網路交易平台之著名商標間接侵權責任

Secondary Liability for Well-Known Trademark Infringement of Online Marketplace Platforms

廖彥綾(Liaw, Yan Ling)

指導教授 ： 范建得

國立清華大學/科技管理學院/科技法律研究所/碩士(2016年)

摘要

隨著網際網路的蓬勃發展與智慧型手機的普及，再加上網路購物之便利性及無地域性限制之特性使然，故現代人利用網路進行購物已然成為生活習慣中不可分離之一部。在網路購物興盛前，傳統交易市場中商標仿冒問題比比皆是，網路購物成為經濟主流後，仿冒商標問題更是猖狂興盛，政府苦無對策解決、商標權人權利亦無以伸張、消費者更是無辜遭受損失。
出賣人販賣仿冒品時，須對該商標權人負直接侵權責任，故無疑問；然在網路交易平台有積極幫助銷售之情形時，是否構成商標間接侵權責任則尚無定論，遂對該問題進行研究。由於我國現有法規並無網路交易平台之定義，即先予以定性，並探討美國、歐盟及中國的商標間接侵權責任之相關理論及經典判決，發現美國和中國著重商業利益，偏向於保護網路交易平台，而歐盟則著重於保護商標權，雙方對於網路交易平台之商標間接侵權責任認定不一致。再檢討我國商標法之直接侵權及擬制侵權、民法之共同侵權及著作權法對於ISP業者之民事免則事由之規定，得否適用於網路交易平台？網路交易平台除與出賣人間具有媒介居間契約，積極幫助銷售的行為，可認定成立幫助共同侵權外，其餘情形尚難適用。
電子商務是未來市場的發展趨勢，針對網路交易平台之定義及其所應負的責任，以及免責事由等相關規範，應在商標法中明定，以期周延。在未修法規範前，有成立幫助共同侵權之情形時，宜適用民法第185條第2項規定，課以網路交易平台之商標間接侵權責任。但宜參考歐盟之司法見解，觀察網路交易平台介入雙方交易之程度，若有積極主動介入雙方當事人間之交易，如收取成交手續費或使出賣人之商品提高能見度之幫助銷售行為時，其對於雙方之交易具有高度之影響力，應可要求其負責。

關鍵字

商標間接侵權責任 ； 成交手續費 ； 網路交易平台

並列摘要

Nowadays, it becomes an inseparable life habit for people to shop online for the reasons that the blooming development of Internet, the widespread use of smartphones and the conveniences and the character that no region restrictions of online shopping. Even before online shopping flourished, the traditional marketplace struggled with trademark counterfeiting, but after online shopping became mainstream, counterfeit trademarks exploded. Currently, government can’t figure out how to solve the problem, the registered trademark owners can’t fight for their rights, and consumers suffer a great loss.
When selling counterfeit goods, there is no doubt that the tortfeasor should be responsible for the direct trademark infringement. It’s not settled, however, as to whether the online marketplace platform the trademark violator uses should be responsible for secondary trademark infringement when it played an active role in the promotion or sale of the goods. Since there is no existing legislation in Taiwan defining online marketplace platform secondary trademark infringement, one has to look to legal theories and precedents in US, European Union （EU）, and Chinese law. Generally, laws and regulations in the United States and China focus on business interests and tend to protect the online marketplace platform, while the European Union focuses on the protection of trademark rights. Overall, the United States and China’s legal stance towards secondary liability of the online marketplace platform for trademark infringement conflicts with the EU’s position. Can judges, however, use direct infringement and deemed infringement analysis under the Trademark Act, contributory infringement under the Civil Code, and limitations on liability for Internet service providers under the Copyright Act, to determine online marketplace platform regulation? Of the referenced legal frameworks, only online marketplace platforms playing an active role in the promotion or sale of goods that have a contract for intermediary brokerage with the seller fall under contributory infringement; other cases are not covered.
E-commerce is an important development trend in future markets. Therefore, the Trademark Act should set forth relevant regulations like legal definitions, responsibility, and related exemptions for online marketplace platforms. But before amending the law, if contributory infringement of the online marketplace platform is established, the second paragraph of article 185 of the Civil Code should apply secondary liability to the online marketplace platform for trademark infringement. Still, judges should refer to EU judicial opinions to analyze how deep the online marketplace platform was involved in the transaction between the buyer and the seller. If the online marketplace platform charges a final value fee or helps the seller improve the visibility of the merchandise, which highly influence both sides of the transaction, the online marketplace platform should be liable.

並列關鍵字

secondary trademark infringement ； final value fee ； online marketplace platforms

參考文獻

黃雪芬（2012）。《商標間接侵害之研究》，嶺東科技大學財經法律研究所碩士論文，台中。

李一笑（2013）。《網路交易平台之商標侵權責任》，國立臺灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文，台北。

李治安（2012），〈著作權法中的灰姑娘：利用人地位之探討〉，《台大法學論叢》，41卷3期，頁931-979。

高秀美（2011）。〈論商標反向假冒-以臺灣高等法院97年度上訴字第10號刑事判決為例〉，《智慧財產權》，146期，頁49-86。

陳隆昇（2014），〈網路服務提供者商標間接侵權責任〉，《中原財經法學》，33期，頁42。