The Scope Of Trademark Protection Of Criminal Law

China’s criminal law on trademark protection is mainly reflected in Article 213, Article 214 and Article 215. Comparing with the relevant provisions of the civil law, criminal laware limited both in the protection of objects and patterns of behavior.As the economy continuing to develop, the economic value of intellectual property has become increasingly prominent. In this context, trademark infringement also show multiple trends, China’s "Trademark Law" has been amended many times, and many scholars believe that the criminal law should also make the appropriate changes to enhance the protection of trademark rights. To this end, I have combined with China’s practices and trends in the administration of justice in civil legal changes, puttedmy views to wish to make valuable suggestions for criminal law protection of trademark rights.This paper is divided into three chapters. The first chapter mainly talks about the research of trademark criminal behavior, which always thought to be as a typical administrative offense. So we should think about necessary, independence and feasibility when we classify it is a sort of crimes. We cannot expand the the scope of trademark in criminal law just for eliminating the differences between the civil law and the criminal law. Because of role of judicial interpretation, in fact, the section 213 has a certain degree of expansion, both of the "a commodity" and "the same trademark" have expanded. I believe that this interpretation have been able to apply to the fight against crime requires. Instead, if we expand in the legislative, it may not be conducive to incriminate standard judgment. For the reverse counterfeiting, since this is a relatively new type of infringement, and the crime rate is not high and the harmfulness is lower than the normal, criminal law t is no need for interfering in early.The second chapter discusses the issue of trademark protection of the criminal law, and the main contents includes whether the service should be included in the scope of trademark protection, and special protection methods to well-known trademarks. The author hold the view that the services should be included in the scope of trademark protection in criminal law,in the background of the great development of the service industry in China, not to mention the harmfulness and the treaty obligations. For many scholars proposing that we should give special protection to well-known trademarks, especially that the protection of well-known trademarks should be expanded to "dilute the act". However, I believe that these arguments is questionable, for the intention of the well-known is not to give a wellknown trademark system active power but negative power. In other word, the wellknown trademark is not a special honor. In addition,the well-known trademark system was distortedartificially in our country. So the new amendment of the "Trademark Law" reiterated the principle of the well-known trademark of "on-demand identification, recognition and passive case found". Sothe criminal law should not be expanded in the field.The third chapter is trying to discuss the ways of penalty of the trademark criminal. It involves three main issues, which is whether the criminal standard of trademark should reduce ? Whether the three typical settings of trademark crime need to change? Whether trademark criminal punishment should add qualifications ? Some people think since we should give the intangible assets the same protection comparing with the tangible assets, so the standard of trademark crime should not be too high. But I think the standard is reasonable for the object is different.And I believe that social harmfulness of counterfeiting registered trademarks is much different from the other two crimes, so the punishment should be changed in order to highlight the special nature of the crime of counterfeiting registered trademarks. I also believe that there is no need to add the qualifications punishment, because such qualifications deprivation or prohibitions already exist in the relevant laws. What’ s more, the qualification cannot play well considering the nature of trademark crime in our country.The last part is the conclusion, I think it’s necessary to change the protection of the trademark in the criminal law, but even this expansion should also be limited. It should consider about our concrete and the last amendment of the "trademark Law" and other factors. I think we only need to add service marks provision, no need for changing in behavior. In short, the expansion of trademark on crime bound should be controlled within a reasonable range.