商標合理使用之比較研究

Abstract

商標權與言論自由具有衝突之可能，近來已受到注意，此平衡即在畫定關於商標的公領域及私領域的邊界。正如著作權的合理使用，商標法中的合理使用也是畫定此公領域與私領域間的輪廓的機制之一，美國聯邦最高法院在2004年底判決的KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc.案，牽涉到這兩種畫界機制的互動。著作權合理使用，對商標合理使用，雖不見得能夠全然適合，然而就架構原則體系上，有重要的參考價值。本研究的初期目標有兩大部分：一、重新架構商標合理使用體系；二、從憲法言論自由觀點，來詮釋商標合理使用。 近來，在美國商標案件，已越來越常見被告使用言論自由論證，包括「內含型」論證，與「外顯型」論證。本研究將對商標合理使用原則基於證立理論重新架構。目前我國之商標法修訂草案中，擬將指示性合理使用納入。因此本研究將對我國之修法及法律適用，亦具有價值。

The doctrine of trademark fair use reminds us of the possibility of conflicts between trademark rights and free speech. The balance between free speech and trademark rights are one that draws the line between the public sphere and the private sphere. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in KP Permanent Make-Up, Inc. v. Lasting Impression I, Inc. (2004) illustrates the interaction between these two types of rights. Fair use doctrine in copyright law may not be wholly useful in the trademark sphere, but it might shed great light on how the framework of trademark fair use doctrine can be constructed. The purpose of this research at this stage includes two parts: first, to reconstruct the system of trademark fair use from the perspective of justification theory; second, to reinterpret the trademark fair use doctrine in light of the constitutional principles of free speech. In recent years, we have seen more and more American trademark cases in which the parties assert the free speech arguments, including “internal” arguments and “external” arguments. This research will be of referential value for Taiwanese Trademark Law, which is current being revised to include the nominative fair use principle.