我国商标恶意注册中“恶意”认定研究

【作者】 张艺；

【导师】 马晓燕；

【作者基本信息】 南京师范大学 ， 法律硕士（非法学）（专业学位）， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 我国商标注册申请量近几年一直位居世界之首,伴随着申请量的日益激增,对商标资源的竞争也日趋加剧,商标恶意注册行为呈高发态势。商标恶意注册行为是指以获取不当利益为目的,攀附他人商誉、批量注册商标等行为。商标恶意注册行为认定的关键在于对商标注册申请人其行为在主观“恶意”的认定。2019年我国《商标法》第四次修订旨在适应我国内生需求,推动知识产权的高质量发展,为此立法修改中规定商标恶意注册行为的遏制及处罚措施,但修法中并未对恶意注册规定其一般性条款。在司法实践中,法院对“恶意”的认定是以诉争商标相似性、引证商标知名度、侵犯在先权利、商标囤积行为等因素予以考量。实证分析显示法院在审理中缺乏统一的认定标准,“恶意”认定中主要存在以下问题,一是对“恶意”的主观意图表述不具体,二是对明知或应知的判断标准不统一,三是对“恶意”认定的时间不一致,四是对“恶意”与其他不正当手段之间的关系不明晰。商标恶意注册中的“恶意”源于民法之意,其须要行为人对相关事实知晓,如行为人不知情,因不具有可谴责性则不能认为行为人存在恶意。由于恶意是对价值层面的认定,仅仅知晓并不能完全等同于恶意,还须要具有不正当的动机与目的。由于商标的本质价值须要通过使用得以体现,当商标申请人可以提供善意使用的证据越多,则可以证明恶意的可能性越小。商标恶意注册中的主观“恶意”应当包括主观认知和主观意图两个层次,在判定是否具有恶意时,其认定标准应当是将两者相结合:一方面对是否明知或应知这一主观认知进行判断,如通过诉争商标双方是否存在接触、申请人注册后行为、在先商业标识独创性、知名度以及所处区域或行业等因素,推定行为人知晓他人商业标识存在。另一方面是结合申请人的不诚信意图,如攀附他人商誉、阻碍他人进入市场、谋取其他不正当利益等。更多还原

【Abstract】 In recent years,the number of trademark registration applications in China has always been ranked first in the world.With the increasing number of trademark applications,the competition for trademark resources has also increasingly intensified.At the same time,there is a high incidence of the trademark registration in bad faith.The act of malicious trademark registration is to attach others’ goodwill and register trademarks in batches for improper interests.The key to the identification of malicious trademark registration is to identify bad faith of the trademark registration applicant.The fourth revision of Trademark Law in 2019 aims to meet the needs of domestic students and promote the high-quality development of intellectual property rights.For this purpose,the legislative amendment stipulates the restraining and punishing measures for malicious trademark registration.However,the general provisions for malicious trademark registration are not stipulated in the amendment.In judicial practice,the court considers the identification of "bad faith" based on such factors as the similarity of the contested trademark,the popularity of the citing trademark,the act of infringing the prior right and trademark hoarding.The empirical analysis shows that the court lacks a uniform identification standard of determining bad faith in the trial.There are the following problems: first,the expression of the subjective intention is not specific;second,the judgment standard is not uniform;third,the time of determination is not consistent;fourth,the relationship between "bad faith" and improper means is not clear.The "bad faith" in trademark registration is derived from civil law,which requires the perpetrator to know the relevant facts.It cannot be regarded as malicious if the applicant does not know relevant facts of trademark.As the identification of bad faith is at the level of value,knowing is only a neutral judgment which cannot be completely equated with bad faith.It also requires a perverse motive and purpose of bad faith.The essential value of a trademark needs to be reflected by using.The more evidences can provide in good faith use,the less likely the applicant is in bad faith.There are two sides in trademark registrations in bad faith: subjective cognition and subjective intention.On the one hand,it makes a judgment on whether applicant knows or should know the subjective cognition,such as the contact between the two parties of the trademark in dispute,the conduct of the applicant after registration,the originality and popularity of the prior mark,the region or industry,etc.On the other hand,the judgment must be based on the applicant’s dishonest intention,such as clinging to the goodwill of others,blocking others from entering the market and seeking other improper interests,etc.更多还原