从“非诚勿扰”案看商标反向混淆的认定标准

On the Criteria of Recognition in Trademark Reverse Confusions from the Case of “If You Are the One”

“非诚勿扰”案三次判决结果各有不同的根本原因在于商标反向混淆的认定标准不够统一。美国司法实践承认反向混淆是商标侵权行为经历了一个漫长的过程。我国《商标法》虽然没有在立法上明确承认反向混淆,但从“蓝色风暴”案和“慧眼”案等案件对反向混淆的认定可以看出,我国事实上已经承认了反向混淆的非正当性。目前,反向混淆的构成要件尚未统一,导致司法实践中难以认定,因而应尽快统一反向混淆的认定标准。

The three judgments in the case of“If You Are the One”have different results because the identified criteria of trademark reverse confusion are not uniform enough. American judicial practice proves that it has gone through a long process in the“reverse confusion is trademark infringement”. Although Trademark Law in China does not explicitly recognize reverse confusion in legislation,it can be seen from the identification of reverse confusion in“Blue Storm”case and“Wise Eye”case that China has in fact recognized the illegitimacy of reverse confusion. At present,the elements of reverse confusion have not been unified,which makes it difficult to identify in judicial practice. Therefore,we should unify the criteria of reverse confusion as soon as possible.