外語翻譯商標爭議案件之符號學分析

Analysis of Hard Cases Involving Translated Trademarks from Semiotic Perspective

本文所討論乃是外語商標的譯名所導致的侵權爭議。人類從事溝通使用任何能夠傳遞資訊的載體都可視為符號，商標用以傳遞商家資訊自然屬於符號一種。台灣近年來發生多起外語商標的中譯名案件，知名如跨國企業Swarovski與Chanel提告台灣某些商家以其品牌音譯作為公司名稱，主張造成商標混淆或聲譽減損。本研究乃參考符號學索緒爾(Ferdinand de Saussure, 1857-1913)「能指」與「所指」、「系譜軸」與「毗鄰軸」概念以及皮爾斯(C. S. Peirce，1839-1914)的符號三元理論，分析國內外三起涉及外語翻譯的商標權爭議。作者先回顧符號學應用於商標的既有文獻，以及品牌在地化可能涉及的翻譯策略，然後對這三起國內外案件的商標之符號性進行描述分析。這三起案件分別發生在台灣（絲芙蘭訴伊芙蘭案）、中國（喬丹訴喬丹體育）、美國（Otokoyama Co. Ltd. v. Wine of Japan Import）。隨著外國投資者在台灣越來越多，台灣商標法將面臨更多挑戰，台灣本地公司在採用翻譯外國標記作為其公司名、品牌名或口號時應更加謹慎。
The problem discussed in this article is the trademark disputes caused by translation including transliteration of existing trademarks. Firstly, any carrier that conveys information in human communication can be regarded as a semiotic sign; a trademark used to convey business information naturally belongs to a type of semiotic signs. Recently, there have been quite a few cases of trademark disputes involving transliterations of foreign names or brands in the rulings of Taiwan Intellectual Property Courts. For example, the renowned foreign enterprises Swarovski and Chanel sued certain companies in Taiwan for violating their trademark rights by using the transliteration of their brand names as their trademarks or company names. This research adopts a framework of semiotic theories represented by Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) and C.S. Peirce (1839-1914) for analyzing three cases of trademarks disputes. The author first reviews the existing literature on the semiotic nature of a trademark as well as the brand naming strategies when localizing their products in a foreign market, and then performs analysis on the translated trademarks involved in the three cases. Respectively, the three cases occurred in Taiwan (Sephora v. Evelyn), China (Jordan v. Jordan Sports), and the United States (Otokoyama Co. Ltd. v. Wine of Japan Import). With the arrival of more and more foreign investors in Taiwan, Taiwan's trademark law faces more challenges. Our local companies are expected to be more discreet when using translated foreign marks as their company names, brand names or slogans.

The problem discussed in this article is the trademark disputes caused by translation including transliteration of existing trademarks. Firstly, any carrier that conveys information in human communication can be regarded as a semiotic sign; a trademark used to convey business information naturally belongs to a type of semiotic signs. Recently, there have been quite a few cases of trademark disputes involving transliterations of foreign names or brands in the rulings of Taiwan Intellectual Property Courts. For example, the renowned foreign enterprises Swarovski and Chanel sued certain companies in Taiwan for violating their trademark rights by using the transliteration of their brand names as their trademarks or company names. This research adopts a framework of semiotic theories represented by Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) and C.S. Peirce (1839-1914) for analyzing three cases of trademarks disputes. The author first reviews the existing literature on the semiotic nature of a trademark as well as the brand naming strategies when localizing their products in a foreign market, and then performs analysis on the translated trademarks involved in the three cases. Respectively, the three cases occurred in Taiwan (Sephora v. Evelyn), China (Jordan v. Jordan Sports), and the United States (Otokoyama Co. Ltd. v. Wine of Japan Import). With the arrival of more and more foreign investors in Taiwan, Taiwan's trademark law faces more challenges. Our local companies are expected to be more discreet when using translated foreign marks as their company names, brand names or slogans.