英文摘要 |
The issues that have arisen concerning parallel importation relate to trademark infringement, unfair marketing competition, international trade in goods, and, in particular, legislative policies and the legal effects of parallel importation caused by interactions between the territoriality principle and the exhaustion doctrine. It is well known that the territorial-ity principle implies that trademarks are protected within the territories in which they are registered. However, parallel importation does not just infringe upon the trademark rights of domestically authorized dealers or agents in current Taiwanese law; it is also a result of the application of the exhaustion doctrine. Parallel importers do not require permission from domestic agents to import genuine goods; the exhaustion doctrine permits this as long as these goods are legally obtained outside of or within Taiwan. This paper attempts to discuss these defects through liter-ature analyses and case studies. It also attempts to point out six particular defects and to proffer solutions. These defects include the conflict be-tween the territoriality principle in Articles 2, 3, and 4 of the Trademark Act and the exhaustion doctrine, the conflict involving “other legitimate reasons” governed by the proviso to Section 2, the ambiguity of Article 36 of the Trademark Act, and the different definitions for parallel impor-tation in the Copyright Act and the Trademark Act. The paper also in-cludes a discussion of the influence on potential commercial goodwill for legitimate trademark users when parallel importation is permitted, the likelihood of parallel importation to cause confusion and trademark dilu-tion effects on relevant consumers, how parallel importation forces for-eign firms to withdraw from the domestic market, and the negative con-sequences of such withdrawal for domestic consumers. The goal of the paper is to reexamine such trademark disputes. It is this author’s hope that future Taiwanese legislation and the judicial system will consider various factors as possible solutions to harmonize the territoriality prin-ciple and the exhaustion doctrine. These factors include examining mar-ket shares of parallel-imported goods and those that are not, authorizing substantive goods in the market, relaxing restrictions on foreign trade-mark applications, and drafting legislation based on the principle of legal certainty. |