판매전 혼동이론의 적용확대와 그 비판


Criticisms Against the Extended Application of Initial Interest Confusion Theory


피인용수 : 0(자료제공 : 네이버학술정보)



The criterion for considering trademark infringement is based upon the traditional likelihood of confusion analysis. Initial interest confusion theory is related to this analysis. This theory was first adopted thirty years ago in the Grotrian v. Steinway & Sons case. US courts have recently expanded the application of this theory, in particular, in digital environments, for examples, metatag, domain name disputes, pop-up or pop-down advertisement, and keyword and banner advertisements. Based upon initial interest confusion theory, courts hold that defendant commits trademark infringement when consumers might initially, not at the time of selling, be attracted by a competitor’s product or service. Even if not adopted all US courts and commentators, initial interest confusion theory has been championed by many US courts and commentators. Initial interest confusion theory is attractive when applied to some issues in internet, it may cause some problems. It may inappropriately expand the rights of trademark owner, and prevent comparative advertisement. This paper argues that it is appropriate to apply this theory in some cases, but that it argues against too expansive application.


Ⅰ. 서론
 Ⅱ. 판매전 혼동이론의 기원ㆍ발전
  1. Grotrian 케이스
  2. Mobil 케이스
  3. Brookfield 케이스
 Ⅲ. 판매전 혼동이론의 적용
  1. 도메인이름 분쟁
  2. 메타택과 상표
  3. 광고를 위한 상표 검색어 사용
  4. 팝업광고를 위한 상표 검색어 사용
 Ⅳ. 판매 전 혼동이론의 적용확대에 대한 비판
  1. 혼동의 부존재
  2. 현행 체제에 의한 해결 가능
  3. 상표권의 과대한 보호
  4. 메타택의 비효율성
 Ⅴ. 결어


  • 이대희 Lee, Dae-Hee. 고려대학교 법과대학


자료제공 : 네이버학술정보

    함께 이용한 논문

      ※ 기관로그인 시 무료 이용이 가능합니다.

      • 6,600원

      0개의 논문이 장바구니에 담겼습니다.