《商标法》第44条第1款评注

经过历次修正,《商标法》第44条第1款从原来的绝对理由和相对理由混合规定转变为现在的单纯绝对理由条款。本文首先分析了该条款的法律适用的各个方面。其次,对其中"不正当手段"规定,结合实践提出,应坚持其绝对理由条款的性质,无需过多地关注商标是否实际使用,而应注重其不正当的意图和行为,应区分转让人与受让人的不同情况以确定是否适用"不正当手段"规定。最后,对2019年修正《商标法》第4条与"不正当手段"规定在法律适用中的冲突进行了研究,建议将对大量抢注和囤积注册行为适用第4条的规定,将"不正当手段"规定作为绝对理由的兜底条款,将诚实信用原则作为相对理由的兜底条款,使商标授权确权法律规则体系更加完善。

Commentary on Para.1, Art.44 of Trademark Law

After successive revisions,para.1,art.44 of the Trademark Law now includes only absolute grounds,which used to provide both absolute grounds and relative grounds.The paper first provides an analysis on all the application aspects of para.1.Then,based on judicial practices,the paper argues that the application of the provision of"illegitimate means"needs to maintain absolute grounds,meaning the focus should be on illegitimate intents and behaviors rather than actual use of trademark.Besides,whether or not to apply the provision of"illegitimate means"should consider different situations of assignor and assignee.Finally,the paper studies the application conflicts between art.4 and art.44,suggests to apply art.4 to forbid trademark squatting and hoarding,to make the provision of"illegitimate means"the miscellaneous provision of absolute grounds,and to make the principle of bona fide as stipulated in art.7 the miscellaneous provision of relative grounds,so that the trademark grant and confirmation legal system would be better.