Kējì Fǎxué Pínglùn (Dec 2012)
網路關鍵字廣告之商標權侵害爭議──評析美國與歐盟實務對於商標使用之界定 Trade Mark Use in Keyword Advertisements in the United States and European Union
Abstract
關鍵字廣告服務的模式多樣而複雜，於歐美已引起諸多商標法爭議。本文深入分析美國Rescuecom 案及歐盟L’Oréal 案的相關爭議與實務見解。在涉及關鍵字廣告的商標權侵害爭議中，侵權行為人可能為搜尋引擎經營者、線上市場經營者，或是透過網路販賣帶有他人商標的商品之人。就侵權行為態樣與對應之法律責任而言，侵權行為人可能必須獨立負擔主要侵權人的責任，或與其他侵權行為人連帶負共同侵權的責任，或負擔幫助行為的責任。欲認定侵害商標權之人須負擔何種責任，須檢視其行為是否符合特定侵權行為的要件。就歐美商標法制的要件而言，以下兩項至為重要：「是否未經授權即就他人商標為商業上之使用」以及「是否有混淆誤認之虞」，其中又以涉及第一項要件的判斷最為困難。具體來說，於本文所探討兩件案例中，搜尋引擎經營者和線上市場經營者是否確有「於商業上使用他人商標」的行為，係相關爭議中的核心問題。 The rapid development of online keyword advertising has triggered a series of trade mark disputes in the United States and Europe. This Article analyses the legal disputes concerning the unauthorised use of trade marks in the keyword advertisements, in particular those in Rescuecom Corp. v. Google Inc. in 2009 and in L’Oréal SA & Ors v. eBay International AG & Ors in 2011. As to the trade mark infringements regarding keyword advertisements, those sued by trademark owners include search engine operators, online marketplace operators, and those involved in promoting online sales of products bearing signs identical or similar to third party trade marks. As regards the types of infringement concerned, those who make unauthorised use of trade marks may be held responsible for primary infringement in certain circumstances, and in the others, the infringers may be held responsible for joint torfeasorship or contributory infringement. As to what constitutes trade mark infringement, the key standards include “use in commerce (or in the course of trade)” and “likelihood of confusion”, which can be found in the US law and in the EU trade mark regime. This Article focuses its attention on the issues concerning the first standard, which have proved to be extremely controversial as far as the Rescuecom and L’Oréal cases are concerned.
