美國立體商標之功能性原則—兼評析我國立體商標審查實務

Abstract

得作為商標，具有表彰商品或服務來源之作用的標誌，不再限於傳統觀念中二度空間的平面商標，三度空間的立體形狀、包裝、容器、設計等亦有此功能。我國為順應世界潮流及履行國際義務，於民國九十二年年五月二十八日修正商標法，引進立體、顏色、聲音等非傳統商標，自同年十一月二十八日施行。立體商標在我國係屬商標之一種，其註冊要件與一般商標一樣必須具備識別性，以及符合一般商標之註冊要件，即不得具備第二十三條第一項各款之不得註冊事由。第二十三條第一項第四款規定功能性形狀不得註冊為商標，此規定係立體商標之「功能性原則」之體現，換言之，功能性為立體商標保護之消極要件，具備功能性之立體形狀，無論有無識別性，皆不得註冊為立體商標。 本文欲從比較法的觀點來探討「功能性原則」在我國適用之情形，並蒐集、整理我國立體商標審查實務上之核駁案件，依其核駁依據及核駁理由之不同而將之類型化，檢討我國立體商標審查實務上之問題。 本文共分為六章：第一章為「緒論」，敘述研究動機與目的、研究範圍、研究方法以及論文架構。第二章為「美國立體商標保護制度概說」，概說美國之商標、商業表徵、及立體商標之保護。第三章為「美國功能性原則之探討」，從美國法上之案例及Lanham Act來討論功能性原則之目的、內涵與判斷標準。第四章為「我國立體商標保護暨功能性原則之探討」，說明我國立體商標之保護以及我國功能性原則，並與美國法規範作比較。第五章為「我國立體商標審查實務之檢討與評析」，類型化我國立體商標核駁案，評析我國立體商標實務之問題。第六章為「結論」。

What is capable of identifying the source of goods (services) and of distinguishing the goods (services) of others is no longer limited to traditional word marks. Three-dimensional shapes or configurations of goods, packaging, containers, and designs also function as source identifying and distinguishing marks. Taiwan’s Trademark Act was amended on May 28, 2003 and three-dimensional marks, color marks, and sound marks were introduced into it as three new types of trademarks. As one type of trademarks, a three-dimensional shape of goods or packaging must possess distinctiveness before being registered as a trademark. It must comply with other requirements that apply to traditional trademarks as well. Moreover, if the three-dimensional shape is indispensable for performing the intended functions, then the trademark application shall be rejected. This is the so-called “functionality doctrine,” which has been enacted in the Trademark Act. In other words, a functional three-dimensional shape of goods or packaging shall not be registered as a trademark, regardless of its distinctiveness. This study will discuss from comparative legal perspectives the “functionality doctrine” and its enactment in Taiwan. Besides, this paper will categorize and analyze the rejections of three-dimensional trademark applications, reviewing whether any problems exist in the three-dimensional trademark examination practice in Taiwan. There are six chapters in this study. Chapter I is “Introduction,” stating the motivation, the purpose, the scope, the methods, and the structure of this study. Chapter II is “Introduction of the Mark Protection in the U.S.,” describing the protection for traditional marks, trade dress, and three-dimensional marks. Chapter III is “The U.S. Functionality Doctrine,” discussing from the U.S. cases and the Lanham Act the rationales of the doctrine, the meaning of “functionality,” and how to determine a feature of a product qualifies as “functional.” Chapter IV is “The Protection of Three-Dimensional Trademark and the Functionality Doctrine in Taiwan,” illustrating the protection for three-dimensional trademarks and the functionality doctrine in Taiwan. Chapter V is “Comment on the Examination Practice in Taiwan,” categorizing relevant rejections of three-dimensional trademark applications and commenting on the actual and potential problems in the examination practice. Chapter VI is “Conclusion.”