真品平行輸入於國內外商標權人不同時，是否有商標耗盡原則之適用？－－評智慧財產法院105年度民商上字第14號民事判決

Whether Principle of Exhaustion is Applied to Parallel Importation of Different Trademark Right Owners in Domestic and Foreign Countries: Taiwan Intellectual Property Court’s 2016 Min-Shang-San-Zi-14 Case

商標權利耗盡原則之意旨，為商標由商標權人或經其同意之人標示在商品上，且於市場上交易流通時，權利人不得就該商品主張商標權，故商標權於第一次投入市場交易時，其就已經耗盡，如相關消費者使用或轉銷售商品之二次行銷，自不受商標權效力所拘束。就與商標權利耗盡原則攸關之商標真品平行輸入議題，若其國內外商標權人不一致，無論雙方有無經濟或法律關係，是否有商標權利耗盡原則之適用，藉以判斷商標真品平行輸入之合法性？本文將綜合理論和實務之見解，並以智慧財產法院105年度民商上字第14號民事判決為核心，來探討當國內外商標權人為不同人，且國外商標權人之商品乃第一次流通時，是否有商標權利耗盡原則之拘束？

The principle of exhaustion applies to the placing of goods on domestic or foreign markets under a registered trademark by the proprietor or with his or her consent. Thus, the principle of exhaustion prohibits goods from being resold. Trademark rights are exhausted when goods are first transacted on markets, meaning that limits exist on the effects of registered trademarks when relevant consumers use or resell. Trademark parallel importation issues are related to the trademark principle of exhaustion. Whether the principle of exhaustion is applicable influences the legality of trademark parallel importation regardless of whether the domestic and foreign trademark right owners have economic or legal relations. However, the principles of such determination are inconsistent. This article discusses the Taiwan Intellectual Property Court’s 2016 Min-Shang-San-Zi-14 Case and whether the principle of exhaustion is applicable if the domestic and foreign trademark owners are different and if goods with foreign trademark owners have already been transacted, which requires the integration of theoretical and practical perspectives.