美国冒犯性商标注册审查标准的变化及其启示——从涉新冠疫情商标申请谈起

《美国兰哈姆法》第2条a款和我国《商标法》第10条第1款第8项在国际公约义务和惯例、立法目的、条文开放性上有相似之处,但在商标注册层面的表达自由和遵循公序良俗边界的认定上差异巨大。表达自由不应逾越遵循公序良俗的国际惯例和国内司法习惯,美国式的完全放开商标注册层面的表达自由不符合我国传统价值观下公众的合理预期。我国在适用"不良影响"条款时需要把握表达自由与遵循公序良俗二者的界限,避免过宽适用"不良影响"条款而吞噬表达自由的空间,应以本土性价值判断克制条款的适用。

Changes in the US Trademark Registration Examination Standard for Offensive Marks and the Implication:From the Perspective of COVID-19 Related Trademark Application

The Article 2 a of Lanham Law and the Item 10,Paragraph 8,Article 10 of China’s Trademark Law have similarities in terms of international obligations and practices,legislative purposes,and openness of provisions,but there is huge differences in freedom of expression in the sense of trademark law and compliance with the public order and good customs.The freedom of expression in trademarks should not go beyond the international practice of complying with public order and good customs and domestic judicial practice.The US practices in allowing complete freedom of expression in trademarks is not suitable for the reasonable expectations of the public under the Chinese traditional values.When applying the clause of"adverse effect",China needs to pay attention to the boundary between freedom of expression and compliance with public order and good customs.The freedom of expression in trademarks should not be eroded by the excessive application of the clause of"adverse effect";the application of the clause should be restrained by local values.