Study On Trademark Infringement For Unauthorized Replacement Of Product Packaging

The developments of market economy constantly bring new challenges to the existing social system. To replace the packing of the goods without authorization is the concentrated reflection of pursuing benefit maximization, under the condition of market economy. However, replace the packing of the goods without authorization has brought new challenges to the standard of trademark infringement. In the replacement of goods packaging without authorization, the registered trademark of the trademark holder doesn’t have any change, it still is attached on the new packaging of goods plays a role in identifying the sources of. But around whether the behavior constitute a trademark infringement,disputation has never been ceased.In fact, replace the product packaging without authorization, is often characterized by a variety of different types, the existing debate about this issue always around one of the types, and it’s difficult to form the consistency. The conception of this article is that, whether the behavior of replace the product packaging without authorization constitute the understanding of the trademark infringement cannot be treated as the same, but should be specific analysis, the principle of Exhaustion and Nominative Fair Use cannot be used to every behavior does not constitute a trademark infringement reasonable justification. As for the structure of this essay, mainly including the following three parts:The first part is the basic part of this article. This part mainly involves replace the product packaging without authorization concept defining, analyzes the behavior characteristic and cooperate with typical cases of different types of the behavior of a simple description. Among them, the replace after defining the concept of commodity packaging, mainly compared with the similar trademark infringement of reverse counterfeit behavior, to deepen our understanding of this problem. At the same time, to give below demonstrates a flow, this part also made a simple introduction about the different understanding of commodity packaging is tort or not.The second part is the sublimation part of this article. Which mainly introduce the typical case of commodity packaging "Prestonettes" case happened in USA, the Hoffman la Roche v Centrafam happened in EU, and related cases and academic views in Japan, aimed at by carding these countries to deal with the same problem, to find the basic ideas of whether replace the product packaging without authorization is trademark infringement.The third part is the core of this article discusses some. In this part, first of all, from the quality assurance of trademark, it wants to tell us the independent status of quality assurance in trademark law, and then points out that the replace of commodity packaging although there is no damage of trademark recognition, but as long as the damage of the quality of the goods shall be considered as trademark infringement; Second, tease the principle of Exhaustion and its exceptions, and put forward the principle cannot be provide to each replace behavior of commodity packaging is not infringement defense; Finally, has carried on Nominative Fair Use, pointed out that due to the replace commodity packaging does not conform to the trademark reasonable use applicable premise, so it can’t be replace after commodity packaging does not constitute a trademark infringement of justification.Finally, the article concludes that as long as change could lead to the quality of commodity packaging damage, damage of trademark quality assurance function, should be identified as trademark infringement.