property Systems: The Case of French Chefs, 19 ORGANIZATION SCIENCE 187 (2008).
     7.Julie P. Tsai, Fashioning Protection: A Note on the Protection of Fashion Designs in the United States, 9 LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 447 (2005).
     8.Kal Raustiala and Christopher Spirgman, The Piracy Paradox: Innovation and Intellectual Property in Fashion Design, 92 VIRGINIA L. REV. 1687 (2006).
     9.Kimberly A. Harchunck, Fashion Design Protection: The Eternal Plight of the “Soft Sculpture”, 4 ARKON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY J. 73 (2010).
     10.Lauren Howard, An Uningenious Paradox: Intellectual Property Protections for Fashion Designs, 32 COLUBIA J. OF L. & THE ARTS 101 (2009).
     11.Margaret E. Wade, The Sartorial Dilemma of Knockoffs: Protecting Moral Rights without Disturbing the Fashion Dynamic, 96 MINNISOTA L. REV. 336 (2011).
     12.Meredith G. Lawrence, Edible Plagiarism: Reconsidering Recipe Copyright in the Digital Age, 14 VANDERBILT J. OF ENT. AND TECH. L. 187 (2011).
     13.Naomi Straus, Trade Dress Protection for Cuisine: Monetizing Creativity in a Low-IP Industry, 60 UCLA L. REV. 182 (2012).
     14.Rochard A. Posner and Eric B. Rasmusen, Creating and Enforcing Norms, with Special Reference to Sanctions, 19 INT’L R. OF L. AND ECONOMICS 369 (1999).
     15.Rochelle C. Dreyfuss, Does IP Need IP? Accommodating Intellectual Production Outside the Intellectual Property Paradigm, 31 CARDOZO L.R. 1437 (2010).
     
     Cases
     
     1.Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
     2.Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763 (1992).
     3.Fashion Originators’ Guild of Am., Inc. v. FTC, 312 U.S. 457 (1941).
     4.Millinery Creator’s Guild v. FTC, 109 F.2d 175 (2d Cir. 1940).
     5.Foxworthy v. Custom Tees, Inc., 879 F. Supp. 1200 (N.D. Ga. 1995).
     6.Johnny Carson Apparel, Inc. v. Zeeman Manufacturing Co., C75-544A, 1978 WL 21356 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 4 1978).
     7.L.A. Gear, Inc. v. Thom McAn Shoe Co., 988 F.2d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
     8.Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc., 456 U.S. 844 (1982).
     9.U-Neek, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 147 F. Supp. 2d 158 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
     10.Abercrombie & Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc., 537 F.2d 4, (CA2 1976).
     11.Zatarains, Inc., v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786, 790-96, 217U.S.P.Q. 988 (5th Cir.1983).
     12.Wal-­Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Bros., 529 U.S. 205 (2000).
     13.Cesare v. Work, 520 N.E.2d 586 (Ohio Ct. App. 1987).
     14.Lauratex Textile Corp. v. Allton Knitting Mills Inc., 519 F. Supp. 730, (S.D.N.Y. 1981).
     
     Documents
     
     1.Exploiting Intellectual Property in a Complex World, PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, June 2007, available at http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/technology/pdf/exploiting-intellectual-property.pdf.
     2.Wazir Management Consiltants, The Road to 2025: Textile and Apparel Trends, 15. Available at http://www.wazir.in/pdfs/The Road to 2025- Wazir Advisors.pdf.
     3.Brian T. Yeh, Copyright Protection for Fashion Design: A Legal Analysis of the Design Piracy Prohibition Act (H.R.2033 and S. 1957), January 16, 2009, available at http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RS22685.
     
     Internet
     
     1.National Restaurant Association, Facts at a Glance,
     http://www.restaurant.org/News-Research/Research/Facts-at-a-Glance
     2.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Types of Patents, http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/patdesc.htm
     3.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Food or Edible Material: Process, Composition, and Products Class 426, http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/uspc426/defs426.htm
     4.Pete Wells, New Era of the Recipe Burglar, FOOD & WINE (Nov. 2006) available at http://www.foodandwine.com/articles/new-era-of-the-recipe-burglar.
     5.Chanel: Inspiration and Influence, available at http://www.chanelcollections.wordpress.com/
     6.Robin Givhan, Michelle Obama’s Designers Want Protection from Knock-offs,
     THE WASHIGNTON POST, Apr. 27, 2009, available at http://www.chinapost.com.tw/life/fashion/2009/04/27/205860/p2/Michelle-Obama%27s.htm.
     7.Jenna Sauers, How Forever 21 Keeps Getting Away with Designer Knockoffs, http://jezebel.com/5822762/how-forever-21-keeps-getting-away-with-designer-knockoffs.
     8.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1504 Examination [R-11.2013], available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1504.html
     9.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Performance and Accountability Report: Fiscal Year of 2012, 16 available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2012PAR.pdf
     10.Lindsay Lavine, When Business Names Confuse Consumers: The Basics of Trademark Law, March 12, 2013 Available at http://www.entrepreneuw.com/article/226140.
     11.U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Glossary, available at http://www.uspto.gov/main/glossary/index.html#t.
     12.Sean Springer, Stand-Up Comedians, available at http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199791286/obo-9680199791286-0137.xml.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
法律科際整合研究所
98652007
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0986520071
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 李治安zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Jyh An, Leeen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 羅方妤zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) 羅方妤zh_TW
dc.date (日期) 2014en_US
dc.date.accessioned 3-Feb-2016 12:16:47 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 3-Feb-2016 12:16:47 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 3-Feb-2016 12:16:47 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0986520071en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/81209-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 法律科際整合研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 98652007zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 對於當代社會而言，法律與社會規範均是不可缺少的重要部分。產業濳規則得以有效取代並制衡部份無法受智慧財產權保護的產業。透過交互運用智慧財產權法及產業濳規則的規範，將可以提供更好的功能，進而更完善的維護智慧財產。 在某些產業中，濳規則之存在是不容置疑的。從部份無法受智慧財產權保護的產業觀之，產業濳規則之規範可達到相似於智慧財產權法規範之保護目的及功效。
     
      本文之核心問題在於若無 proprietary IP system 的情況下，智慧財產如何受產業濳規則之保護並達到相同之功效及結果。文章中的 Part II, Part III 和 Part IV 探討Culinary、Fashion 以及 Stand-up Comedy之產業，分別檢視 proprietary system 在各產業中應如何應用，以及其成效。另從各產業之傳統文化及歷史背景所形成之濳規則中，研究濳規則是如何提供產業之成員有效的保護。
     
      模仿、抄襲是如何影響並促進創新; 一個產業又如何在不受智慧財產權法規範的保障下蓬勃發展。前述的三個產業，均證實其產業之濳規則得以有效並取代智慧財產權之規範。在 Stand-up Comedy 的產業裡，明顯的顯現出產業濳規則之存在與作用。反之，於 Fashion 產業中基於其他因素，產業濳規則之規範較不明顯。由於上述之三個產業均無法受智慧財產權完整之保護，利用各產業之濳規則加以規範成為各產業之常態。隨著時代之變遷，產業之濳規則雖無法提供滴水不漏之把關，惟仍需給予肯定，濳規則之存在得以維持產業之秩序並適當規範並制止恣意之侵權者。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) Law and social norms are two indispensable components that are quintessential to modern civilization; the absence of proprietary IP systems in certain industries is likely to be replaced by equally effective governing industry norms. Improvement upon IP protections can be made through promoting the co-existence of both proprietary and nonproprietary IP systems working together in harmony. In certain industries, the existence of nonproprietary IP systems is indisputable. In fact, the fundamental values of nonproprietary IP systems do provide similar protection to contemporary proprietary IP system.
     
      Questions arise from whether the absence of proprietary IP system would have had produced the same effects and results. Part II, Part III and Part IV of this article each features culinary industry, fashion industry, and stand-up comedy industry respectively to examine the applications of proprietary system in each industries and to validate the effectiveness of different nonproprietary systems. Specifically, they focus on the traditional culture of each industry and how the industry social norms can offer efficient protection to members of the industry.
     
      How imitation influence innovation, and how an industry thrives without complete IP regulations. All three industries show that social norms can effectively substitute legal IP systems. While social norms in the comedy world have a strong presence, in contrast, they are comparably less prominent in the fashion industry. Due to the lack of legal protection across all three creative industries, using informal norms to regulate against appropriation becomes a common practice. Although from time to time social norms are not always the failsafe regulator, they certainly assert the much-needed order through their own system of dealing with violators.		en_US
dc.description.abstract (摘要) "I. INTRODUCTION 1
     A. Purpose and Motives 1
     B. Social Norms 2
     C. The Fitting of Social Norms in Creative Industries 3
     D. The Structure of Present Thesis 4
     II. CULINARY INDUSTRY 6
     A. Background and Overview 6
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 6
     1. Patent 7
     2. Copyright 10
     3. Trademark 12
     4. Trade Secret 14
     C. Industry Norms 15
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 18
     III. FASHION INDUSTRY 21
     A. Background and Overview 21
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 25
     1. Patent 25
     2. Copyright 28
     3. Trademark and Trade Dress 31
     4. Trade Secret 33
     C. Industry Norms 34
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 35
     IV. STAND-UP COMEDY 37
     A. Background and Overview 37
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 37
     1. Patent 38
     2. Copyright 38
     3. Trademark 40
     C. Industry Norms 41
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 44
     V. Conclusion 46
     Appendix I 48
     References 49
     
     "		-
dc.description.tableofcontents I. INTRODUCTION 1
     A. Purpose and Motives 1
     B. Social Norms 2
     C. The Fitting of Social Norms in Creative Industries 3
     D. The Structure of Present Thesis 4
     II. CULINARY INDUSTRY 6
     A. Background and Overview 6
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 6
     1. Patent 7
     2. Copyright 10
     3. Trademark 12
     4. Trade Secret 14
     C. Industry Norms 15
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 18
     III. FASHION INDUSTRY 21
     A. Background and Overview 21
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 25
     1. Patent 25
     2. Copyright 28
     3. Trademark and Trade Dress 31
     4. Trade Secret 33
     C. Industry Norms 34
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 35
     IV. STAND-UP COMEDY 37
     A. Background and Overview 37
     B. Possible IP Protections under Current IP Law 37
     1. Patent 38
     2. Copyright 38
     3. Trademark 40
     C. Industry Norms 41
     D. Proprietary v. Nonproprietary System 44
     V. Conclusion 46
     Appendix I 48
     References 49		zh_TW
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0986520071en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 產業濳規則zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 知慧財產權zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 著作權zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 專利權zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 商標權zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 營業秘密zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) social normsen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) intellectual property systemen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) copyrighten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) patenten_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) trademarken_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) trade secreten_US
dc.title (題名) 智慧財產權與產業濳規則zh_TW
dc.title (題名) Law-Based v. Norm-Based IP: Intellectual Production with Limitied IP Protectionen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Books
     
     1.CHRISTOPHER ARUP AND WILLIAM VAN CAENEGEM, INTELLECTUAL POLICY REFORM: FOSTERING INNOVATION AND DEVELOPMENT (2009).
     2.KAL RAUSTIALA AND CHRISTOPHER SPRIGMAN, THE KOCKOFF ECONOMY: HOW IMITATION SPARKS INNOVATION (2012).
     3.LANNING G. BRYER, SCOTT J. LEBSON AND MATTHEW D. ASBELL, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STRATEGIES FOR THE 21ST CENTURY CORPORATION: A SHIT IN STRATEGIC AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT (Lanning G. Bryer et al. eds., 1st ed. 2011).
     4.RICHARD STIM, PATENT, COPYRIGHT & TRADEMARK 6-7 (Robert Wells eds., 12th ed 2012).
     
     Periodicals
     
     1.Austin J. Broussard, An Intellectual Property Food Fight: Why Copyright Law Should Embrace Culinary Innovation, 10 VANDERBILT J. OF ENTERTAINMENT AND TECH. L. 691 (2008).
     2.Christopher J. Buccafusco, On the Legal Consequences of Sauces: Should Thomas Keller’s Recipes be Per Se Copyrightable?, 24 CARDOZO ARTS AND ENTERTAINMENT 1121 (2007).
     3.Daniel C. Feldman, The Development and Enforcement of Group Norms, 9 ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT R. 47 (1984).
     4.Dotan Oliar and Christopher Sprigman, There’s No Free Laugh (Anymore): The Emergence of Intellectual Property Norms and the Transformation of Stand-Up Comedy, 94 VIRGINIA L. REV. 1787 (2008).
     5.Emily Cunningham, Protecting Cuisine under the Rubic of Intellectual Property Law: Should the Law Play a Bigger Role in the Kitchen?, 9 J. HIGH TECH. L. 21 (2009).
     6.Emmanuelle Fauchart and Eric von Hippel, Norms-Based Intellectual Property Systems: The Case of French Chefs, 19 ORGANIZATION SCIENCE 187 (2008).
     7.Julie P. Tsai, Fashioning Protection: A Note on the Protection of Fashion Designs in the United States, 9 LEWIS & CLARK L. REV. 447 (2005).
     8.Kal Raustiala and Christopher Spirgman, The Piracy Paradox: Innovation and Intellectual Property in Fashion Design, 92 VIRGINIA L. REV. 1687 (2006).
     9.Kimberly A. Harchunck, Fashion Design Protection: The Eternal Plight of the “Soft Sculpture”, 4 ARKON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY J. 73 (2010).
     10.Lauren Howard, An Uningenious Paradox: Intellectual Property Protections for Fashion Designs, 32 COLUBIA J. OF L. & THE ARTS 101 (2009).
     11.Margaret E. Wade, The Sartorial Dilemma of Knockoffs: Protecting Moral Rights without Disturbing the Fashion Dynamic, 96 MINNISOTA L. REV. 336 (2011).
     12.Meredith G. Lawrence, Edible Plagiarism: Reconsidering Recipe Copyright in the Digital Age, 14 VANDERBILT J. OF ENT. AND TECH. L. 187 (2011).
     13.Naomi Straus, Trade Dress Protection for Cuisine: Monetizing Creativity in a Low-IP Industry, 60 UCLA L. REV. 182 (2012).
     14.Rochard A. Posner and Eric B. Rasmusen, Creating and Enforcing Norms, with Special Reference to Sanctions, 19 INT’L R. OF L. AND ECONOMICS 369 (1999).
     15.Rochelle C. Dreyfuss, Does IP Need IP? Accommodating Intellectual Production Outside the Intellectual Property Paradigm, 31 CARDOZO L.R. 1437 (2010).
     
     Cases
     
     1.Feist Publ’ns, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv. Co., 499 U.S. 340 (1991).
     2.Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc., 505 U.S. 763 (1992).
     3.Fashion Originators’ Guild of Am., Inc. v. FTC, 312 U.S. 457 (1941).
     4.Millinery Creator’s Guild v. FTC, 109 F.2d 175 (2d Cir. 1940).
     5.Foxworthy v. Custom Tees, Inc., 879 F. Supp. 1200 (N.D. Ga. 1995).
     6.Johnny Carson Apparel, Inc. v. Zeeman Manufacturing Co., C75-544A, 1978 WL 21356 (N.D. Ga. Nov. 4 1978).
     7.L.A. Gear, Inc. v. Thom McAn Shoe Co., 988 F.2d 1117 (Fed. Cir. 1993).
     8.Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc., 456 U.S. 844 (1982).
     9.U-Neek, Inc. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 147 F. Supp. 2d 158 (S.D.N.Y. 2001).
     10.Abercrombie & Fitch Co. v. Hunting World, Inc., 537 F.2d 4, (CA2 1976).
     11.Zatarains, Inc., v. Oak Grove Smokehouse, Inc., 698 F.2d 786, 790-96, 217U.S.P.Q. 988 (5th Cir.1983).
     12.Wal-­Mart Stores, Inc. v. Samara Bros., 529 U.S. 205 (2000).
     13.Cesare v. Work, 520 N.E.2d 586 (Ohio Ct. App. 1987).
     14.Lauratex Textile Corp. v. Allton Knitting Mills Inc., 519 F. Supp. 730, (S.D.N.Y. 1981).
     
     Documents
     
     1.Exploiting Intellectual Property in a Complex World, PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS, June 2007, available at http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/technology/pdf/exploiting-intellectual-property.pdf.
     2.Wazir Management Consiltants, The Road to 2025: Textile and Apparel Trends, 15. Available at http://www.wazir.in/pdfs/The Road to 2025- Wazir Advisors.pdf.
     3.Brian T. Yeh, Copyright Protection for Fashion Design: A Legal Analysis of the Design Piracy Prohibition Act (H.R.2033 and S. 1957), January 16, 2009, available at http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RS22685.
     
     Internet
     
     1.National Restaurant Association, Facts at a Glance,
     http://www.restaurant.org/News-Research/Research/Facts-at-a-Glance
     2.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Types of Patents, http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/patdesc.htm
     3.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Food or Edible Material: Process, Composition, and Products Class 426, http://www.uspto.gov/web/patents/classification/uspc426/defs426.htm
     4.Pete Wells, New Era of the Recipe Burglar, FOOD & WINE (Nov. 2006) available at http://www.foodandwine.com/articles/new-era-of-the-recipe-burglar.
     5.Chanel: Inspiration and Influence, available at http://www.chanelcollections.wordpress.com/
     6.Robin Givhan, Michelle Obama’s Designers Want Protection from Knock-offs,
     THE WASHIGNTON POST, Apr. 27, 2009, available at http://www.chinapost.com.tw/life/fashion/2009/04/27/205860/p2/Michelle-Obama%27s.htm.
     7.Jenna Sauers, How Forever 21 Keeps Getting Away with Designer Knockoffs, http://jezebel.com/5822762/how-forever-21-keeps-getting-away-with-designer-knockoffs.
     8.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1504 Examination [R-11.2013], available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/pac/mpep/s1504.html
     9.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Performance and Accountability Report: Fiscal Year of 2012, 16 available at: http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2012PAR.pdf
     10.Lindsay Lavine, When Business Names Confuse Consumers: The Basics of Trademark Law, March 12, 2013 Available at http://www.entrepreneuw.com/article/226140.
     11.U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Glossary, available at http://www.uspto.gov/main/glossary/index.html#t.
     12.Sean Springer, Stand-Up Comedians, available at http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/view/document/obo-9780199791286/obo-9680199791286-0137.xml.		zh_TW