商标侵权的判断标准:相似性与混淆可能性之关系

2013年商标法的重大修改之一是对商标侵权判断标准的修改。然而,规定商标侵权判断标准的商标法第57条第2项中的相似性与混淆可能性概念及两者之间的关系均是不清楚的。混淆可能性吸收相似性、混淆可能性内化于相似性以及以相似性为基础、以混淆可能性为限定条件成为世界各国或地区商标侵权判断标准的三种代表性立法例。从法理上看,商标的通信本质决定了混淆性商标使用会影响商标功能的发挥,商标法立法目的决定了混淆可能性是商标侵权判断的基本标准,商标权的基本权能决定了混淆可能性主要适用于商标和商品有一者不相同但近似或者类似的商标使用情形,维持公平竞争和自由竞争平衡的商标保护基本政策决定了混淆的程度是混淆可能性,相似性本身的重要性与历史传统的影响决定了相似性可以是商标侵权判断标准的重要内容。从我国商标侵权判断标准引入混淆可能性的基本动因来看,商标法第57条第2项所确立的商标侵权判断标准可以解释为以相似性为基础和前提、以混淆可能性为限定条件,而传统上内含于商标近似、类似商品、类似服务、商品与服务类似等概念的混淆可能性应该从这些概念中剥离。

Test of Trademark Infringement: Relationship between Similarity and Likelihood of Confusion

One of the major revisions of the Chinese Trademark Law in 2013 is the revision of the test of the trademark infringement. However, Article 57(b) of Chinese Trademark Law, which provides for the test of trademark infringement, fails to clearly define the concepts of similarity and likelihood of confusion and the relationship between them. As far as the test of trademark infringement is concerned, there are three kinds of representative legislation in the world, that is, the test of likelihood of confusion that contains elements of similarity, the test of similarity that contains elements of likelihood of confusion, and the test that takes similarity as the basis and likelihood of confusion as qualification. From the jurisprudential point of view, the communicative nature of trademark determines that confusing trademark use affects the functions of trademark whereas the policy objectives of trademark law determines that the likelihood of confusion is the fundamental test of trademark infringement. The fundamental capacity of the right to trademark determines that the test of likelihood of confusion will be mainly applied to cases of using a trademark that is similar to a registered trademark in connection with the same goods or that is identical with or similar to a registered trademark in connection with the same or similar goods. The basic policy of maintaining a balance between fair competition and free competition determines the likelihood and degree of confusion. And the importance of similarity and the influence of historical tradition determine that similarity is an important part of the test of trademark infringement. Judging from the basic motivation for introducing the likelihood of confusion into the test of trademark infringement in China, the test of trademark infringement provided for in Article 57(b) of Trademark Law can be interpreted as taking similarity as the basis and precondition and likelihood of confusion as limitation of test for trademark infringement. Furthermore, the likelihood of confusion internalized in the similarity of trademarks, similar products, similar services and similarity between goods and services should be stripped away from these concepts.