Research On The Interpretation And Application Of Article 6(4)of The Anti-unfair Competition Law

Article 6 of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law is a legal regulation that specifically addresses the confusing conduct of commercial signs.Among them,Article 6(4)is also known as the underwriting clause.The interpretation and application of Article 6(4)of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law has been of great concern to the academic community and judicial practice.Through empirical analysis,it can be found that the underwriting clause presents problems such as unclear interpretation,unclear boundary of application,and misalignment with the application of general provisions.The key to understanding the tout clause is to place it in the context of the entire anti-unfair competition law and Article 6,and to determine its constituent elements and the scope of "other" protected trade marks.At the same time,it is important to clarify the boundaries between the application of the catch-all clause,the exemplification clause and the general clause.According to the interpretation and analysis of the law,"other" refers to commercial signs with a certain degree of influence that do not include trademarks and examples.Article 6(4)of the Anti-Unfair Competition Law should be interpreted as meaning that an operator shall not use other commercial signs of others with a certain degree of market recognition,without the permission of others,in such a way as to cause confusion as to whether they are the goods of others or have a specific connection with others.In relation to the application of the exemplary norms,the touting clause should be governed by the following rules: the principle of exhaustion of the exemplary norms and the prohibition of repeated evaluation.Excessive interference with the competition of market players can lead to an abnormal trend of growth in the number and type of confusing acts and can increase the concerns of commercial players to enter the market.The underwriting clause is known as a "mini-general clause" and is often invoked at the same time as the general clause in practice.The application of the general provisions should follow the legislative intent and be inferior to the typological provisions,the subordinate provisions and the analogous application.The application of the general provisions is only possible if the specific provisions and the specific law on intellectual property are not regulated.In other words,when there is a specific legal regulation,the competitive conduct being sued can no longer be regulated by the general provisions.