International Open Access Journal Platform

比较法视角下商标“恶意抢注”行为 的再探视

Reexploration of Trademark “Malicious Rush Registration” from the Perspective of Comparative Law

Advance in Law / 2021,3(2): 82-91 / 2021-04-23 720 636

View Download PDF

• Authors: 郭兵林     
• Information:

  中南财经政法大学法律硕士教育中心，武汉

• Keywords: Malicious preemption; Comparative law; Freezing period; Punitive damages 恶意抢注；比较法；惩罚性赔偿
• Abstract: With the development of market economy, the added value of trademark to enterprises is increasing day by day. At the same time, the malicious rush registration of trademark is also becoming more and more serious. Such as “Wang Zhihe trademark rush case”, “sunflower pharmaceutical trademark rush case” and so on, bring a lot of trouble to the enterprise. It can be seen that the malicious rush registration of trademarks is a “sharp blade” that endangers the order of market competition and the healthy and orderly development of enterprises, and it should be strictly regulated. Although the new trademark law, which will come into effect on November 1, 2019, has amended and added a number of provisions against malicious rush registration, which has filled some gaps. However, due to the general and vague provisions, the regulation effect of malicious rush registration is not very obvious. In view of this, it is necessary to start from the thorny field of trademark malicious rush registration, based on the perspective of comparative law, properly learn from foreign reasonable experience, and combine with the current reality of our country to improve. For example, increase the “freeze period” of trademark transfer, trademark registrants regularly provide trademark use instructions, and increase malicious rush registration in the content of punitive damages. 随着市场经济发展环境的愈发成熟，商标给予企业提供的附加价值与日俱增，与此同时伴随而来的商标恶意抢注行为也愈演愈烈。如“王致和商标抢注案”“葵花药业商标抢注案”等，给企业带来不少麻烦。可见，商标恶意抢注行为是危害市场竞争秩序和企业健康有序发展的一把“利刃”，应当对其进行严格规制。尽管2019 年11 月1 日正式施行的新商标法中修改、新增了若干针对恶意抢注行为的规定，填补了部分空缺。但由于规定的笼统模糊，对于恶意抢注行为的规制效果并不十分明显。鉴于此，有必要从商标恶意抢注的棘手领域入手，基于比较法视角，适当借鉴域外合理经验并结合我国当前实际进行完善。如增加商标转让“冷冻期”、商标注册人定期提供商标使用情况说明书、惩罚性赔偿内容中增加恶意抢注行为等。
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.35534/al.0302009
• Cite: 郭兵林．比较法视角下商标“恶意抢注”行为的再探视［J］．法学进展，2021，3（2）：82-91．