期刊文献+

议限制商标使用是否为间接征收----以菲利普诉乌拉圭案为例 预览

Whether the Limitation of Use of Trademark Constitutes the Indirect Expropriation -------Taking Philip v Uruguay for an exsample
在线阅读 下载PDF
分享 导出
摘要 关于间接征收范围的认定,国际上一直存在争议.商标权虽作为新兴知识时代产物,但大多数条约中都规定,其属于征收财产.2016年的“菲利普诉乌拉圭案”折射了另一个视野---对商标使用的限制是否构成间接征收.菲利普公司认为平装烟草降低盈利能力,构成间接征收.然而该案裁决却认为政府出于公共利益的目的,实行烟草平装措施,对烟草商标使用进行一定限制,这不构成侵害商标权以及剥夺商标权人对商标的所有,不构成间接征收.社会利益与投资者个人利益一直都在博弈,其中政府行为起着举足轻重的作用. It 's controversial to define the range of indirect expropriation. Although the trademark right is a knowledge production of the modern era, it belongs to the expropriation property which was regulated in many treaties. The Philip v Uruguay provided a new view that whether the restrictions on the use of trademarks constitutes indirectly expropriation .Philip claimed that the plain packing had re-duced his profitability and it was indirect expropriation. However, the arbitrators judged that it could not be indirect expropriation, due to the purpose of the government action was for public interests. Moreover, the plain packing did not infringement trademark rights and de-prived of the trademark. There is always a conflict between social benefits and interests of the individual investors, so the government be-havior plays an important role to balance.
作者 王郡 张雅婷 WANG Jun, ZHANG Yating(School of Law,Shanghai University of International Business and Economics, Shanghai 200000)
出处 《武夷学院学报》 2017年第4期29-33,共5页 Journal of Wuyi University
关键词 间接征收 烟草平装 商标使用 indirect expropriation plain packaging trademark using
作者简介 王郡(1994-),女,汉族,在读硕士研究生,主要从事国际投资法研究.
  • 相关文献

二级参考文献41

  • 1S.Chapman.Public Health Advocacy and Tobacco Control:Making Smoking History[M].New Jersey:Wiley-Blackwell,2007:176. 被引量:1
  • 2G.Eindhoven.Elegant Packs Promote Image,Defend Property Rights[J].World Tobacco,1999(16):170. 被引量:1
  • 3B.Freeman,S.Chapman,Matthew Rimmer.The Case for the Plain Packaging of Tobacco Products[J].Addiction,2008(103):580. 被引量:1
  • 4S.Chapman,B.Freeman.Markers of the Denormalisation of Smoking and the Tobacco Industry[J].Tobacco Control,2008(17):28. 被引量:1
  • 5J.Thrasher,M.Rousu,D.Hammond,A.Navarro,J.Corrigan.Estimating the Impact of Pictorial Health Warnings and“Plain”Cigarette Packaging:Evidence from Experimental Auctions among Adult Smokers in The United States[J].Health Policy,2011(102):41-48. 被引量:1
  • 6C.Snowdon.Plain Packaging:Commercial Expression,Anti-smoking Extremism and the Risks of Hyperregulation[M].England:ASI(Research)Ltd,2012:6. 被引量:1
  • 7M.Davison.The Legitimacy Of Plain Packaging Under International Intellectual Property Law:Why There Is No Right To Use A Trademark Under Either The Paris Convention Or The Trips Agreement[A]in T.Voon,A.Mitchell,J.Liberman,G.Ayres(eds.).Public Health and Plain Packaging of Cigarettes[C].Cheltenham:Edward Elgar Pub,2012. 被引量:1
  • 8Guy Tritton.Intellectual Property in Europe[M].London:Sweet&Maxwell,2007:227. 被引量:1
  • 9T.Thamarangsi,A.Puangsuwan.Why Thailand should have the Pictorial Warning Label on Alcoholic Beverage Packages[M].Bangkok:Center for Alcohol Studies,2010:1. 被引量:1
  • 10Regulations on“plain packaging”of Cigarettes:a Case of WTO“Plain Inconsistency”?,Trade Perspective,Issue No.19,October2010. 被引量:1

共引文献5

投稿分析

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部 意见反馈