상표위조행위에 대한 법정손해배상제도의 도입 검토
Review on the Introduction of Statutory Damages System against Trademark Counterfeiting
김원오(인하대학교)
24호, 1~30쪽
초록
상표법의 영역에서 상품 위조행위(Counterfeiting)를 규율하는 연방법과 주법이 별도로 제정되어 있다. 1984의 상표위조행위법(Trademark counterfeiting Act of 1984) 및 1996의 위조방지 및 소비자보호법(Anticounterfeiting and Consumer Protection Act of 1996)이 연방법으로 대표적이다. 이 들 법에서는 상표위조 행위와 통상의 상표권침해를 구분하여 취급하고 있으며 위조에 대해서만 구제책의 일환으로 법정손해배상제도를 규정하고 있다. 미국은 사용주의 국가임에도 이러한 법의 적용을 받기 위한 기본적인 전제는 연방 상표등록이 되어 있어야 한다는 점이다. 일반 상표권침해와 달리 상품위조행위에 대해서는 법정손해배상 이외에도 특별한 법적 취급을 받게 된다. 예컨대 실질적 경고 없는 일방적 압류절차의 이용(availability of ex-parte seizure orders without actual notice), 강제적 변호사 비용 산입(mandatory attorneys fees), 형사처벌의 적용(Criminal provisions) 등을 들 수 있다.
Abstract
Recently KORUS FTA including the Clause that "Each Party shall ... in cases of trademark counterfeiting, establish or maintain pre-established damages..." has been concluded at the end. Therefore, Korea should amend trademark laws to allow courts to award significant statutory (or “pre-established”) damages against counterfeiters. This article aims to review on the desirable statutory damages system that should be introduced into the Korean trademark law as an implementation action of KORUS FTA. This article firstly studies a statutory damages in general by comparing it with a lost-profit damages and punitive damages. Further, this article is to address issues concerning the principle requirements for the statutory damages system and proper amount by analyzing the rules and regulations of other countries each other including Lanham Act and Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. Under the KORUS FTA and the American rules and regulations, a statutory damages is to be sought only to the counterfeiting of the registered trademark in use. Therefore, it is firstly required to define "trademark counterfeiting" distinguishing from the general trademark infringement. Further, trademark owners may elect statutory damages, at any time before final judgment is rendered by the trial court in recognition of situations where it is difficult for the trademark owners to prove their measurable monetary damage. It is also notable that there is some exceptions, which does not include any mark used on or in connection with goods or services of which the manufacture or producer was, at the time of the manufacture or production in question authorized to use the mark. In order to introduce it into Korean trademark law system properly, the above issues are discussed or examined and proposed a desirable directions for the revision of the Korean trademark law.
- 발행기관:
- 한국지식재산학회
- 분류:
- 법학