CAJ | 학술논문

通过“微信”商标案我们看到,商标的标识功能和交流媒介的社会属性,决定了任何一件商标都不可能成为一项纯粹的私人权利,不可能与公共利益毫无瓜葛,决定了消费者应当成为商标法中“隐形的上帝”,消费者所代表的利益应当成为商标法上的公共利益.在审查判断有关标志是否构成《商标法》第10条第1款第（8）项所规定的“具有其他不良影响”时,不应当以根本不可能产生不良影响的标志或标志的要素本身为标准,而应当考虑该标志使用在其指定的商品上,是否“可能对我国政治、经济、文化、宗教、民族等社会公共利益和公共秩序产生消极、负面影响”.如果涉案商标将导致相关公众发生混淆误认,对已经形成的稳定的市场秩序造成消极影响,应当被认定“具有不良影响”.
통과“미신”상표안아문간도,상표적표식공능화교류매개적사회속성,결정료임하일건상표도불가능성위일항순수적사인권리,불가능여공공이익호무과갈,결정료소비자응당성위상표법중“은형적상제”,소비자소대표적이익응당성위상표법상적공공이익.재심사판단유관표지시부구성《상표법》제10조제1관제（8）항소규정적“구유기타불량영향”시,불응당이근본불가능산생불량영향적표지혹표지적요소본신위표준,이응당고필해표지사용재기지정적상품상,시부“가능대아국정치、경제、문화、종교、민족등사회공공이익화공공질서산생소겁、부면영향”.여과섭안상표장도치상관공음발생혼효오인,대이경형성적은정적시장질서조성소겁영향,응당피인정“구유불량영향”.
From ＂WeChat＂ trademark dispute case, we can see that trademark is not only of identifying function, but also is a communication media, which, on one hand, determines that any trademark can not be an absolutely private right, having nothing to do with public interest, on the other hand, determines that consumers should be the ＂invisible God＂ in trademark law. Therefore, consumers＇ interests should be regarded as the public interest in the sense of trademark law. When interpreting ＂marks having other harmful effects＂ prescribed in Article 10, Paragraph 1, Sentence 8 of China Trademark Law, the interpretation should not be confined to the adverse effects of the mark itself, but should also include the harmful effects generating from the use of the mark. If the subject trademark will cause confusion and mistake among relevant public, and would cause adverse influence to the already-formed stable market order, it should be regarded as ＂having harmful effects＂.