论文部分内容阅读
商业广告语得因使用而获得识别商品来源之显著性,进而成为受法律保护的商业标识。洛克的劳动财产权说无法为付出智力劳动收获排他性财产权提供正当性支持,以商标的来源功能确定涉案广告语之利益归属更为适宜。《反不正当竞争法》一般条款之适用有待于限定条件的满足以及内涵之具体化。对本案纠纷处理结果的理性认识应当从认识论上的转变开始。将“怕上火”广告语所属的识别性利益归属于王老吉,但不赋予其对“怕上火”这一词汇的垄断性专有使用权,从功利主义的角度更符合社会整体福利的提高。
The commercial slogan is used to gain the salience of identifying the source of the goods, and then become the legal protection of the business logo. Locke’s labor property rights can not provide legitimate support for paying intellectual labor to acquire exclusive property rights, and it is more appropriate to determine the attribution of interests in the advertising slogans based on the origin of trademarks. The application of the general provisions of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law is subject to the fulfillment of the qualifications and the concretization of the connotation. The rational understanding of the outcome of handling disputes in this case should start from the epistemological shift. Will be “afraid to get angry” belongs to the recognition of the advertising language Wong Lo Kat, but does not give its “afraid of getting on fire ” monopoly of the exclusive right to use more utilitarian perspective more in line with society The overall welfare improvement.