探討傳統智慧創作與商標法適用問題

A Study on Traditional Intellectual Creations of Indigenous Peoples and Trademark Law

林孟玲(Lin, Christine Meng-Ling)

原住民族 ； 傳統智慧創作 ； 傳智條例 ； 商標權 ； 商標消極註冊要件 ； 紐西蘭商標法 ； 諮詢義務 ； indigenous peoples ； traditional intellectual creations ； The Protection Act for the Traditional Intellectual Creations of Indigenous Peoples ； trademark right ； trademark negative element ； New Zealand Trademark Law ； duty to consult

輔仁法學

64期（2022 / 12 / 01）

165 - 203

繁體中文;英文

原住民族傳統文化成果表達之保護，起源於西方殖民主義一連串不名譽的剽竊事件，發生於全球各地而引起的反動。我國原住民族傳統智慧創作遭到誤用或濫用的例子，也時有所聞。舉例而言：電影公司打算將著名電影「賽德克．巴萊」作為商標加以註冊，並使用於商品之銷售，一開始獲得智慧財產局之核准，但經由賽德克族異議，認為損及賽德克族名的神聖性而引發爭議。原住民族傳統智慧創作保護條例之制定，對於保護原住民族傳統智慧創作、文化成果之表達有顯著貢獻；傳智條例的落實，有賴於已經在進行中的傳統智慧創作之登記，以及未來有關智慧創作專用權之授權、侵權、原住民族主張智慧創作專用權等一連串關於權利主張與實現的過程。本研究目的有二。一、著眼於傳統智慧創作登記之後，未來商標申請人如果以含有原住民族文化表達元素的商標申請註冊時，所可能產生之傳智條例與商標法第30條第1項第7款與第8款之商標註冊消極要件適用問題。其二，尚未登記之傳統智慧創作也可能為商標申請人用以申請為商標註冊，此時智財局應如何處理？本文以比較法研究，以紐西蘭2002年商標法為借鏡，研究其規範依據與內涵，提供我國商標法修法之參考。

A series of events involving traditional indigenous intellectual creations that were misappropriated by Western colonialism has highlighted the need for the protection of these items. Similar cases have also arisen in Taiwan, for example the movie Seediq Bale describes how the Seediq indigenous people fought against the Japanese during the Japanese colonial period. The movie company intended to register Seediq Bale as a trademark to promote commercial products unrelated to tribal culture. Initially the Intellectual Property Office of Taiwan approved the application, however the Seediq people, with the support of the Council of Indigenous Peoples, later claimed the trademark application offended the holy meaning of their tribal name. This case demonstrates the importance of protecting traditional indigenous intellectual creations. The Protection Act for Traditional Intellectual Creations of Indigenous Peoples greatly contributes to the protection of indigenous cultural expressions, and promotes native culture. So far tribes continue registering their traditional intellectual creations. After they gain their intellectual creation exclusivity right, they can claim if there is an infringement in the future. On the other hand, if the trademark applicant tries to register his trademark related to indigenous cultural expression according to Trademark Act, there will be a possible conflict between The Protection Act for Traditional Intellectual Creations of Indigenous Peoples and Trademark Act. Secondly, unregistered traditional intellectual creations are also possibly registered as trademarks. The goal of this article is to discuss and analyze these possible issues in the future. This study will firstly address the dispute caused by the protection between traditional intellectual creations of indigenous peoples. Second, the author will analyze the relationship between registration of traditional intellectual creations of indigenous peoples and Article 30 Paragraph 1 Subparagraphs 7 and 8. Finally, the article will research New Zealand Trade Marks Act as a comparative study while there have been many similar experiences that happened in New Zealand, and hopefully will make a contribution to a possible amendment of the Trademark Act in Taiwan.

1. 黃居正(2009)。特殊權利概念的重建—評析原住民族傳統智慧創作保護條例。傳統智慧創作與公共領域—原住民族傳統智慧創作保護論文集，:
   連結：
2. 智慧財產局商標檢索系統：https://twtmsearch.tipo.gov.tw/SS0/SS0202.jsp?tab_showView=showView_Simple&l6=zh_TW&isReadBulletinen_US=&isReadBulletinzh_TW=true （最後瀏覽日 2019.07.24）。
3. 經濟部智慧財產局網站「涉及原住民文化表達之商標審查原則」：https://www1.tipo.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=633994&ctNode=7048&mp=1（最後瀏覽日 2020.01.14）。
4. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment of New Zealand. http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/Page___1291.aspx (last visited 12/14/2015).
5. Maori Trade Marks Advisory Committee, Intellectual Property Office of New Zealand. http://www.iponz.govt.nz/cms/trade-marks/the-trade-mark-process/examination-step/maori-trade-marks-advisory-committee (last visited 2015/12/18).
6. Maori Trade Marks Advisory Committee, Background Information, Ministry of Economic Development, http://www.med.govt.nz/templates/Page1291.aspx (last visited 11/02/2017).
7. 臺灣、澎湖金門馬祖個別關稅領域與紐西蘭經濟合作協定（中譯本）：參見臺灣 ECA/FTA 總入口網：http://fta.trade.gov.tw/ftapage.asp?k=1&p=9&n=104&a=74 （最後瀏覽日 2020.01.14）。
8. 國際赦組織台灣分會網站： https://www.amnesty.tw/node/699（最後瀏覽日 2020.01.14）。
9. 噶瑪蘭撞名原民怨酒商盜家徽，中時電子報：https://www.chinatimes.com/newspapers/20180528000543-260114?chdtv（最後瀏覽日 2019.03.27）。
10. Chalk, Peter J.,Dunlop, Alexander(2009).Indigenous Trade Marks and Human Rights: An Australian and New Zealand Perspective.Trademark Rep.,99,956+971-972.
11. DeBeer, Mariaan(2006).Protecting Echoes of the Past: Intellectual Property and Expressions of Culture.CANTERLAWRW,12,94+102.
12. Frankel, Susy(2012).Branding Indigenous Peoples’ Traditional Knowledge.The Law of Reputation and Brands in the Asia Pacific
13. Frankel, Susy(2008).Trademarks and Traditional Knowledge and Cultural Intellectual Property.TRADEMARK LAW AND THEORY: A HANDBOOK OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH
14. Gatter, Ken M.(2003).Genetic Information and the Importance of Context: Implications for the Socail Meaning of Genetic Information and Individual Indentity.St. Louis U. L. J.,47,423+440.
15. Gilbert, Jeremie,Doyle, Cathal(2011).A New Dawn over the Land: Shedding Light on Collective Ownership and Consent.REFELECTIONS ON THE UN DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES
16. Generally Kim Griggs, Lego Site Irks Maori Sympathizer, Wired.com (Sep. 9, 2019), http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2002/11/56451
17. Chris Chu Cheng Huang, The 2007 Indigenous Traditional Cultural Expression Protection Act（ITCEPA）of Taiwan—An Innovation Sui Generis Regime, http://ipedr.com/vol48/019-CHHSS2012-A00047.pdf（last visited 07/24/2019）
18. Ironside ＆ Lucy Hopman, Maori Trade Marks Advisory Committee, https://www.baldwins.com/news/maori-trade-marks-advisory-committee (last visited 12/19/2015).
19. Oswald, Lynda J.(2004).Challenging the Registration of Scandalous and Disparaging Marks Under the Lanham Act: Who Has Standing to Sue?.Am. Bus. L.J.,41,251+278.
20. The Law Library of Congress, Global Legal research Center(2010).,未出版
21. 林孟玲(2015)。智慧創作專用權之性質與使用倫理—給原創條例的幾點建議。科技法學評論，12(1)
22. 林淑雅(2009)。原住民族傳統智慧創作的認定與保護難題—以泰雅染織文化為例。傳統智慧與公共領域—原住民族傳統智慧創作保護論文集，:
23. 馬鈺婷(2018)。國立交通大學科技法律研究所。
24. 梅安華(2011)。國立中正大學財經法律學研究所。
25. 黃正宏,張仁福,紀詩慧(2016)。部落組織與祭儀歌曲之申請實務。原緣流長--2016 原住民族傳統智慧創作保護研討會，: