頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論嬌蕉包與愛馬仕柏金包糾紛之商標侵權爭議=Comments on the Trademark Disputes between Hermes Birkin Bag and Banana Taipei Tote Bag |
---|---|
作 者 | 張瑞星; | 書刊名 | 興大法學 |
卷 期 | 12 2012.11[民101.11] |
頁 次 | 頁103-140 |
分類號 | 490.25 |
關鍵詞 | 嬌蕉包; 商標仿作; 商標近似; 商標混淆誤認; 商標淡化; 合理使用; Trademark parody; Similar trademark; Likelihood of confusion; Trademark dilution; Fair use; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 號稱台灣設計製造的嬌蕉包將國際知名精品愛馬仕柏金包以攝影後的圖樣拓印到帆布袋上,且以看起來極為近似但經過修改且具趣味的商標貼附在帆布袋上於市場上販賣圖利,這樣的商標利用方式,究竟只是搭便車的商標抄襲模仿作品或是具創意的商標仿作作品,嬌蕉包所採用之商標模仿愛馬仕商標是否過於近似而造成消費者混淆及有否淡化著名商標等問題。乃本文所討論之核心所在。 本文除了首先將糾紛之爭議提點外,亦藉助美國法院的見解,將何謂商標仿作的概念加以規範,商標仿作是否會造成消費者的混淆,其標準應如何判定;如果仿作的標的是著名商標,是否會造成商標淡化;在參酌法院過去的處理方式後,本文接著先就嬌蕉包之商標模仿是否為合理的商標仿作為判斷,次就判斷之結果是否造成消費者混淆誤認加以認定,即便不造成混淆誤認,但因愛馬仕為國內外著名之商標,故恐有商標淡化之問題,亦一併加以討論。 綜合言之,本文認為嬌蕉包在商標侵權之爭議上,雖然業經我國法院做成判決確定,然考量商標仿作之特性含有創意的言論自由成分,在商標利用並不致造成消費者混淆誤認的前提下,應以保護商標仿作的言論表達為優先考量。嬌蕉包商標及商品幾乎不可能造成消費者混淆誤認其為愛馬仕柏金包,則含有創意表達的嬌蕉包商標應以受法律保護為宜。 |
英文摘要 | The well-known French luxury goods brand "Hermes" recently filed a lawsuit against a Taiwanese handbag company, Banana Taipei, for infringing its trademark right. Hermes alleged that Banana Taipei has not only imprinted photographs of what appears to be a genuine Hermes Birkin bag to its canvas tote bag but also used a similar trademark, Banana Taipei, comparing to Hermes Paris. Hermes argues that Banana Taipei's canvas bag is simply free riding on the reputation and recognition of Hermes Birkin bag; however, according to some U.S. court opinions, it is possible that Banana's bag could constitute a creative fair use parody. This article analyzing trademark disputes between two bags provides four steps for examining if Banana's trademark infringes Hermes' famous mark by reviewing some important U.S. cases. Four steps include examining if (1) "Banana Taipei" mark is a parody trademark; (2) "Banana Taipei" mark causes likelihood of confusion to consumers; (3) "Hermes Paris" mark is a famous trademark; (4) "Banana Taipei" mark causes trademark dilution to "Hermes Paris". This article finally concludes that Banana's bag can pass the test of trademark parody. Consumers are able to sense the criticism, new meanings and new purposes generated from the Banana's bags by comparing with Hermes bag so that the Banana's bags will not cause consumers confused and the famous Hermes trademark will not be diluted. Moreover, the Trademark Law should be construed to apply to artistic works only where the public interest in avoiding consumer confusion outweighs the public interest in free expression. Therefore, this article concludes that the use of Banana's mark is a fair use of trademark parody. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。