同時涉及侵害著作權及商標權之戲謔仿作行為的法律適用方式──智慧財產法院108年度民商上字第5號民事判決的問題提起

How to Approach A Parody Dispute Involving Both Copyright and Trademark Infringement

當個案中之戲謔仿作行為同時涉有侵害著作權及商標權之虞，且被告亦就其戲謔仿作主張合理使用抗辯時，法院審理是應先行就著作權法之合理使用抗辯及侵權議題進行審理；抑或，應先審理商標侵權的合理使用抗辯及侵權問題？二者分析、審理是否可以交互利用，抑或應各自於其範疇內進行獨立分析、審理？本文認為，著作權法關於戲謔仿作之合理使用抗辯認定、判斷方式，可提供商標法諸多參考之處，故法院於此應有之審理方式，當是先就著作權法的戲謔仿作議題加以審理，嗣後再參考其審理過程及結果，針對商標戲謔仿作議題進行分析、判斷。

When the parody in a case involves both copyright and trademark infringement, and the defendant also asserts the fair use defense, should the court proceed with the fair use defense and infringement issues under the copyright law first, or should it resolve the fair use defense and infringement issues under the trademark law first? Can the analysis and trial of the two be used interchangeably, or should they be analyzed and reviewed independently within their own scope? This Article asserts that the copyright law’s factfinding and judgment regarding the fair use defense of parody can provide many references for the trademark law. Therefore, the court should first try the parody issue in the copyright law, and then refer to its trial process and results to analyze and judge the issue of trademark parody issue.