摘要
《刑法修正案(十一)》展现了积极保护商标权的立法取向,使侵犯商标权犯罪的结构呈现既严且厉的变化。其合理性主要体现在坚持平等保护服务商标和商品商标原则及扩大销售假冒注册商标的商品罪的处罚范围,其非理性主要展现在未彻底贯彻平等保护服务商标和商品商标原则,且对商标侵权行为犯罪化的理性发展预期不足,遗漏了诸多值得刑法处罚的商标侵权行为类型,而删除拘役刑不符合消极责任主义。合理以刑法处罚侵犯商标权行为的前提是妥当界定我国商标法上的商标侵权行为。尚未被犯罪化的商标侵权行为主要包括商标混淆行为、销售假冒注册商标的服务行为、销售构成商标混淆的商品或服务行为、商标反向假冒行为及驰名商标淡化行为。在平等保护观的指引下,销售假冒注册商标的服务行为具有犯罪化的正当性与必要性。在刑法扩张保护商标权的时代背景下,应认真对待上述尚未被犯罪化的商标侵权行为的犯罪化问题。其他尚未被犯罪化的商标侵权行为均属商标法明文规定的商标侵权行为,且均在实质上侵犯了商标权人的合法利益,而非刑事法规制显然无法满足法益保护的需要,由刑法进行保护反而遵守了法益保护原则,不违反刑法谦抑主义。
The AmendmentⅪto the Criminal Law shows the legislative orientation of actively protecting trademark rights,which makes the structure of trademark infringement crimes show a strict and severe change.Its rationality is mainly reflected in the principle of equal protection of service trademarks and product trademarks and the expansion of the penalties for the crime of selling counterfeit registered trademarks.Its irrationality is mainly manifested in the failure to thoroughly implement the principle of equal protection of service trademarks and product trademarks,and the infringement of trademarks.The rational development of criminalization of behavior is not expected to be sufficient,and many types of trademark infringements worthy of criminal law are omitted,and the deletion of criminal detention does not conform to negative liability.The prerequisite for the reasonable punishment of trademark infringement by criminal law is to properly define the trademark infringement in our country’s trademark law.Trademark infringements that have not yet been criminalized mainly include trademark confusion,sales of services that counterfeit registered trademarks,sales of goods or services that constitute trademark confusion,trademark reverse counterfeiting,and well-known trademark dilution.Under the guidance of the concept of equal protection,the act of selling counterfeit registered trademarks has the legitimacy and necessity of criminalization.In the context of the era when the criminal law expands the protection of trademark rights,the criminalization of the above-mentioned trademark infringements that have not yet been criminalized should be taken seriously.Other trademark infringements that have not yet been criminalized are trademark infringements expressly stipulated in the Trademark Law,and they have substantially violated the legitimate interests of the trademark owner.The non-criminal regulations obviously cannot meet the needs of legal interest protection and are carried out by the criminal law.On the contrary,the protection complies with the principle of protection of legal interests and does not violate the modest and restrained principles of the criminal law.
作者
冯文杰
Feng Wenjie(The Academy of Intelligence and Justice Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China)
出处
《北京化工大学学报（社会科学版）》
2023年第3期31-39,共9页
Journal of Beijing University of Chemical Technology(Social Sciences Edition)
基金
重庆市教育委员会人文社会科学研究项目“监察机关与公安机关配合制约关系的衔接制度研究”(23SKGH028)
西南政法大学智能司法研究院2022年度合规专项课题“企业合规改革的试点动因、模式选择及规范优化”(ZNHG2022K05)
重庆市教育委员会人文社会科学研究项目“智慧量刑理论基础研究”(22SKGH044)。
关键词
《刑法修正案(十一)》
商标侵权行为
侵犯商标权犯罪
立法更新
理性形塑
The AmendmentⅪto the Criminal Law
trademark infringement
crime of trademark infringement
legislative update
rational shaping
