商标商品平行进口问题的法律研究
Legal Research on the Issue of Parallel Importation of Trademarked Goods
摘要: 随着经济全球化和贸易自由化的发展,大量商标商品在全球范围内流动,进口商将商标商品从其他低价地域进口至高价位的进口国销售,凭借此价格差异来获取利润,如此便产生了商标商品平行进口的问题。我国目前在立法层面还未出台相关的法律予以规范,司法实践中尚无具体法律的指引,遇到此类纠纷大都只能依靠法官的自由裁量,从而出现了司法混乱甚至于同案不同判的情况。本文意欲厘清商标平行进口的概念和侵权认定的相关理论基础,通过对比分析不同国家或地区对于商标平行进口相关问题的理论研究成果和司法实践,以期明晰我国在解决平行进口问题时选择何种理论原则较为合适,为我国建立较为完善的商标平行进口法律体系提供有益的启示。
Abstract: With the development of economic globalization and trade liberalization, trademarked goods flow extensively across global markets. Importers purchase such goods from low-price regions and import them into higher-priced countries for resale, profiting from price differentials. This practice gives rise to the issue of parallel importation of trademarked goods. Currently, China lacks specific legislative provisions to regulate parallel imports at the statutory level. Judicial practice also lacks concrete legal guidance, leaving disputes largely dependent on judges’ discretionary rulings. Consequently, judicial inconsistencies and divergent rulings in similar cases have emerged. This paper aims to clarify the conceptual framework of trademark parallel imports and the theoretical foundations for infringement determination. By comparatively analyzing theoretical research and judicial practices regarding parallel imports in different countries/regions, it seeks to identify suitable theoretical principles for resolving parallel import issues in China. Ultimately, it proposes constructive insights for establishing a well-defined legal system governing trademark parallel imports.
文章引用:何思颖. 商标商品平行进口问题的法律研究[J]. 交叉科学快报, 2025, 9(6): 874-881. https://doi.org/10.12677/isl.2025.96111

参考文献

[1] 王迁. 知识产权教程[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2021: 649-650.
[2] Dorot, A. (1990) Parallel Importation of Trademarked Goods: Recent Developments in American and Israeli Law. Israel Law Review, 24, 270-298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[3] Chiappetta, V. (2000) The Desirability of Agreeing to Disagree: The WTO, TRIPS, International IPR Exhaustion and a Few Other Things. Michigan Journal of International Law, 21, 333-335.
[4] 陶钧. 商标侵权纠纷中“权利用尽”规则与“平行进口”的法律规制[J]. 中国市场监管研究, 2018(7): 23-30.
[5] 王春燕. 平行进口法律规制的比较研究[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2012: 4.
[6] 秦元明, 周波. 浅析平行进口商标侵权法律问题[J]. 人民司法, 2020(26): 12-18.
[7] 杜颖. 社会进步与商标观念: 商标法律制度的过去、现在和未来[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2013: 207.
[8] 杨祝顺. 商标的来源识别功能: 理论演进、法律地位与制度完善[J]. 私法, 2022, 39(3): 211-228.
[9] 刘维. 商标识别功能损害判定研究[J]. 知识产权, 2014(9): 18-25.
[10] 张鹏. 品质保证功能在商标侵权判断中的地位[J]. 知识产权, 2020(10): 41-50.
[11] 樊子源. 平行进口商标侵权的裁判标准——基于商标功能的视角[J]. 中华商标, 2023(6): 73-78.
[12] Dobrin, S. and Chochia, A. (2016) The Concepts of Trademark Exhaustion and Parallel Imports: A Comparative Analysis between the EU and the Usa. Baltic Journal of European Studies, 6, 28-57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[13] 黄晖, 黄义彪. 略论与平行进口有关的商标侵权行为[J]. 中国知识产权杂志, 2010, 42(8): 34-37.
[14] 何国华. 商标平行进口关系重心的位移与反不正当竞争法的补充规制[J]. 学术论坛, 2019, 42(6): 95-102.
[15] 黄晖. 我国商标权利用尽与平行进口的司法实践[J]. 中华商标, 2022(5): 33-38.
[16] 徐青格. 我国商标平行进口中违法行为认定研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 武汉: 华中科技大学, 2022.
[17] 韩磊. 权利国际用尽原则与平行进口的法律规制[J]. 河北法学, 2017, 35(10): 150-159.