地理標誌保護全球化的歷史變遷及啟示

The Historical Changes of Clobalization of Geographical Indications Protection and Its Enlightenment

地理標誌保護的早期歷史即已反映出了地理標誌作為一種特殊商標所具有的來源識別、品質保證、商譽承載以及市場競爭等功能。從全球化視角，特別是近代以來主要國際條約包括《巴黎公約》《馬德里協定》《里斯本協定》《TRIPS 協定》以及《日內瓦文本》等對地理標誌保護的制度變遷以及保護規則的具體設定來看，地理標誌的保護經歷了從“混淆保護“到“淡化保護“的演變歷程，還存在“相對保護”與“絕對保護”的路徑分野。地理標誌法律保護的核心議題主要包括兩個方面：一是制止對地理標誌的不正當使用，二是防止地理標誌“通用化”和“私有化”。在國際上，《里斯本協定》不太成功說明將地理標誌視為一種靜態的“絕對權利”來維護的極端做法，並非切合實際的路徑選擇，《TRIPS 協定》針對不同商品類別設定的“雙重保護標準”也備受爭論和質疑。相對而言，世界知識產權組織(WIPO)新出臺的《日內瓦文本》，儘管也還存在一些值得選一步探討之處，但是《日內瓦文本》對地理標誌保護規則的重新設定，包括科學設定地理標誌“聲譽”這一核心保護要素，明文規定地理標誌可以尋求類似於馳名商標的反淡化保護，以及在處理地理標誌與普通商標的關係等方面的諸多新規定，則是較為科學合理的，能夠為我國構建地理標誌強保護規則提供啟示和借鑒。

Historically, the early history of geographical indication protection has already reflected the source identification, quality assurance, reputation bearing and market competition of geographical indications. From the perspective of globalization , especially institutional changes and specific protection rules in major international treaties since modern times, including the Paris Convention, the Madrid Agreement, the Lisbon Agreement, the TRIPS Agreement, and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement, geographical indications have undergone an evolutionary process from ''confusion protection'' to ''dilution protection'' , and there are also path differences between ''relative protection'' and ''absolute protection''. The legal protection of geographical indications includes two main issues: the first is to prohibit the improper use of geographical indications, and the second is to prevent the ''generalization'' and privatization'' of geographical indications. From the perspective of the globalization of the protection indications, the highly unsuccessful implementation of the ''Lisbon Agreement'' illustrates the extreme practice of maintaining geographical indications as a static right, which may not be an ideal path for geographical indication protection. Relatively speaking, the geographical indication protection settings in the ''TRIPS Agreement'' and WIPO's new ''Lisbon Agreement Geneva Act'' are more worthy of careful attention, and can provide reference for the improvement of the legal protection of geographical indications in China.