商品状况改变后的权利穷竭问题研究

我国《商标法》尚无权利穷竭原则的明确规定,权利穷竭还不是商标侵权的一个法定抗辩理由,实践中对权利穷竭原则的内涵及其适用条件仍存有不同解释。商品状况改变后再销售行为类型可以分为三类,此三类行为适用权利穷竭原则存在理论障碍和现实危害,应在立法上明确权利穷竭原则的涵义、适用条件及其限制,并在区分不同的"商品状况被改变"情形的前提下谨慎运用权利穷竭原则处理相关侵权问题。

In Chinese trademark law, there is no clear definition of the principle of right exhaustion. The principle of right exhaustion is not a statutory defense for trademark infringement. There are different interpretations on the implications of the principle of right exhaustion and its applicable condition in practice. This article summarizes three types of behaviors of re-sale activity when the commodity condition changes, analyzes the disorder in theory and practice when the principle of right＇exhaustion is mechanically applied to re-sales behavior, proposes that we should explicit the implications, applicable conditions and limitations of right exhaustion in legislation. And on the basis of the distinction between the status-changed goods, we should prudently use the principle of exhaustion of rights to deal with related infringement problem.