Kējì Fǎxué Pínglùn (Jun 2012)
關於UDRP決定司法效力之研究 ― 以海峽兩岸法院裁判為中心 The Legal Position of UDRP Decision ― Focus on Chinese and Taiwanese Court Judgment
Abstract
UDRP（Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy）並非法律亦非條約，卻解決了成千上萬的域名糾紛，其司法效力如何，不但值得從學理上探討，也是司法實務所不可迴避的問題。本文乃先從學理邏輯上，論析UDRP 決定可能之不同效力模式，並從各國司法主權行使、UDRP 制定意旨及規定、當事人權利保障等各方面論證對於UDRP 決定不應賦予任何司法效力。繼而針對此問題，以海峽兩岸法院判決進行實證研究。研究結果發現中國大陸法院就此有較為統一之司法解釋，正確地指引法院處理域名爭議案件；臺灣法院對於此類案件及相類似之TWDRP（Taiwan Network Information Center Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy）決定案件，則有較為分歧的見解。本文亦針對中國大陸之司法解釋及臺灣法院之不同見解，進行評析，並提出具體建議，除希望可以促進商標與域名衝突之法制，可以有更正向細緻的發展，也期待在兩岸乃至全球間能有一致性之處理。 UDRP (Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy) is neither national law nor international treaty. Even so, it solves hundreds of thousands domain name disputes. What is its legal position under the current law? It is a question worthy for the academic study and cannot be voided in the judicial practice. This article firstly discusses the different kinds of possible legal positions for UDRP decision, then argues that UDRP decision shall have no legal effect under the current law from the view of national judicial sovereignty, the legislative intent of UDRP, and party’s right. This article also makes an empirical study on Chinese and Taiwanese Court Judgments. In the study, this article finds that China has an uniform judicial explanation from the Supreme People’s Court that correctly guide the lower courts to deal with the UDRP decision. In the contrast, Taiwan has splitting opinions among several judgments. This article gives its comments on Chinese the judicial explanation and several court opinions concerning the above issue, and expects that the law for the conflict between trademark and domain name has a good development and same treatment all over the world.
