商标产权与人权

Sándor Vida
{"title":"商标产权与人权","authors":"Sándor Vida","doi":"10.1556/026.2015.56.4.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article reports on some judgments of the European Court of Human Rights applying the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of trademarks. The first group of cases relates to the freedom of expression (Art 10). In the cases Tokaji, Marlboro and McDonald’s, the applicants referred to this principle to defend their actions related to the trademark. The second kind of cases relate to the protection of property (Protocol No. 1). In the case of Budweiser the European Court took the position in favor of applying this rule to a trademark application. The third group of cases relates to the right to a fair trial (Art. 6). According to reports on the Orient and McDonald’s cases, the national courts committed important procedural faults. The conclusion of the author is that trademark rights can be protected by means of human rights only in exceptional circumstances.","PeriodicalId":284706,"journal":{"name":"Acta Juridica Hungarica","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trademark property and human rights\",\"authors\":\"Sándor Vida\",\"doi\":\"10.1556/026.2015.56.4.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article reports on some judgments of the European Court of Human Rights applying the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of trademarks. The first group of cases relates to the freedom of expression (Art 10). In the cases Tokaji, Marlboro and McDonald’s, the applicants referred to this principle to defend their actions related to the trademark. The second kind of cases relate to the protection of property (Protocol No. 1). In the case of Budweiser the European Court took the position in favor of applying this rule to a trademark application. The third group of cases relates to the right to a fair trial (Art. 6). According to reports on the Orient and McDonald’s cases, the national courts committed important procedural faults. The conclusion of the author is that trademark rights can be protected by means of human rights only in exceptional circumstances.\",\"PeriodicalId\":284706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Juridica Hungarica\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Juridica Hungarica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1556/026.2015.56.4.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Juridica Hungarica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1556/026.2015.56.4.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文报道了欧洲人权法院在商标问题上适用《欧洲人权公约》原则的一些判决。第一类案件涉及言论自由(第10条)。在Tokaji, Marlboro和McDonald 's的案例中,申请人引用了这一原则来捍卫他们与商标有关的行为。第二类案件涉及财产保护(第一号议定书)。在百威啤酒案中,欧洲法院采取了赞成将这一规则适用于商标申请的立场。第三类案件涉及公平审判权(第6条)。根据关于东方和麦当劳案件的报告,国家法院犯了重要的程序错误。笔者的结论是,只有在特殊情况下,商标权才能通过人权的方式得到保护。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Trademark property and human rights
The article reports on some judgments of the European Court of Human Rights applying the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights in respect of trademarks. The first group of cases relates to the freedom of expression (Art 10). In the cases Tokaji, Marlboro and McDonald’s, the applicants referred to this principle to defend their actions related to the trademark. The second kind of cases relate to the protection of property (Protocol No. 1). In the case of Budweiser the European Court took the position in favor of applying this rule to a trademark application. The third group of cases relates to the right to a fair trial (Art. 6). According to reports on the Orient and McDonald’s cases, the national courts committed important procedural faults. The conclusion of the author is that trademark rights can be protected by means of human rights only in exceptional circumstances.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信