電子商務平台與商標侵權責任—兼論數位通訊傳播法草案

電子商務隨著行動通訊與網路技術飛快發展下，造成智慧財產權侵權可能性大幅增加。因此，相關的侵權理論之建構與免責規範之設計必須釐清。而在商標領域，由於我國現行商標法對於商標「間接侵權」僅有就商標準備行為予以規範，而單純提供虛擬空間之電商平台，對於第三人商標侵權行為之責任為何？似無規範。除此之外，電商平台身為網路服務提供者，對其平台中商標侵權行為，是否能同著作權法責任避風港相關規定，於符合一定要件下給予民事責任免除，亦無相關規範。　　從以上問題出發，針對電商平台商標侵權責任成立，本文透過我國法律與相關實務案例，分析電商平台對第三人商標侵權責任之成立依據。首先分析電商平台使用者服務契約之性質與商標侵權之關係、比較性質類似購物平台商標侵權責任之建構，並評析實務案例，最後總結電商平台責任成立依據。在比較法部分，則研究美國、歐盟、中國法律與相關案例，歸納評析後並提出值得我國借鏡之處。　　而針對電商平台商標侵權民事免責規範部分，雖然商標法目前並無明文規定，不過經行政院會通過、目前送交立法院審議之數位通訊傳播法草案中民事免責規定，似得適用於商標領域。因此本文進一步分別就商標法得否類推適用著作權法避風港、數位通訊傳播法草案設計有何缺失，以及商標法是否應增訂相關規定等問題進行研究。　　在結論方面，首先本文認為我國實務見解下，平台縱無侵權之意思聯絡而僅具過失，亦可能成立商標共同侵權行為，對於平台而言責任恐過重。其次，我國法院就電商平台對於商標侵權之主觀因素應立下較為明確之判斷標準，或可參考美國「特定知悉」與歐盟「辛勤經營者」標準，方使平台業者能以資遵循。而針對網路服務提供者之商標免責規範，本文認為不宜類推適用著作權法避風港規定，且數位通訊傳播法草案有不少缺失，因此最終仍應於商標法中增訂為宜。最後，本文試草擬出商標法增訂條文，以供參考。

關鍵字

電商平台；網路服務提供者；商標侵權；間接侵權；共同侵權；責任避風港；數位通訊傳播法草案

並列摘要

An increase in IPR infringements arises as e-commerce grows rapidly through telecommunication and internet. Therefore, it is crucial that the construction of theories regarding online platforms’ liability and immunity for such infringements should be clarified. However, in the field of trademark laws, although Taiwan’s Trademark Act deems manufacturing, possessing, displaying, selling, exporting or importing labels, tags, packaging or containers as contributory trademark infringement, it is uncertain if an e-commerce platform merely provides virtual marketplace for its users to sell counterfeits is liable for trademark infringement. Additionally, as an internet services provider, it is also unclear whether e-commerce platforms could exempt from trademark infringement liability under certain condition like copyright law does with its “safe harbor” clause for ISPs. To answer the questions above, this thesis firstly analyzes and concludes trademark infringement liability of e-commerce platforms for third-parties’ infringements through statutes and cases in Taiwan, starting from analyzing user agreement on the platform, comparing with retail stores and shopping TV channels, and concluding court decisions by case studying. Also, this thesis researches both laws and cases in the U.S, E.U and China with a comparative approach. As for the exemption of trademark infringement liability for e-commerce platforms, current Trademark Act provides no safe harbors for such liability. Nevertheless, the Draft Digital Communication Act proposed by Executive Yuan to Legislative Yuan seeks to provide immunity for all torts with regard to digital communication, including online trademark infringements. Thus, this thesis is to analyze the pros and cons of all manners of this issue, including commenting on the Draft Digital Communication Act, analyzing whether the safe harbor in Copyright Act is applicable in trademark cases by analogy, or Trademark Act should has its own safe harbor. To conclude the research of this thesis, firstly, it concludes that e-commerce platforms might be overburdened. According to Taiwan’s court ruling, one can be imposed joint liability when there’s a breach of obligation of care, even without conscious. Thus, if a platform neglect to monitor or supervise, it could be held jointly liable for trademark infringement with direct infringers. Secondly, we can take U.S’s “specific knowledge” or E.U’s “diligent economic operator” standard as a reference, making rather clear standards for consideration of platform operators’ liability. Thirdly, it concludes that it’s inappropriate to apply copyright law’s safe harbor to trademark field, and the Draft comes with several shortcoming, making it unsuitable applying to trademark infringement cases as well. Therefore, lastly, this thesis suggests that the Trademark Act indeed should establish its own exemption rules, and also provides draft amendment on Trademark Act.

並列關鍵字

E-commerce Platforms ； Internet Services Providers ； Secondary Trademark Infringement ； Joint Trademark Infringement ； Safe Harbor of Liability ； Draft Digital Communication Act