패러디 상표의 비상업적 사용 인정 기준에 관한 연구 – 미국 로저스 테스트 축소 동향을 중심으로 –

This study explores the criteria for recognizing the non-commercial use of parody trademarks as an exception to trademark dilution liability. Trademark dilution theory, designed to protect the reputation and consumer appeal of famous marks, has raised concerns about excessive restrictions on freedom of speech. Parody trademarks, which transform well-known marks in a satirical or critical manner to convey social messages, stand at the intersection of trademark rights and free speech. Although the Korean Unfair Competition Prevention Act explicitly recognizes “non-commercial use” as an exception to dilution, the criteria for its application remain vague, resulting in legal uncertainty regarding the protection of parody trademarks. This paper analyzes the Rogers test developed in U.S. jurisprudence, particularly focusing on the recent shift in legal interpretation following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in Jack Daniel’s v. VIP. It explores how the narrowing of the Rogers Test affects freedom of speech and draws insights for interpreting the “non-commercial use” clause in Korean law. Drawing on this development, the study hope to provide insights for interpreting the “non-commercial use” exception under Korean law that harmonizing trademark protection with the freedom of speech.