后台型竞价排名的商标侵权及不正当竞争认定  

Determination of Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Concerning Backstage Paid Listing:Conflicts of Judicial Decisions and Reflections

作　　者：张韬略[1] 张倩瑶 

机构地区：[1]同济大学法学院,上海200092

出　　处：《同济大学学报（社会科学版）》2017年第6期114-124,共11页Journal of Tongji University:Social Science Edition

基　　金：教育部人文社科项目"中美信息技术产业专利危机及专利制度优化比较研究"(项目编号:14YJC820077)

摘　　要：为评价竞价排名中关键词设置行为的合法性,文章以推广链接条目和目标网站皆不出现系争标识的后台型竞价排名为对象,筛选出国内10个诉讼。分析显示,由于目前对关键词设置行为是否属于"商标性使用"以及认定商标侵权和不正当竞争是否需要"混淆之虞"的认识不一,导致法律适用标准迥异。这源于我国商标专用权性质定位不清和"商标性使用"概念的滥用。将他人商标设置为搜索关键词属于显性地使用商标的行为,性质上类似比较广告,因此,只要没有导致混淆、误导的,都应具有合法性。建议以立法形式扩充我国《商标法》第59条的商标正当使用制度,并借助《反不正当竞争法》第9条的虚假宣传规定,来规制关键词广告使用他人标识的行为。To evaluate the validity of keyword advertisement,the article focuses on a special type of keyword advertisement in which the trademark involved neither shows in the advert links nor in the target website.After analyzing 10 cases,we find no consistent standard with regard to the application of law.This is because the courts hold different views about the nature of trademark right,the concept of"use of a trademark,"and whether likelihood of confusion shall be an essential element of trademark infringement.The courts should recognize keyword advertisement as a kind of"use of a trademark"and,in order explain the element of misleading and likelihood of confusion,should apply the relevant rule of comparative advertisement to analyze the validity issue of keyword advertisement.This article suggests legislators extend the scope of trademark fair use in Art.59of Trademark Law and apply the advertisement clause in Art.9 of the Anti-unfair Competition Law to regulate the keyword advertisement.

关 键 词：后台型竞价排名 关键词广告 混淆 比较广告 

分 类 号：D912.29[政治法律—民商法学]