Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/128651
|
| Title: | 套用4C行銷理論避免商標通用化: 以Google商標為例
Preventing trademark genericide based on 4C marketing theory: The Google trademark |
| Authors: | 陳玉穎
Chen, Yu-Ying |
| Contributors: | 宋皇志
Sung, Huang-Chih
陳玉穎
Chen, Yu-Ying |
| Keywords: | 行銷策略
商標管理
商標通用化
4C行銷理論
谷歌商標
Marketing strategy
Trademark management
Trademark genericide
4C Marketing Theory
Google trademark |
| Date: | 2019 |
| Issue Date: | 2020-02-05 18:32:15 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 企業該如何利用行銷策略，有效避免商標通用化﹖智慧財產與行銷策略，表面上看似是毫無相似之處的研究領域，但企業若要順利營運，兩者之間的平衡是十分關鍵的。本研究目的在於拉近商標管理與行銷策略，二專業領域的距離。有些像彼特森等(Robert A. Peterson et al.) 學者，曾探討行銷對於造成商標稀釋的影響；也有學者曾探討行銷造成商標混淆誤認的潛在可能；有些學者更是探討心理學、行銷與商標的關聯性，但對於行銷策略與商標通用化直接的關聯性，存在的討論卻非常少。針對該議題近十年來有一重要判決為Elliot v. Google Inc. 的判決，因此本研究以商標法觀點分析此案件，並套用邱志勝教授所提出的4C行銷理論，進一步釐清行銷策略與商標管理的關係，並提出企業可執行的結論，避免制定未考量周全而造成商標通用化的行銷策略，達到釐清二研究領域關係的目的。為達到此目的，本研究的研究方法包含文獻回顧、質性研究與量化研究，質性研究包含兩個焦點訪談，量化研究為一線上問卷調查。雖然Google 在Elliot v. Google Inc.的判決中獲得勝訴，但本研究結果指出，若被告以名詞觀點切入，表示Google商標應該以名詞被通用化，那麼Google或許會敗訴，而喪失商標權。本研究貢獻在於闡述企業可以如何在制定行銷策略時，察覺商標通用化的潛在風險，並借此避免商標通用化。
What can companies do to prevent their trademark from being rendered generic through marketing strategies? Though Intellectual Properties and Marketing may be two very different areas of study, it is crucial to reach a balance between both studies for the successful operation of a company. This dissertation aims to close the gap between practices of trademark management and marketing strategies. Scholars like Robert A. Peterson et al. have discussed the effect of dilution marketing may cause on a trademark ; there are also scholars that have discussed how marketing can cause trademark confusion ; some have also discussed the relationship between psychology, marketing and trademarks. However, little ink has been spilled over the direct relationship between marketing strategies and trademark genericide. There has been a fairly recent case on this matter, which is the Elliot v. Google Inc. case. Therefore, the purpose of this dissertation is to clarify this relationship further by analyzing the Elliot v. Google Inc. case using aspects of Trademark Law and applications of the 4C Marketing Theory proposed by Professor Chiou, and to propose possible solutions to prevent trademark genericide cased as a result of rather imprudent marketing strategies. Research methods to achieve this purpose include literature reviews, qualitative and quantitative research by focus groups and one online survey. Although Google won the case of Elliot v. Google Inc., research results point out that they could have lost the lawsuit if the plaintiff had argued that Google be rendered generic as a noun. This dissertation contributes to how companies can perceive the potential risk of trademark genericide in making marketing strategies and prevent trademark genericide. |
| Reference: | PetersonSmith, K.H., and Zerrillo, P. C.R.A.,. (1999, April 1st ). Trademark Dilution and the Practice of Marketing . Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Abstract.
PapavassiliouV. andMitchell. (1999, August 1st ). Marketing Causes and Implications of Consumer Confusion. Journal of Product and Brand Management, Introduction.
Elliot v. Google Inc., 860 F.3d 1151 (United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 2017, June 14th ), at 1156, 1161.
Cyh-ShenChiou. (2015). Marketing research: Practices and theoretical applications. Taipei, Taiwan: BestWise Co. Ltd.
台灣商標法，第一章總則，第一條。
15 U.S.C.A. § 1127.
PierceBowmanVanessa. (2007, Winter). If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, shouldn`t it be a duck?: How a "functional" approach ameliorates the discontinuity between the "Primary Significance" tests for the genericness and secondary meaning. New Mexico Law Review, at 150.
See id at 148.
See id at 158.
McCarthyThomasJ. (2019, June). Appendix A5. Selected Legislative History of the 1988 Trademark Law Revision Act: Senate Judiciary Report on S. 1883. 7 McCarthy on Trademarks Appendix A5, at 1.
John M. Golden, "Patent Trolls" and Patent Remedies, 85 Tex. L. Rev. 2111, 2112 (2007).
台灣商標法，第63條，第二項。
§ 16:4.Inherently distinctive marks—Ownership is acquired by priority use, 2 McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 16:4 (5th ed.).
McCarthyThomasJ. (2018). McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, Fifth Edition, at § 29:61.
BrownAaron. (2016, March 30th ). Here`s a look back at the Tesla car that started it all. Retrieved from Business Insider: https://www.businessinsider.com/tesla-roadster-history-2016-3. Last visited: April 22nd, 2019.
刘霁(实习生)、熊旭. (2014, August 6th ). 特斯拉在华商标案和解. Retrieved from人民網: http://ip.people.com.cn/n/2014/0806/c136655-25411664.html. Last visited: April 23rd, 2019.
新京报、南方日报. (2014, August 6th ). 特斯拉在华商标案和解 占宝生放弃TESLA标志. Retrieved from: 第一電動: https://www.d1ev.com/news/qiye/33434. Last visited: April 23rd, 2019.
See id.
中華人民共和國商標法，第三十二條。
MirelesS.Michael. (2015). Trademark Trolls: A Problem in the United States? Chapman Law Review, at 815, 827.
William G. Barber, The Trademark Dilution Revision Act of 2005: Breathing Life Back into the Federal Dilution Statute, 16 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1113, 1124 (2006).
NguyenThaoXuan-. (2011,October). Fame Law: Requiring Proof of National Fame in Trademark Law. Cardozo Law Review, at 89, 92.
Philadelphia Storage Battery Co. v. Mindlin, 163 Misc. 52 (Supreme Court, New York County 1937, May 10th ), at 180.
15 U.S.C.A. § 1125.
商標法第30條第1項第11款著名商標保護審查基準， 2.1.2.1認定著名商標之參酌因素。
FoxP.Mindy. (2009). Does it Really Suck? The Impact of Cutting- Edge Marketing Tactics on Internet Trademark Law and Gripe Site Domain Name Disputes. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal, at 233.
Economides, N. (1997, September). Trademarks. forthcoming in the new pal grave dictionary of economics and law.
See id at 1. Scope of Protection.
Dr. Sanjeev Arora Professor Associate. (無日期). DECODING THE BRAND GENERICIDE CONUNDRUM: FROM TOP OF MIND TO BOTTOM OF MARKET, at abstract.
InSung. (2002). Death of a trademark: Genericide in the digital age. University of Texas School of Law Publications, at 160.
KimS.Christina. (2006, September to October). THE PSYCHOLOGY BEHIND TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT AND COUNTERFEITING. BY J.L. ZAICHKOWSKY. 2006. PP. 305. $39.95. LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS, 10 INDUSTRIAL AVENUE, MAHWAY, NJ 07430. The Trademark Reporter, at 1152.
Redding Crowley Anna. (2018). Google it: A history of Google. New York: Feiwel and Friends, at 16.
See id at 29.
See id at 38.
See id at 44.
See id at 53.
See id at 39.
See id at 67.
See id at 92.
See id at 95.
See id at 97.
See id.
See id at 75.
See id at 99.
See id at 86.
See id at 123.
See id at 149.
See id at 139.
See id at 145.
See id at 149.
See id at117.
See id at 173.
Chris Gillispie v. Google Inc. , 2019 WL 479303 (Trademark Trial and Appeal Board 2019, February 1st ).
USPTO Trademark database.
Famous Trademarks: Everything You Need to Know. Retrieved from upcounsel: https://www.upcounsel.com/famous-trademarks. Last visited: June 12th, 2019.
See id.
Elliot v. Google Inc., 860 F.3d 1151 (United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 2017, June 14th ), at 1154.
SagH. Baniak and MatthewMichael. (2010). Trademark and Copyright in the Days of Internet: The Google Influence. Northwestern Journal of Technology & Intellectual Property, at 401.
Ullrich J.Quentin. (2018, September to October). Corpora in the Courts: Using Textual Data to Gauge Genericness and Trademark Validity. The Trademark Reporter, at 991.
Elliot v. Google Inc., 860 F.3d 1151 (United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 2017, June 14th ), at 1167.
See id at 1171.
See id at 1175.
See id at 1156.
See id at 1162.
See id.
Lanham Trade-Mark Act, §§ 2(f), 33(a), 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1052(f), 1115(a).
McCarthyThomasJ. (2018). McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition, Fifth Edition, at § 12.26.
Google. Retrieved from Instagram: https://instagram.com/google?igshid=4zpz9iv0zdw9. Last visited: June 13th, 2019.
Elliot v. Google Inc., 860 F.3d 1151 (United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit 2017, June 14th ), at 1166.
Toys R Us Inc. v. Canarsie Kiddie Shop Inc. , 559 F. Supp. 1189 (United States District Court, E.D. New York 1983, March 17th ), at 1205.
Cyh-ShenChiou. (2015). Marketing research: Practices and theoretical applications. Taipei, Taiwan: BestWise Co. Ltd.
HandrichL. Keene and Rita R.Douglas. (2002). Jurors for the next 50 years: Generation X. Association of Trial Lawyers of America, at Table 1.
See id.
Baidu. (2019, August 6th ). Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baidu. Last visited: August 7th, 2019.
Seach Engine Market Share. Retrieved from Net Marketshare: https://netmarketshare.com/report.aspx?options=%7B%22filter%22%3A%7B%22%24and%22%3A%5B%7B%22deviceType%22%3A%7B%22%24in%22%3A%5B%22Desktop%2Flaptop%22%5D%7D%7D%5D%7D%2C%22dateLabel%22%3A%22Trend%22%2C%22attributes%22%3A%22share%22%2C%22group%22%3A%22searc. Last visited: April 26th, 2019.
Baidu. Retrieved from Baidu: https://www.baidu.com. Last visited: April 26th, 2019.
See id at 116.
See id at [15].
Selfie. Retrieved from Lexico: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/selfie. Last visited: May 14th, 2019.
Google. Retrieved from Google: https://www.google.com. Last visited: May 14th, 2019.
search engine. Retrieved from Lexico: https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/search_engine. Last visited: May 15th, 2019.
Hans RoslingOla Rosling and Anna Rosling Ronnlundwith. (2018). Factfulness. New York: Flatironbooks, at 65.
Cyh-Shen, Chiou. (2014). Strategic Marketing Analysis: Framework and Pratical Applications. Taipei: 智勝文化.
See id at 55.
See id at 127.
BohlenG. M. and J.M.Beal. (1957). The diffusion process.
SentanceRebecca. (2018, December 11th ). What are the differences in how age demographics search the internet? Retrieved from Userzoom: https://www.userzoom.com/blog/what-are-the-differences-in-how-age-demographics-search-the-internet/. Last visited: June 5th, 2019.
See id at 36.
10 TikTok Statistics That You Need to Know in 2020 [Infographic]. Maryam Mohsim. 2. TikTok Downloads. 22 Oct, 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.oberlo.com/blog/tiktok-statistics. |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
科技管理與智慧財產研究所
106364216 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0106364216 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU202000072 |
| Appears in Collections: | [科技管理與智慧財產研究所] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 421601.pdf | 1853Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 87 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
