自古以來，人們就有使用標記的習慣，而對於標記使用的開端，已難以考證，此外，使用商標的行為對於現代社會具有重要的意義，欠缺商標的經濟市場難以運行，消費者無從區別、選購商品，生產者則欠缺提升產品品質的動力，不僅經濟市場機制無法運行，更可能導致經濟競爭機制的崩塌，有鑒於商標的重要性，各國相互簽訂國際條約，制定相關制度規範、保障商標，並對於仿冒商標的行為制訂民事和刑事責任。我國商標法對於仿冒商標的行為，原本只有民事侵權責任之規範，然而，因應當時代的國際情勢和國際條約之需求，我國商標法納入刑事規範處罰仿冒商標及販賣仿冒品的行為，在經過幾次修法後，現今我國商標刑罰的條文主要是以消費者的角度，判斷係爭行為是否成立商標罪責，亦即，藉由「混淆誤認之虞」作為商標刑責成立的門檻，除此之外，現行我國商標刑罰的條文尚包含商標使用行為的判斷及行為人主觀要件的具備。 然而，綜觀我國商標法刑事責任的條文，不僅條文內容多為不確定法律概念，與我國商標法民事侵權責任之條文內容幾近相同。民事責任和刑事責任於其本質上大有不同，基於刑罰手段的嚴厲性，對於人民權利的侵害程度非民事責任所能比擬，故有刑法最後手段性原則的出現，但是，我國現行商標法的民事侵權責任和刑罰規範內容幾近相同，則似有違刑法的謙抑性，因此，似有重新對我國現行商標刑罰條文重新檢視之必要，而探究刑法存在的目的，現行多數見解認為是刑法法益，故將探究商標法的保護法益為何，再從確立的法益重新解釋商標刑罰的條文，又商標法第95條為最典型和最原始的仿冒商標行為規範，因此，將專注於商標法第95條的檢討和反思。 / Since ancient times, people have had the habit of using marks, yet the beginning of the use of the mark has been hard to verify. In addition, the use of trademark has important meaning for the modern society. Without trademark, the economic market would be hard to operate. Consumers would not be able to distinguish one product from another, let alone buying the product. As for producers, they would lack the motivation to promote the quality of the product. It might not only stop the operation of the economic market, but also lead to the collapse of the economic competition mechanism. In light of the importance of the trademark, most of the countries signed international treaties, made relevant norms to protect trademarks and formulated civil and criminal liability for counterfeiting trademarks. Originally, there was only civil liability in our trademark law, however, due to the international situation of that time and the needs of the international treaties, our trademark law has brought in criminal punishment for counterfeiting trademarks and selling counterfeit goods. After several amendments to the trademark law, our trademark penalty is mainly based on the view of consumers to determine whether the conduct is found guilty, that is, by using the concept of " the likelihood of confusion" as the threshold of the establishment of the trademark criminal liability. Apart from that, our trademark penalties also require the use of trademark and the subjective elements. However, if we look through our trademark penalties, there are full of uncertain legal concepts, and the content of the provision is same as the trademark civil liability. But there is great difference between the nature of the civil liability and criminal liability, so it is necessary to review our trademark penalty again, and from the view of Rechtsgut. Therefore, after defining the Rechtsgut of our trademark penalty, I would reinterpret Article 95 of the trademark law from the point of view of Rechtsgut, as Article 95 is the typical and the original norms for the conduct of counterfeiting trademarks.

Le droit de marque préoccupe aux plans législatif et judiciaire. L'intérêt s'explique par l'essor de la contrefaçon à l'échelle mondiale. La protection du droit de marque contre la contrefaçon mérite donc d'être renforcée. Pour cela, il convient de définir l'étendue du droit à protéger. Le droit de marque, droit exclusif d'exploitation d'une marque, est décrit majoritairement comme un droit de propriété d'un type particulier. Or, une étude comparée du droit de marque et du droit de propriété fait apparaître davantage de différences que de ressemblances. Identifier l'objet du droit de marque dans la place qu'occupe la marque sur le marché dans l'esprit du public et des concurrents amène à une nature juridique nouvelle, celle du droit de marché. Dès lors, les concurrents indélicats qui commettent des actes de contrefaçon empiètent incontestablement sur un droit de marché appartenant à autrui puisqu'ils usurpent la place de marché réservée à travers l'enregistrement de la marque. Par ailleurs, l'acte fautif cause un dommage plus ou moins grave au titulaire de la marque. La contrefaçon portant sur des produits authentiques est d'une faible gravité par rapport à celle qui porte sur des produits non authentiques car alors, les marchandises indûment marquées, souvent de qualité médiocre, risquent de nuire à la santé ou la sécurité de l'homme et de son environnement, et l'image de la marque contrefaite n'en est qu'altérée. Ainsi, si au pénal l'amende pourrait prendre la forme d'un pourcentage sur le chiffre d'affaires réalisé par le contrefacteur, au civil la condamnation à verser à la victime les fruits de l'activité contrefaisante permettrait de dissuader la contrefaçon lucrative. / The trademark rights are a legislative and judicial concern. The interest is due to the rise of worldwide counterfeiting. Trademark protection against counterfeiting deserves to be strengthened. It is then necessary to define the scope of the rights to protect. Trademark rights, exclusive rights to use a trademark, are described mainly as an ownership of a particular type. However, a comparison study of trademark rights and ownership reveals more differences than similarities. Identify the object of trademark rights in the place of the trademark on the market in the minds of the public and competitors leads to a new legal nature : the market rights. Therefore, unscrupulous competitors who commit acts of infringement undoubtedly impinge on the market rights belonging to others as they usurp the marketplace reserved through trademark registration. The fault causes a more or less severe damage to the trademark owner. Counterfeiting on genuine products is a low gravity compared to the one on non genuine products because then improperly marked goods, often of poor quality, are likely to harm the health or safety of humans and its environment. Thus, the counterfeit trademark is altered. Therefore, under criminal law, the fine could take the form of a percentage of the sales made ​​by the infringer. Under civil law, restitutionary damages would deter lucrative counterfeiting.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:23:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Carlos Eduardo Neves de Carvalho.pdf: 1819884 bytes, checksum: 743f5d09de2989d46ea6b1219468c007 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-09-30 / This essay is dedicated to the study of two empiric phenomena resulting from the use of the mark in the consumer market: acquisition and loss of trademark distinctiveness. The first part is dedicated of the study of acquisition of trademark distinctiveness which could happen in two possibilities: secondary meaning and notoriety. First of all, is addressed the distinctiveness, as the main trademark function and its condition of validity for granting the trademark registration. In the first case, the acquisition of distinctiveness of a trademark occurs by the factual phenomenon known as secondary meaning, in which a descriptive sign, apparently not distinctive, through its prolonged use on the market, acquired a secondary meaning as a distinctive brand, being therefore susceptible for trademark registration. In the second type of acquired distinctiveness, a common trademark can become notorious, renowned and with high commercial prestige within the consumer market through the trademark owner´s advertising investments, which receives special trademark protection: well-known mark within its commercial activity branch, and famous mark, which receives legal protection in all classes of goods and services. The Second Part of this work is dedicated to the study of the loss of distinctiveness of a trademark which may occur in two situations: genericism and dilution. The first situation, genericism, is the factual phenomenon opposed to the secondary meaning, in which, the trademark owner's behavior to promote its brand, results into semantic synonymous and descriptive of the product or service marked by the renowned trademark. The second situation of the loss of trademark distinctiveness is called the dilution phenomenon, which can occurs in three situations: the improper use of a high-renowned trademark in different goods and services marked by the original brand (blurring), the harm to a high-renowned trademark reputation (tarnishment) and the disparagement of a high-renowned trademark in promotional campaigns made by competitors / A presente dissertação analisa dois fenômenos fáticos decorrentes da utilização de uma marca no mercado consumidor: a aquisição e a perda de distintividade marcária. A Primeira Parte dedica-se ao estudo da aquisição de distintividade marcária que pode acontecer em duas hipóteses: significado secundário e notoriedade. Primeiramente, é abordada a distintividade como principal função marcária e condição de validade para a concessão do registro marcário. Na primeira hipótese, a aquisição de distintividade de um sinal marcário ocorre pelo fenômeno fático conhecido como secondary meaning, na qual um sinal descritivo, aparentemente não distintivo, face ao uso prolongado no mercado, adquire uma significação secundária como marca distintiva no mercado consumidor, tornando-se passível para registro. Na segunda hipótese, um sinal marcário comum, face aos elevados investimentos publicitários do titular, torna-se tão conhecido dentro do mercado consumidor, que recebe proteção especial: marca notoriamente conhecida dentro de seu ramo de atividade comercial, e marca de alto renome que possui proteção legal em todas as classes de produtos e serviços. A Segunda Parte deste trabalho dedica-se ao estudo da perda de distintividade de uma marca, o que poderá ocorrer em duas hipóteses: degeneração e diluição. A primeira situação, que é o fenômeno fático oposto ao significado secundário, ocorre pela degeneração, na qual, face ao comportamento do titular, ao promover sua marca, esta se transforma em sinônimo semântico do produto ou serviço assinalado por ela. A segunda situação de perda de distintividade ocorre pelo fenômeno da diluição, que pode se dar em três possibilidades: uso indevido de uma marca de renome em bens diversos daqueles assinalados pela marca original (ofuscação ou turvação), ofensa à reputação da marca de renome (maculação), ou adulteração desta marca em campanhas promocionais feita pelos concorrentes (propaganda comparativa)