- citati u SCIndeksu: [2]
- citati u CrossRef-u:0
- citati u Google Scholaru:[
 ]
- posete u poslednjih 30 dana:3
- preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:0
|
|
|
2011, vol. 59, br. 1, str. 35-54
|
|
Načelo specijalnosti žiga i zabrana razvodnjavanja čuvenog žiga - pravnoekonomsko tumačenje
Specialty principle and prohibition of dilution of famous trademarks: Legal and economic interpretation
Sažetak
Posle prikaza ekonomske zasnovanosti zaštite robnih marki žigom, u članku je izvršena analiza dva bitna instituta prava žiga: načela specijalnosti žiga (pravilo) i zabrane razvodnjavanja čuvenog žiga (izuzetak). Cilj analize je da se utvrdi ekonomska logika njihovog delovanja i da se na taj način ukaže na širinu okvira u kojem se izuzetak može tumačiti. Zaključak je da se zabrana razvodnjavanja čuvenog žiga može kretati samo u okvirima osnovne ekonomske funkcije žiga, a to je povećanje efikasnosti tržišta putem smanjenja asimetrije informisanosti između ponuđača i potražilaca robe. Nasuprot tome, svojinska logika zabrane razvodnjavanja čuvenog žiga vodi preširokom tumačenju ovog izuzetka i nema svog ekonomskog opravdanja.
Abstract
This article starts off with a presentation of economic foundations of trademark protection, and continues with an analysis of two essential institutes of trademark law: the specialty principle (as a rule), and the prohibition of dilution of famous trademarks (as an exception). The goal of the analysis was to reveal the economic logic behind the operation of the two, and thereby indicate the scope of the exception. The conclusion is that the prohibition of dilution of famous trademarks should exist only within the boundaries of the basic economic function of trademark, namely the promotion of market efficiency by reducing the asymmetry of information. Inversely, the proprietary economic reasoning behind the prohibition of dilution of famous trademarks leads to unjustified and excessively broad interpretation of this exception.
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
|
*** (2000) Joint recommendation concerning provisions on the protection of well-known marks. WIPO, www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/development_iplaw/pub833.htm, pristup marta 2010
|
|
5  
|
Akerlof, G. (1970) The market for 'Lemons': Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84(3), str. 488-500
|
|
|
Assaf, K. (2009) Kulturelle Bedeutung des Markenschutzes. GRUR Internationaler Teil, 1/12-14
|
|
|
Barnes, D.W. (2006) A new economics of trademarks. Northwerstern Journal Of Technology And Intellectual Property, 5, 1/56
|
|
|
Barton, B. (2005) Search and persuasion in trademark law. Michigan Law Review, 103, 8/2020
|
|
2
|
Baumbach, A., Hefermehl, W. (1979) Warenzeichengesetz. Munchen
|
|
10
|
Begović, B., Labus, M., Jovanović, A. (2008) Ekonomija za pravnike. Beograd: Pravni fakultet
|
|
1 
|
Landes, W.M., Posner, R.A. (2003) The economic structure of intellectual property law. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press
|
|
|
Lemley, M.A. (2004) Property, intellectual property and free riding. Texas Law Review, 83, 1058
|
|
|
Lemley, M.A. (1999) The modern lanham act and the death of common sens. Yale Law Journal, 108, 7/1697-1703
|
|
16
|
Marković, S.M. (2007) Pravo intelektualne svojine. Beograd
|
|
|
Mckenna, M.P. (2006-2007) The normative foundations of trademark law. Notre Dame Law Review, 82, 5, 1916
|
|
|
Ramello, G.B. (2006) What is a sign?: Trademark and economic theory. Journal Of Economic Surveys, 20, 4/561
|
|
|
Schechter, F.I. (1927) The rational basis of trademark protection. Harvard Law Review, 40, 6, 819
|
|
|
Stacey, D.L., Lemley, M.A. (2004-2005) Trademarks consumer search costs on the Internet. Houston Law Review, 41, str. 790-791
|
|
|
Welkovitz, D.S. (1991) Reexamining trademark dilution. Vanderbilt Law Review, 44/539-546
|
|
|
|
|