论非传统商标的显著性认定：价值立场与论证框架  

On Judicial Determination of Distinctiveness of Nontraditional Trademark: Normative Standing and Reasoning Framework

作　　者：胡骋 Hu Cheng

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院

出　　处：《知识产权》2020年第1期39-50,共12页Intellectual Property

摘　　要：注册非传统商标的门槛因开放式的商标定义而降低。保护非传统商标带来的行政与司法的制度成本不容忽视,其中最需厘清的是显著性判定标准。我国商标法实践中存在“独创性”“驰名商标知名度”等不恰当的理论借用,及“商标与商品关系的远近”等欠缺精度的细化规则,尚未形成统一、合理的论证框架;司法审判中权衡多主体法益的思考方式之缺位,催生了对非传统商标的强保护倾向。一个更周延的论证框架是:首先应排除所属行业的通用选择;其后要求申请人履行“第二含义”的证明责任;最后根据有关消费者认知的证据,对显著性进行认定。The threshold for the registration of nontraditional trademark is lowered due to the open-end trademark definition.The administrative and judicial institution cost for protecting nontraditional trademark cannot be ignored,among which,the most urgent task is to clarify the distinctiveness standard.Inappropriate borrowing of theories such as originality and notability of well-known trademark,as well as the imprecise rule of“the connection between trademark and goods”existing in current Chinese trademark legal practices have not yet been fully and thoroughly reasoned.The negligence in weighing the legal interests of multi-agents in judicial trials catalyzes the tendency of strong protection for nontraditional trademark.This article proposes a better legal reasoning framework:first,to exclude the generic forms of the mark in a trade;second,to let the applicant bear the burden to prove secondary meaning;third,to identify the existence of distinctiveness according to relevant consumers’cognition.

关 键 词：非传统商标 显著性 第二含义 立体商标 声音商标 颜色商标 

分 类 号：D923.43[政治法律—民商法学]