부정경쟁방지법상 보호되는 영업표지로서의 제호에 관한 소고 -뮤지컬 ‘캣츠’사건을 중심으로-
Study on the Protection of Title as a Business Mark under Unfair Competition Prevention Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Under Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Law("UCPL"), the term ‘acts of unfair competition’ means an act of causing confusion with another person's commercial facilities or activities by using marks identical or similar to, another person's name, trade name, or emblem, or any other mark indicating another person's business, which is widely known in the Republic of Korea. The application of UCPL to the title, a prerequisite to be a business mark referred to in UCPL, was not the case in this situation, since the title lacked such a precondition. The title 'Cats' did not display the function of indicating source by specifying the 'RUG' company, as well as plaintiff ‘Seol & Company’, and also the defendants did not use the title ‘Children's Cats’ as a business mark. Even if using the title 'Children Cats' is the act of unfair competition under UCPL, ‘Fair Use Theory’ is applied to UCPL since the Government promotes the fair use of intellectual property and shall endeavor to prevent abuse of intellectual property rights under Framework Act on Intellectual Property. 'Cats' in the title used by the defendant’s Children Cats is nothing but merely to point to the contents of the musical with ‘Cats’. And it is not showing business mark of the RUG as well as the plaintiff. Since the defendant has used 'Cats' in order to explain their musical case to ‘descriptive fair use’, this does not correspond to unfair competition.
Abstract
Under Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Law("UCPL"), the term ‘acts of unfair competition’ means an act of causing confusion with another person's commercial facilities or activities by using marks identical or similar to, another person's name, trade name, or emblem, or any other mark indicating another person's business, which is widely known in the Republic of Korea. The application of UCPL to the title, a prerequisite to be a business mark referred to in UCPL, was not the case in this situation, since the title lacked such a precondition. The title 'Cats' did not display the function of indicating source by specifying the 'RUG' company, as well as plaintiff ‘Seol & Company’, and also the defendants did not use the title ‘Children's Cats’ as a business mark. Even if using the title 'Children Cats' is the act of unfair competition under UCPL, ‘Fair Use Theory’ is applied to UCPL since the Government promotes the fair use of intellectual property and shall endeavor to prevent abuse of intellectual property rights under Framework Act on Intellectual Property. 'Cats' in the title used by the defendant’s Children Cats is nothing but merely to point to the contents of the musical with ‘Cats’. And it is not showing business mark of the RUG as well as the plaintiff. Since the defendant has used 'Cats' in order to explain their musical case to ‘descriptive fair use’, this does not correspond to unfair competition.
참고문헌 (18)
- 박현경, "뮤지컬 캣츠 사건을 통해 본 제호의 법적 보호", 스포츠엔터테인먼트와 법, 18(2), pp.205~231 (2015), 한국스포츠엔터테인먼트법학회
- 사법연수원, "부정경쟁방지법" (2015), 사법연수원 출판부
- 사법연수원, "상표법" (2015), 사법연수원 출판부
- 송선미, "상표 공정사용의 유형에 관한 연구", 박사, 법학과, pp.2013
- 송영식, "지적소유권법" (2013), 육법사
- 윤선희, "상표법 제2판" (2014), 법문사
- 윤선희, "지적재산권법 제14판" (2014), 세창출판사
- 장정애, "드라마 제호의 부정경쟁방지법상 보호에 관한 소고", 비교사법, 16(1), pp.467~527 (2009), 한국비교사법학회
- 정상조, "부정경쟁방지법 원론" (2007), 세창출판사
- 한국특허기술연구원, "부정경쟁방지및영업비밀보호에관한업무편람" (2010), 진한엠앤비
- 한규환, "지식사회와 기업법" (2005), 박영사
- Carl Regelmann, "Trademark Nominative Fair Use: Thr Relevance of The ‘New Kids on The Block Factors’ After The Supreme Court KP PERMANENT MAKE-UP V. LASTING IMPRESSION DECISION", DePaul-LCA J. Art & Ent. L, 16, pp.1~ (2005)
- John L. Reed, "Lanham Act and Deceptive Trade Practice Claims Arising Under State Professional Licensure Laws", Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J, 8, pp.223~ (1997)
- Justin Kerner, "The Third Circuit Adopts an Eight-Factor Test for Likelihood of Confusion in False Endorsement Cases and Flags Related Defenses in Facenda v. NFL Films", Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J, 32, pp.111~ (2009)
- Lars Smith, "Trade Distinctiveness : Solving Scalla’S Tertium Quid Trade Dress Conundrum", Mich. St. L. Rev, 2005, pp.243~ (2005)
- "Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. Bavarian Brewing Co., 264 F.2d 88, 120 U.S.P.Q. 420", ~
- "KP PERMANENT MAKE-UP, INC., Petitioner v. LASTING IMPRESSION I, INC., SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 543 U.S. 111", ~ (2004)
- "Zatarains, 698 F.2d at 796", ~ (1983)