《商标法》“恶意”条款的理解与适用  

Understanding and Application of the“Malicious”Clause in“Trademark Law”

作　　者：王晶晶 WANG Jing-jing(East China University of Political Science and Law,Shanghai 201620,China)

机构地区：[1]华东政法大学知识产权学院,上海201620

出　　处：《哈尔滨学院学报》2025年第1期63-68,共6页Journal of Harbin University

摘　　要：现行《商标法》中共有7条“恶意”条款,除第63条第1款之外,其余六处“恶意”条款的内涵与外延、认定依据和证明标准均存在争议。文章考察《商标法》“恶意”条款的历史演变,以明晰各条款的立法目的;参考刑法中的概念,对“恶意”与“直接故意”“间接故意”“重大过失”之间的关系进行要点解读;以规制理由、时间和行为人身份对其进行类型化细分,以达到对“恶意”条款的精细化适用。建议将恶意行权与恶意诉讼行为纳入“排除合理怀疑”的证明标准,使“恶意”条款的适用更加科学化、体系化和合理化。The current“Trademark Law”contains seven“malicious”clauses.Aside from Article 63,Paragraph 1,there are disputes regarding the connotation and extension,basis for determination,and standards of proof for the other six“malicious”clauses.This article examines the historical evolution of the“malicious”clauses in the Trademark Law to clarify the legislative intent of each clause.It provides a key interpretation of the relationship between“malicious”and“direct intent”,“indirect intent”,and“gross negligence”,drawing on concepts from criminal law.It categorizes the“malicious”actions based on regulatory reasons,timing,and the identity of the perpetrator,aiming for a refined application of the“malicious”clauses.It is suggested that malicious actions and malicious litigation should be included in the standard of proof of“excluding reasonable doubt”,making the application of the“malicious”clauses more scientific,systematic,and rational.

关 键 词：《商标法》 恶意侵权 恶意注册 恶意诉讼 

分 类 号：D923.43[政治法律—民商法学]