论文部分内容阅读
美国联邦第二巡回上诉法院案号:696 F.3d 206判决时间:2012年9月5日阅读提示作为设计要素之一的颜色,大多能起到即刻吸引消费者眼球的作用,在时尚产业更是如此。每一季度,设计师总会选择一种或几种颜色来表达其独特的设计理念。既然如此,是否应对颜色给予商标法保护?反对者担心一旦给予保护,将导致时尚产业中的特定颜色被垄断,诱发不正当竞争行为,其依据是“美学功能性规则”。而支持者则认为,随着时代的发展,人们已经能够合理利用颜色,给予颜色适当保护并无大碍。鲁布托案恰恰对上述争议作了解释。该案的意义在于:明确在时尚
US Federal Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Court Case No .: 696 F.3d 206 Judgment: September 5, 2012 Reminder For the color of one of the design elements, most can play an immediate role in attracting the attention of consumers. In the fashion industry, That’s it. Every quarter, designers always choose one or several colors to express their unique design concepts. If so, should trademark protection be given to color? Opponents fear that once given protection, certain colors in the fashion industry will be monopolized and unfair competition may be induced on the basis of “aesthetic functional rules.” Proponents argue that with the development of the times, people have been able to make rational use of colors and give appropriate protection of color without any serious problems. The case of Lutobu just explained the above controversy. The significance of the case is: clear in fashion