商標法上之美學功能性理論-以美國法為中心

美國法就商標法的功能性區分為實用功能性與美學功能性。而美學功能性理論之發展可追溯至西元1938年侵權行為法整編§742評釋a。該理論係指產品特徵雖不具實用功能性，而不能增加商品或服務的效能或降低其成本，但是明顯具有其他競爭優勢(例如: 顏色)，而該競爭優勢可以用來吸引消費者，則該競爭優勢應保留給同業使用。因此，當產品具有美學功能性時，便不能獲得商標法的保護。由於傳統商標(例如: 文字商標)無法具有美學上的吸引力，因而僅非傳統商標有適用美學功能性理論的可能，而本文則將美學功能性理論的適用客體限縮於立體商標及顏色商標。美國法有許多運用美學功能性理論所做成的判決。由於美國法對該理論並未有統一標準，而造成適用上的混亂。我國審查基準係參考美國法並於民國101年的非傳統商標審查基準首次提及美學功能性理論。本文藉由與美學功能性理論相關的美國實務見解分析該理論的標準，進而就美國與我國的美學功能性理論作比較分析。觀諸美學功能性理論的目的係為避免商標權人藉由商標註冊，而影響產業發展。基於商標法的立法目的之一係為確保市場的公平競爭，若因而完全忽略商品涉及美學功能的部分，將會使商標的功能性審查因而不完整，反而會造成不公平競爭的結果，是以，美學功能性理論仍有其存在之必要性。因此，本文以為我國適於行在其中，秉持中庸之道，不宜完全將美學功能性理論完全排除於功能性審查範圍之外，但也不需完全採納與美國實務完全相同的標準。亦即適用美學功能性理論時，應從嚴認定。

關鍵字

傳統商標；實用功能性理論；美學功能性理論；功能性理論；立體商標；顏色商標；非傳統商標

並列摘要

The American law distinguishes functionality doctrine between utilitarian functionality and aesthetic functionality. The development of aesthetic functionality can be traced back to Restatement of Torts § 742, comment a (1938). Aesthetic functionality means that a product feature is essential to the use or purpose of the article or if it affects the cost or quality of the article, that is, exclusive use of the feature would put competitors in a significant non- reputation- related disadvantage position. The trademark is not registrable when it falls into the scope of aesthetic functionality. Due to the traditional marks (such as word marks) don’t have appeals to aesthetics, only non- traditional marks can be applied to aesthetic functionality. There are many cases for aesthetic functionality in American Law. Due to the lack of a consistent standard in the American Law, there is chaos when applying aesthetic functionality. Thus, this thesis tries to evaluate the standard of aesthetic functionality by analyzing cases. In R. O. C., aesthetic functionality doctrine was first found in the Examination Guidelines on Non- Traditional Trademarks of 2012, which was established by conferring the American Law. Thus, this thesis tries to analyze and compare the aesthetic functionality between the United States and our country. The purpose of aesthetic functionality is to prevent from influencing the development of the industries when the owners register the trademarks. This thesis claims that we should take a strict way when applying aesthetic functionality doctrine.

並列關鍵字

utilitarian functionality ； aesthetic functionality ； functionality doctrine ； three- dimensional marks ； color marks ； traditional marks ； non-traditional marks

參考文獻

1、呂姝賢，非傳統商標保護之研究-以現實生活與虛擬世界為中心，國立台北科技大學智慧財產權研究所碩士學位論文，民國102年。

11、Kellner, Christopher J., Rethinking the Procedural Treatment of Functionality: Confronting the Inseparability of Useful, Aesthetically Pleasing, and Source-Identifying Features of Product Designs, 46 EMORY L.J. 913(1997).

27、Smith, Kline & French Labs. v. Clark & Clark, 157 F.2d 725 (3d Cir. 1946).

16、Port, Kenneth L., General Law Issue: Article: On Nontraditional Trademarks, 38 N. KY. L. REV. 1(2011).

5、California Crushed Fruit Corp. v. Taylor Beverage & Candy Co., 38 F.2d 885 (D. Wis. 1930).

國際替代計量

商標法上之美學功能性理論-以美國法為中心

未授權

主題瀏覽