Earticle

초록

영어

According to the concept of a trademark, very few visible elements can be a trademark and favored elements by customers are limited among them. In contrast, because the attitude to a trademark influences purchase of product,select of a trademark is critical to an applicant of trademark registration. Customers feel friendly toward familiar expression used in daily conversation,but such expression is impossible to be registered as a trademark due to its non-distinctiveness. However, considering correlation between a trademark and product sales, applicants may try to include familiar expression into a trademark and that increases a composite trademark. A composite trademark can be registered even though it contains a non-distinctive element if it is distinctive as a whole. For this composite mark, only distinctive part can be given trademark right, but the public mistakenly consider its whole parts to have trademark right. Disclaimer makes the extent of trademark right clear and helps a user to use the trademark without any fear of infringement. However, regardless of this merit, very few countries such as the U.S., U.K. etc adopt the disclaimer in their trademark systems and even these countries do not actively use the disclaimer. The reason to adopt the disclaimer is that they have a first-to-use system but the U.K. even has the provision to limit trademark right subsequent to registration. In Korea, the disclaimer was adopted in 1949, subsequently deleted and was discussed to be readopted in 2009. It was not adopted as a law at that time, but there is strong possibility to be re-discussed in the future. Under Korean trademark system, a first-to-file system, the disclaimer can be a way to overcome demerits of a first-to-file system. However, fundamental issues surrounding disclaimer in a first-to-file system are still in question. The disclaimer and the limit of trademark right under section 51 have the same result-limiting the extent of trademark right. Thus, if the issue of demarcating trademark right can be resolved properly in amending section 51, in my opinion, there is no need to introduce disclaimer into Korean trademark law.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론
 Ⅱ. 권리불요구제도의 개념 및 성격
  1. 권리불요구제도의 개념
  2. 권리불요구제도의 성격
  3. 유사 내지 관련 개념과의 비교
 Ⅲ. 국내ㆍ외의 권리불요구제도
  1. 제정 상표법
  2. 영국
  3. 미국
 Ⅳ. 권리불요구제도 도입에 대한 논의와 도입 필요성
  1. 제도도입에 따른 이익과 손실
  2. 2009년 권리불요구제도 도입(안)
  3. 도입 필요성
 Ⅴ. 결론
 참고문헌
 

키워드

권리불요구 식별력 결합상표 상표등록 상표권침해 미국 상표 및 부정경쟁방지법 disclaimer distinctiveness composite mark trademark registration trademark infringement Lanham Act.

저자

• 육소영 [ Yook, So-young | 충남대학교 법학전문대학원 부교수 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물