中美经贸协议背景下地理标志和通用名称界分研究

对于地理标志和通用名称的界分,我国当下采取的标准为“指代一类商品”标准。这一标准并不能反映地理标志和通用名称的本质区别。地理标志通用化的本质是“标示地理来源”功能的丧失,故应当引入“标示地理来源”标准。对于通用名称的判断范围,应当坚持以全国标准为主,同时严格限制相关市场标准的适用。《中美经贸协议》本质上是美方寻求更广泛的市场准入的尝试,对我国地理标志和通用名称的界分提出了新的要求。《地理标志保护中的通用名称判定指南》(征求意见稿)虽然回应了《中美经贸协议》的要求,但是提供的保护水平过低,不利于地理标志资源的开发利用。应当在符合《中美经贸协议》要求的基础上,努力寻求地理标志的高水平保护。

Study on the Distinction between Geographical Indications and Generic Names in the Context of US-China Economic and Trade Agreement

For the distinction between geographical indications and generic names,the standard adopted by China isreferring to a class of goods.This standard does not reflect the essential difference between geographical indications and generic names,so the standard ofindication of geographical originshould be introduced.For the judging scope of generic names,the national standard should be insisted on,while strictly limiting the application of relevant market standards.The US-China Economic and Trade Agreement is an attempt by the US to seek broader market access,which has put forward new requirements on the distinction between geographical indications and common names in China.Although the Guidelines for the Determination of Generic Names in the Protection of Geographical Indications in 2020 responds to the requirements of the US-China Economic and Trade Agreement,But the protection it provided is too low for the development and utilization of geographical indication.Efforts should be made to seek a higher level of protection for geographical indications on the basis of compliance with the requirements of the U.S.-China Economic and Trade Agreement.