在先商标与在后地理标志共存的再思考

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Xiaoyan Wang, Xinzhe Song
{"title":"在先商标与在后地理标志共存的再思考","authors":"Xiaoyan Wang, Xinzhe Song","doi":"10.54648/trad2022034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The coexistence principle presents a means for resolving the conflict between prior trademarks and later geographical indications (GIs). This principle has been increasingly adopted in several countries due to recent negotiation efforts of the EU that are meant to combat the ‘first in time, first in right’ (‘FITFIR’) principle promoted by the US. This article focuses on three controversial issues raised in the application of the coexistence principle. The World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel Reports in the Australia-EU (DS290) and US-EU (DS174) disputes related to EU Regulation 2081/92 mentioned these issues but left them unresolved, thereby making space for the EU to require trade partners to widen the scope of coexistence between prior trademarks and later GIs in a manner that runs counter to the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). Furthermore, these unresolved issues led to difficulties in applying the coexistence principle and EU-type coexistence clause adopted in non-EU WTO Members. Based on the findings, this article recommends appropriate methods for implementing the coexistence principle that are consistent with the TRIPS Agreement.\ngeographical indication, trademark, coexistence, principle of priority, World Trade Organization, likelihood of confusion, misleading use, reputation of prior trademark, descriptive use, use in a trademark sense","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rethinking Coexistence Between Prior Trademarks and Later Geographical Indications\",\"authors\":\"Xiaoyan Wang, Xinzhe Song\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/trad2022034\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The coexistence principle presents a means for resolving the conflict between prior trademarks and later geographical indications (GIs). This principle has been increasingly adopted in several countries due to recent negotiation efforts of the EU that are meant to combat the ‘first in time, first in right’ (‘FITFIR’) principle promoted by the US. This article focuses on three controversial issues raised in the application of the coexistence principle. The World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel Reports in the Australia-EU (DS290) and US-EU (DS174) disputes related to EU Regulation 2081/92 mentioned these issues but left them unresolved, thereby making space for the EU to require trade partners to widen the scope of coexistence between prior trademarks and later GIs in a manner that runs counter to the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). Furthermore, these unresolved issues led to difficulties in applying the coexistence principle and EU-type coexistence clause adopted in non-EU WTO Members. Based on the findings, this article recommends appropriate methods for implementing the coexistence principle that are consistent with the TRIPS Agreement.\\ngeographical indication, trademark, coexistence, principle of priority, World Trade Organization, likelihood of confusion, misleading use, reputation of prior trademark, descriptive use, use in a trademark sense\",\"PeriodicalId\":46019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of World Trade\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of World Trade\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022034\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022034","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

共存原则为解决在先商标与在后地理标志之间的冲突提供了一种手段。由于欧盟最近的谈判努力,这一原则在一些国家得到了越来越多的采用,这些努力旨在打击美国倡导的“及时优先,权利优先”(“FITFIR”)原则。本文着重讨论了共存原则适用中存在的三个有争议的问题。世界贸易组织(WTO)关于欧盟法规2081/92的澳大利亚-欧盟(DS290)和美国-欧盟(DS174)争端的专家组报告提到了这些问题,但没有解决这些问题,从而为欧盟要求贸易伙伴扩大在先商标和后发地理标志之间共存的范围创造了空间,这种方式与WTO《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》(TRIPS协定)背道而驰。此外,这些未解决的问题导致了共存原则和欧盟型共存条款在非欧盟WTO成员中的适用困难。在此基础上,本文提出了与《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》相一致的实施共存原则的适当方法。地理标志,商标,共存,优先权原则,世界贸易组织,混淆的可能性,误导性使用,在先商标的声誉,描述性使用,商标意义上的使用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rethinking Coexistence Between Prior Trademarks and Later Geographical Indications
The coexistence principle presents a means for resolving the conflict between prior trademarks and later geographical indications (GIs). This principle has been increasingly adopted in several countries due to recent negotiation efforts of the EU that are meant to combat the ‘first in time, first in right’ (‘FITFIR’) principle promoted by the US. This article focuses on three controversial issues raised in the application of the coexistence principle. The World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel Reports in the Australia-EU (DS290) and US-EU (DS174) disputes related to EU Regulation 2081/92 mentioned these issues but left them unresolved, thereby making space for the EU to require trade partners to widen the scope of coexistence between prior trademarks and later GIs in a manner that runs counter to the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). Furthermore, these unresolved issues led to difficulties in applying the coexistence principle and EU-type coexistence clause adopted in non-EU WTO Members. Based on the findings, this article recommends appropriate methods for implementing the coexistence principle that are consistent with the TRIPS Agreement. geographical indication, trademark, coexistence, principle of priority, World Trade Organization, likelihood of confusion, misleading use, reputation of prior trademark, descriptive use, use in a trademark sense
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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信