Search

網路搜尋引擎業者強大的資訊蒐集能力與網路資訊儲存業者強大的資訊儲存能力，引起商標權人對初始興趣混淆議題的高度重視。本文認為美國在實務案件中出現對網路搜尋引擎業者或資訊儲存服務提供者關鍵字搜尋的商標運用行為，過度解讀為直接侵權行為。這樣的作法不但破壞了侵權行為的理論基礎，亦不當的平衡商標權人的保護與網路發展的重要性。若我國將來採取與美國相同的基調，經由美國的相關經驗，對網路搜尋引擎業者或資訊儲存服務業關於關鍵字商標初始興趣混淆責任，亦應以間接侵權行為責任相繩。在責任的具體規範上，第一步或許可以藉由通過目前電子通訊傳播法草案，對於業者宣示最低的行為準則。最終本文建議經由草案中避風港條款機制，對於商標間接侵權行為的免責實踐經驗，並參考美國對於智慧財產間接侵權行為的規範，在我國商標法中增列間接侵權行為責任條文。 The enormous data collection power in search engine providers and the tremendous data storage power in information storage service providers arouse strong concerns about initial interest confusion to trademark use among the trademark owners. This article indicates that US judicial practice overreads the trademark use to keyword search mechanism in search engine providers and storage service providers as direct trademark infringement. This phenomenon not only tears down the fundamental torts theory but also strikes the inappropriate balance between the protection of trademark owners and the importance of Internet development. This article concludes that the indirect torts liability would be the most appropriate solution to resolve the trademark dispute for keywords initial confusion regarding search engine and information storage service if Taiwan follows the US experience. To get through the transitional stage until reaching the ultimate indirect tort liability for search engine providers and information storage providers, this article would suggest that to set minimum behavior requirements through the enactment of the Electronic Communications Act be the first step. With respect to implementing indirect tort liability into Taiwan’s legal system, the author also conceives a tentative contributory liability (induced infringement liability) provision to the Taiwan Trademark Law, which is based upon the counterpart in the US legal system.

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Taiwan Law Review is the property of Angle Publishing Co., Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)