論商標淡化之商標使用要件

Abstract

傳統上，商標法對於商標保護的範圍，僅及於當後使用者使用與商標權人相同或近似之商標，並因而導致消費者對於商品來源有混淆誤認之虞的情形；再者，商標權人必須提出證據以證明被告商標之使用，有構成消費者對於其商品之來源、關聯或贊助(source, affiliation, or sponsorship)，有混淆、錯誤或欺罔之情形存在，對於商標權人的保護似有不周之處。商標淡化理論之本意，就是在填補傳統上此商標保護之不足。商標淡化理論是用來處理，在雖不構成消費者混淆誤認，但卻對於原著名商標之獨特性(uniqueness)有所減損的情形。一般的商標侵權案例，係以被控侵權人的商標使用行為造成商標權利人商標有被「混淆誤認」或有「混淆誤認之虞」的情況而為主張，然而，在「商標淡化」的情況下，縱使於無混淆誤認之虞，為了保護著名商標權人商標的獨特性，在一定的情況下，仍給予其一定之保護。是以，有學者對「商標淡化」此種「特別」保護著名商標權利人的制度，是否有加以限制，或避免其太過擴張的必要，提出質疑？並認為，應透過「商標使用」要件的適用，用以限縮此項權利。然而，這樣的見解，引發了學者間以及法院間的不同意見。本研究除了分析介紹各學派對於此項爭議的不同意見外，另針對美國近期案例，利用質性分析的方式，來了解目前美國實務上對於上述爭議問題所持的意見；另外，在本研究的最後部分，亦會透過量化以及質性的分析方式，對我國法院對於商標淡化案件進行整理，試圖從不同面向來了解我國在此項爭議上的進展。最後，更希望透過本研究，使國人對於我國目前實務上關於商標淡化的認定標準為何有所了解，並進一步分析我國採納上述學者見解的必要與空間。

The trademark laws in the earlier days only covers the usage of trademark by people thereafter, and new trademarks that are similar to the original trademark owner, which as a result, misleads the consumers, or is likely to cause confusion regarding the source of the product or services. Furthermore, the trademark owner must provide physical evidences that can prove trademark abuse where consumers are mislead/misrepresented/cheated about the source, affiliation, or sponsorship of the product, and disregarded the protection of trademark owners, in order to file for remedies. The concept of “Trademark Dilution” is to resolve cases where consumers are not confused or mistaken about a trademark, but the usage of trademark caused decrementing effect to the trademark’s uniqueness. In most common trademark infringement cases, the appeals are primarily focused on the actual or possibility of confusion-based trademark; however, with trademark dilution, trademark owners are provided with some level of protections even if the trademark infringement is not likely to cause confusion. Thus, some scholars also question the validity of Trademark Dilution and its special protection to trademark owners on whether this law can enforce trademark usage of others, or overly broaden the protection of trademark owners? They believe the law should be focused on the “trademark use” criteria and limit the right of trademark usage. This opposing view has sparked conflict of opinion between the scholars and parliament. This particular thesis introduces and analyze the different opinions from all parties, and also provide qualitative analysis of recent lawsuits from United States, to better understand how Trademark Dilution is viewed by U.S. counterpart. The last part of this thesis uses both quantitative and qualitative analysis to organize the Trademark Dilution lawsuits that occurred within Taiwan, and try to use different perspective to understand the progress of resolving the conflict of opinions between scholars and parliament. Readers can hopefully gain better understanding of the current Trademark Dilution standards of Taiwan by this particular thesis, and further discuss the analysis/justification on the necessity of enhancing the trademark use concept, which suggested by scholars in Taiwan.