商标淡化的证明标准——美国“维多利亚的秘密”诉莫斯里案评述
来源:知识产权学术与实务研究网 作者:彭学龙 时间:2010-04-21 阅读数:
[7]Michael J. Schwarz,Demonstrating the requisite Level of a Fderal Trademark Dilution Claim,25 Pace L .Rev.157.
[8]J. ThomasMcCarthy, Proving a Trademark Has Been Diluted: Theories or Facts? 41 Hous. L. Rev. 713.
[9]Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., 537 U.S. 418, 433 (2003).
[10]Pinghuest ,Inc. V. Wick, 256 F.Supp.2d 424,431-32(M.D.N.C. 2003)
[11]Lee Middleton Original Dolls, Inc. v. Seymour Mann, Inc., 299 F. Supp. 2d 892, 902 (E.D. Wis. 2004).
[12]Ringling Bros.-Barnum&Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. Utah Div. of Travel Dev., 170 F.3d 449 (4th Cir. 1999).
[13]Merges, Menell, Lemley: Intellectual Property in the NewTechnological Age, third edition(2003), pp.637-638.
[14]Moseley v. V secret Catlogue,Inc,537U.s.418,433(2003)
[15]Merges, Menell, Lemley: Intellectual Property in the NewTechnological Age, third edition(2003), pp. 637-63
[16]United StatesTrademark Association Trademark ReviewComm., Report and Recommendation toUSTAPresident and Board of Direc-
tors, 77 Trademark Rep. 375, 455 (1987
[17]H.R. Rep. No. 104-374 (1995), As Reprinted in 1996 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1029.
[18]Matthew C. Oesterle, A Call to Amend the Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995, 81 Chi.-Kent. L. Rev. 235.
[19]麦卡锡的观点源于J. ThomasMcCarthy, Proving aTrademarkHas Been Diluted: TheoriesorFacts? 41Hous. L. Rev. 713,不一一加注。
[20]J. ThomasMcCarthy, Trademarks&Unfair Competition 24:94 (4th ed. 2004)
[21]参见吴汉东主编:《知识产权法》,中国政法大学出版社2004年版,第312页
[22]参见[美]苏珊·瑟拉德:《美国联邦商标反淡化法的立法与实践》,张今译,《外国法译评》1998年第4期。
[23]Mead Data Cent.,Inc.v.Toyota Motor Sales,U.S.A.,Inc,875F.2d 1026,1027(2d Cir.1989)
[24]J. ThomasMcCarthy, Proving a Trademark Has Been Diluted: Theories or Facts? 41 Hous. L. Rev. 713.
[25] Ty Inc. v. Perryman, 306 F.3d 509, 511 (7th Cir. 2002)
[26]在该案中,著名漱口水商标“Odol”所有人请求法院撤销同一商标在钢制品上的注册,并最终胜诉
[27]J. ThomasMcCarthy, Proving a Trademark Has Been Diluted: Theories or Facts? 41 Hous. L. Rev. 713.
[28]参见前引○21,吴汉东书,第248页
[29]Frankfurther,J., in Mishaw Rubber&Woolen Mfg.Co.v.S.S.Kresge Co.,316 U.S..203,205(1942)
[30]Richard L. Kirkpatrick, Likelihood of Confusion in Trademark Law, at xx (2000).
[31]Jeremy Phillips, Trade Mark Law: A Practical Anatomy, Oxford University Press, 2003, p. 21.
[32]J. ThomasMcCarthy, The 1996 Federal Antidilution Statute, 16 Cardozo Arts&Ent LJ 587.
- 个人简介:(学术)
- 中国政法大学教授、博士生导师
- 知识产权法研究所所长、无形资产管理研究中心主任
- 北京大学法学博士
- 中国人民大学法学博士后
- 邮箱:fengxiaoqingipr@sina.com
- 北京市海淀区西土城路25号中国政法大学知识产权法研究所
- 个人简介:(实务)
- 最高法院案例指导工作专家委员会委员
- 最高法院知识产权司法保护研究中心首届研究员
- 中欧仲裁中心仲裁员
- 深圳、南京仲裁委员会仲裁员
- 北京天驰君泰律师事务所律师
- 中国律协知识产权专业委员会委员
- 中国审判研究会知识产权审判理论专业委员会委员
- 通讯处:(Zip:100088)
点击进入免费咨询>>