Journal of Digital Convergence (디지털융복합연구)

The Society of Digital Policy and Management (한국디지털정책학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evolution of Internet Trademark Infringement in the U.S.

미국 인터넷상표권 침해관련 법률의 변화에 관한 연구

  • Received : 2014.08.05
  • Accepted : 2014.10.20
  • Published : 2014.10.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Global commerce is apparently here to bind Korean firms as well as Koreans. The advertising, buying and selling of goods and services recognizes no borders. As a result, enforcing territorially based trademark rights has become ever more challenging. Remote trademark owners who peacefully coexisted in a time before the internet and increasing globalism are now bumping heads. The internet also has made it easier for unscrupulous operators to deceive consumers and divert customers from established businesses by misappropriating trademarks on web-sites and in domain names. U.S. federal courts have been willing to help American businesses halt trademark infringements that reaches outside the United States. This is particularly true for e-business, via the internet, and the trend toward enforcement seems to be in favor of the trademark owner. This article discusses this trend as well as the extraterritorial enforcement of trademark rights by U.S. courts under the Lanham Act. It also offers suggestions for protecting valuable trademark rights worldwide. This paper will contribute to global Korean firms and Koreans who carefully read arguments in this valuable literature.

인터넷의 등장에 따른 사이버스페이스의 확장이 많은 변화를 야기하고, 특히 법 영역에서 현실세계의 법체계와 충돌하면서, '사이버스페이스와 법'에 관련된 문제는 우리나라 뿐만 아니라 세계 각지에서 21세기의 가장 중요한 이슈 가운데 하나로 부상하고 있다. 인터넷이나 컴퓨터와 관련된 기술발전의 속도가 빨라지고, 디지털화와 그 결과물인 디지털콘텐츠의 중요성이 증대되고, 전자상거래가 현실세계의 거래에 버금가는 영향력을 갖게 되면서 지적재산권 관련분야의 환경도 급변하고 있다. 특허, 상표, 저작권 등 지적재산권 이용형태의 다양화와 정보 유통형태의 혁신적 발전은 더 많은 정보의 자유로운 이용을 요구하는 이용자와 그러한 환경변화에 부응하는 보호를 요구하는 지적재산권자간의 충돌을 야기하고 있으며, 새로운 유형의 정신적 창작물에 대한 보호와 규율에 대한 논의가 활발히 이루어지고 있다. 이런 상황에서 세계 정치, 경제, 법률을 이끌고 있는 미국의 지적재산권관련 법제의 전개상황을 면밀히 살펴보는 것은 우리의 이익을 지키기 위하여 필수 불가결한 활동이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Robert Dorr, Protecting Trade Secrets, Patents, Copyrights, and Trademarks, 2nd Edition. NY, New York: Wiley Law Publications (1995), at 148-149.
  2. Irina D. Manta, The Puzzle of Criminal Sanctions for Intellectual Property Infringement, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology 24(2), (Spring 2011), at 485-486.
  3. Carlos Maria Correa & Li, Xuan, Intellectual property enforcement: international perspectives, Edward Elgar Publishing, (2009), at 211
  4. Miriam Bitton, Rethinking the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement's Criminal Copyright Enforcement Measures, The Journal Of Criminal Law & Criminology 102(1), (2012), at 67-117.]
  5. Martha L. Arias, IBLS Director, http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=2097.
  6. AMF, Inc v. Sleekcraft Boats, (599 F.2d 341 (C.A.9) 1979).
  7. Am. Rice, Inc. v. Ark. Rice Growers Coop. Asso., (701 F.2d 408, 414 (5th Cir. 1983)).
  8. Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp. (174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999)).
  9. Cecil McBee v. Delica Co., Ltd., (417 F.3d 107 (1st Cir. 2005)).
  10. In re E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., (476 F.2d 1357, 177 USPQ 563 (CCPA 1973)).
  11. Interstellar Starship Servs., Ltd. v. Epix, Inc., (304 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2002)).
  12. Int'l. Cafe, S.A.L. v. Hard Rock Cafe Int'l. (U.S.A.), Inc., (252 F.3d 1274, 178-79 (11th Cir. 2001)).
  13. Liberty Toy Co. v. Fred Silber Co., (No. 97-3177, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 14866 (6th Cir. 1998)).
  14. McBee v. Delica Co., (75 U.S.P.Q.2D 1609 (1st Cir. 2005)).
  15. Network Automation, Inc. v. Advanced Sys. Concepts, Inc. (638 F.3d 1137, 1142 (9th Cir. 2011)).
  16. Nintendo of Am., Ltd., v. Aeropower Co., (34 F.3d 246, 250-51 (4th Cir. 1994)).
  17. Ocean Garden, Inc. v. Marktrade Co., Inc., (953 F.2d 500, 503 (9th Cir. 1991)).
  18. Perfumebay.com Inc. v. eBay Inc., (506 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir. 2007)).
  19. Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications Corp. (354 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2004)).
  20. Rescue.com Corp. v. Google, Inc. (562 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2009)).
  21. Scanvec Amiable, Ltd. v. Chang, 80 Fed. Appx. (171, 180-81 (3d Cir. 2003)).
  22. Steele v. Bulova Watch Co., Inc., (344 U.S. 280 (1952)).
  23. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Tabari (610 F.3d 1171, 117475 (9th Cir. 2010)).
  24. Vanity Fair Mills, Inc. v. T. Eaton Co. Ltd., (234 F.2d. 633, 641 (2d Cir. 1956)).
  25. Vsoske, Inc. v. Vsoske.com, Case No. 00-cv-6099, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5025 (S.D.N.Y. 2003).
  26. Wells Fargo & Co. v. Wells Fargo Express Co., (556 F.2d 406, 427-429 (9th Cir. 1977)).