상표법상 법정손해배상에 관한 비교법적 고찰 － 고의의 차별적 취급 및 사용요건의 강화를 중심으로 －
A Comparative Legal Study on Statutory Damages in Trademark Law : Focused on Enhanced Treatment of Willfulness and a Bona Fide Use
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In a trademark infringement it is very difficult to prove damages because of its intangible character than general tort damages. Therefore, to achieve the purposes of trademark system at least in willful trademark counterfeiting it is needed to reduce owner's burden to prove damages innovatively and statutory damages can make such a role. However, the current statutory damages in trademark law recently came in through the Korea - U.S. Free Trade Agreement left room for various improvements. First, it is needed to enhance the upper limit of statutory damages twice if defendant's willful infringement is proved that is to say the defendant had knowledge that its actions constitute an infringement. Statutory damages have compensatory purposes for actual damages as well as corrective function to trademark infringements. Consequentially statutory damages can feature punitive civil liability. Thus, putting willfulness and negligence in the same category in statutory damages regime is inadequate. Furthermore excluding the presumption of willfulness in statutory damages should be accompanied. If the upper limit enhanced statutory damages are subject to the presumption of willfulness uniformly, statutory damages can be against equity and so-called brand hunters may use statutory damages wrongfully. Then, to prevent abuse of statutory damages strengthening a bona fide use requirement is necessary. In detail, it is needed to be recognized that the trademark express a specific person's products, otherwise require using more than three years. In trademark system with an emphasis on the public interest aspects statutory damages regime has more strong points than other intellectual property law. To amend statutory damages still in the early stages of implementation rationally and revise it to prevent distorted application, our trademark system is able to get one step further to establish a sound trading system.
Abstract
In a trademark infringement it is very difficult to prove damages because of its intangible character than general tort damages. Therefore, to achieve the purposes of trademark system at least in willful trademark counterfeiting it is needed to reduce owner's burden to prove damages innovatively and statutory damages can make such a role. However, the current statutory damages in trademark law recently came in through the Korea - U.S. Free Trade Agreement left room for various improvements. First, it is needed to enhance the upper limit of statutory damages twice if defendant's willful infringement is proved that is to say the defendant had knowledge that its actions constitute an infringement. Statutory damages have compensatory purposes for actual damages as well as corrective function to trademark infringements. Consequentially statutory damages can feature punitive civil liability. Thus, putting willfulness and negligence in the same category in statutory damages regime is inadequate. Furthermore excluding the presumption of willfulness in statutory damages should be accompanied. If the upper limit enhanced statutory damages are subject to the presumption of willfulness uniformly, statutory damages can be against equity and so-called brand hunters may use statutory damages wrongfully. Then, to prevent abuse of statutory damages strengthening a bona fide use requirement is necessary. In detail, it is needed to be recognized that the trademark express a specific person's products, otherwise require using more than three years. In trademark system with an emphasis on the public interest aspects statutory damages regime has more strong points than other intellectual property law. To amend statutory damages still in the early stages of implementation rationally and revise it to prevent distorted application, our trademark system is able to get one step further to establish a sound trading system.
참고문헌 (37)
- 강동세, "지적재산권의 형사적 이해" (2003), 세창출판사
- 권택수, "요건사실 특허법" (2010), 진원사
- 배종대, "형법총론" (2013), 홍문사
- 사법연수원, "상표법" (2012), 사법연수원 출판부
- 송영식, "송영식 지적소유권법 (하)" (2013), 육법사
- 안원모, "특허권의 침해와 손해배상" (2005), 세창출판사
- 이상돈, "형법강의" (2010), 법문사
- 윤정화, "중국지식재산권법" (2011), 진원사
- 이시윤, "신민사소송법" (2012), 박영사
- 정상조, "특허법 주해 II" (2010), 박영사
- 조영선, "특허법" (2013), 박영사
- 권인희, "특허법상 징벌적 손해배상제도 도입 가능성에 관한 소고 - 하도급법상 징벌적 손해배상제도의 도입에 즈음하여-", 법학논총, 27, pp.27~43 (2012), 법학연구소
- 김동욱, "상표판례를 통해 본 한국과 미국의 상표침해이론 비교 및 침해기준 조화를 위한 상표정책 방향", 산업재산권, (35), pp.237~326 (2011), 한국지식재산학회
- 김상찬, "징벌적 손해배상제도의 도입을 위한 비교법적 고찰", 법학연구, (35), pp.163~185 (2009), 한국법학회
- 김원오, "상표위조행위에 대한 법정손해배상제도의 도입 검토", 산업재산권, (24), pp.1~30 (2007), 한국지식재산학회
- 김인희, "국내 인터넷 포털의 현황과 특성 : 산업으로서의 포털과 미디어로서의 포털을 중심으로", 방송통신정책, 22(3)통권 : 479 (2010)
- 산업재산권분야에 있어서 징벌적손해배상제도의 도입가능성 및 도입방안, "배상철", 지식재산권연구센터, ~ (2005)
- 소성규, "불법행위의 성립요건에 있어서 고의와 과실", 법학연구, 6 (1997)
- 심미랑, "특허침해에 대한 손해배상액으로서 실시료 상당액", 안암법학, (37), pp.653~688 (2012), 안암법학회
- 안춘수, "민사책임에 있어서 위법성, 고의⋅과실, 법률의 착오의 관계 - 대법원 2002. 7. 12 선고 2001다46440 판결에 대한 검토를 겸하여 -", 저스티스, (128), pp.281~312 (2012), 한국법학원
- 육소영, "상표법상의 손해배상제도의 문제점과 그 해결방안", 법학연구, 13(1) (2002)
- 이규호, "미국 연방저작권법상 법정손해배상제도에 대한 연구 이규호", 정보법학, 11(1), pp.87~144 (2007), 한국정보법학회
- 이종구, "한미 FTA의 이행에 따른 미국의 법정손해배상제도의 도입과 그 한계", 산업재산권, (23)통권 : 23, pp.617~648 (2007), 한국지식재산학회
- 정태호, "상표법상 법정손해배상제도에 관한 비교법적인 검토 및 제언", 발명특허, 37(7)
- 조영선, "상표의 사용개념에 대한 입법론적 고찰", 저스티스, (105)통권 : 105, pp.128~157 (2008), 한국법학원
- 최경진, "법정손해배상제도의 도입에 관한 연구 - 한미자유무역협정에 따른 민법과의 조화를 중심으로 -", 중앙법학, 13(3)통권 : 41, pp.203~240 (2011), 중앙법학회
- 최우령, "상표권 침해로 인한 손해배상청구에 관한 연구", 박사, 법학과, pp.2013
- 한․EU FTA협상에 따른 상표․디자인 분야 제도 정비 방안에 관한 연구, "특허청", ~ (2009)
- Janis, Mark D, "Trademark Law and Theory : a Handbook of Contemporary Research" (2008), Edward Elgar
- Landes, William M, "Economic Structure of Intellectual Property Law" (2003), Belknap Press
- Lee, Wherry Timothy, "librarian's guide to intellectual property in the digital age : copyrights, patents, and trademarks" (2002), Net Library, Inc
- Mcjohn, Stephen M, "Intellectual Property" (2013), Wolters Kluwer Law & Business
- Stim, Richard, "Patent, Copyright & Trademark" (2006), Ingram Pub Services
- Berne, Jason R, "Court Intervention But Not in a Classic Form : A Survey of Remedies in Internet Trademark Cases", St. Louis U. L. J, 43(1157) (1999)
- Gibson, James, "Risk aversion and Rights accretion in Intellectual Property Law", Yale L. J, 116(882) (2007)
- Gordon, Wendy J, "Fair Use as Market Failure : A structural and economic analysis of the betamax case and its predecessors", Colum. L. Rev, 82(1600) (1982)
- Micheletti, Randy R, "Willful Patent Infringement after in re Seagate : Just what is "objectively reckless" infringement?", Chi.-Kent L. Rev, 84(975) (2010)