【作者】 周雪梅；

【导师】 张丹丹；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 法律硕士（专业学位）， 2021， 硕士

【摘要】 搜索引擎是当前网络信息检索的重要手段之一,其关键词查询这一信息查找方式在极大程度上便利了网络用户。随着互联网络消费形式的出现和迅速发展,百度公司作为搜索引擎商率先向中国引入了竞价排名服务以满足企业在网络宣传推广商品的需要,但是这一服务的推出逐渐引发了许多纠纷,其中商标侵权纠纷尤甚:部分企业出于迎合网络用户搜索习惯吸引点击量的目的,擅自将知名度更高的他人商标设置为竞价关键词,抢夺原属于商标权人的商业机会,严重侵害了商标权人的合法权益。目前,后台型竞价排名服务中服务购买者仅将他人商标设置为关键词,但在搜索链接标题及目标网站中并未出现该商标,对于此种情形是否会构成商标侵权在司法实务和学界中仍存在一定的争议,因此本文将分析后台型竞价排名服务中商标侵权与否的认定要件以及搜索引擎商的责任承担问题,以期找出后台型竞价排名服务中商标侵权问题的解决方法。本文主要内容由以下几部分组成:第一部分主要总结了司法实务中竞价排名服务商标侵权纠纷案件的焦点法律问题。通过对司法案例进行对比研究,总结出认定此类商标侵权案件在理论层面中的争议问题主要有后台型竞价排名服务中设置商标关键词是否构成商标性使用;是否会具有混淆可能性以及搜索引擎商的侵权责任三类问题。第二部分从理论层面分析后台型竞价排名服务商标侵权中的商标性使用和混淆可能性问题。我国司法实践中多采用消费者感知标准判定竞价者使用商标关键词的行为不能为公众感知从而认定不构成商标性使用,实际上是对商标性使用的内涵发生了错误认识,故提出适用行为人主体标准,只要被控侵权行为人在商业活动中显著地对系争商标标识进行了使用,并且具有指示商品或服务来源的主观目的时,就可以认定其行为构成商标性使用。同时明确了商标侵权认定中商标性使用应当处于前提条件的地位。司法实践中使用售中混淆判定竞价者的商标侵权行为的混淆可能性存在一定不足之处,主张后台型竞价排名服务中竞价者对他人商标标识关键词的使用行为会使得消费者产生混淆的时间节点提前,适用初始兴趣混淆理论更具合理性。第三部分将探讨服务提供方搜索引擎商的侵权责任问题。在后台型竞价排名服务中,服务购买者属于商标侵权的直接侵权人,而搜索引擎商作为服务提供者适用共同侵权责任进行归责将会加重其责任承担的范围,故存在不合理之处。通过分析间接侵权责任的成立条件主张适用间接侵权责任对搜索引擎商进行归责更为合理,实践中搜索引擎商也不应完全凭借技术中立适用“避风港制度”免于承担责任。最后提出搜索引擎商应当建立阶段性注意义务的建议。更多还原

【Abstract】 As a product of the Internet,search engines are currently one of the important means for people to search for information on the Internet,and their keyword query information search method greatly facilitates Internet users.With the emergence and rapid development of Internet consumption,Baidu,as a search engine company,took the lead in introducing paid listing to China to meet the needs of enterprises to promote the brand’s products on the Internet.However,the launch of this service has gradually caused many disputes,especially trademark infringement disputes: some enterprises arbitrarily set higher-known trademarks of others as keywords for the purpose of catering to the search habits of Internet users and attracting consumer clicks as well as seizing the business opportunity that originally belonged to the trademark owners,whose legal rights are seriously damaged.At present,service buyers in the backstage paid listing only set others’ trademarks as keywords,but the trademarks do not appear in the search link title and target website.There are still some disputes in judicial practice and academic circles as to whether this situation will constitute trademark infringement.Therefore,this paper will analyze the identification requirements of trademark infringement and the responsibility of search engine companies,in order to find a solution to trademark infringement in the backstage paid listing.The main content of this paper consists of the following parts:The first part mainly summarizes the focal legal issues in the case of trademark infringement disputes in the backstage paid listing in judicial practice.Through a comparative study of judicial cases,it is concluded that the theoretically controversial issues in determining such trademark infringement cases are mainly whether the setting of keywords in the backstage paid listing constitutes trademark use;whether there is the likelihood of confusion and the infringement liability of search engine companies.The second part analyzes the issue of trademark use and confusion likelihood in the backstage paid listing trademark infringement from the theoretical level.In judicial practice in our country,consumer perception standards are often used to determine that use of trademark keywords cannot be perceived by the public as not constituting trademark use.In fact,it is a misunderstanding of the connotation of trademark use,so it is proposed to apply the actor subject standard.As long as the accused infringer has significantly used the mark of the disputed trademark in commercial activities and has the subjective purpose of indicating the source of the goods or services,it can be determined that his behavior constitutes trademark use.What’s more,it is clarified that trademark use should be a precondition in the determination of trademark infringement.There are certain shortcomings in the use of in-sale confusion in judicial practice to determine the likelihood for confusion of trademark infringements,and it is argued that in the backstage paid listing,the use of keywords of other people’s trademarks will bring the time of consumers’ confusion earlier,and it is more reasonable to apply the theory of initial interest confusion.The third part discusses the infringement liability of search engine companies as service providers.In the backstage paid listing,the service purchaser is the direct infringer of trademark infringement,and it is unreasonable that the search engine provider applies joint infringement liability,for which will aggravate the scope of liability.By analyzing the establishment conditions of indirect infringement liability,it is more reasonable to apply indirect infringement liability to search engine companies.In practice,search engine companies should not be completely free from liability by applying the "safe haven system" based on technology neutrality.Finally,it puts forward the suggestion that search engine companies should establish periodic duty of care.更多还原