相關爭議

英格蘭高院請求歐盟法院，就以下三類主要爭議做出解釋，其中前兩類 爭議涉及歐盟商標指令以及歐盟商標條例⁴⁰。歐盟立法者分別於 2008 年與 2009 年修正歐盟商標指令以及歐盟商標條例⁴¹，但由於此案發生於修正案通 過之前，因此歐盟法院的初步判決，仍以商標指令與商標條例修正前的條文 為準。本案的相關爭議如下：

1.他人於未得商標權人同意（without the proprietor’s consent）的情況 下，透過「線上市場經營者」（online marketplace operator）的網路推薦服務

（an internet referencing service），選取相同於商標權人之商標的關鍵字，並 以此關鍵字進行廣告行為⁴²。根據商標指令第 5 條第一項第(a)款及商標條例 第 9 條第一項第(a)款，一商標註冊後，他人未得商標權人同意，不得於交易 過程中（in the course of trade）為以下的使用行為：使用與此註冊商標相同之

39 Id. ¶ a27(i).

40 First Council Directive of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (89/104/EEC) [1989] OJ L40/1 (hereinafter as the “Trade Mark Di-rective”, 本文簡稱為「商標指令」), and Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 De-cember 1993 on the Community trade mark [1994] OJ L11/1 (hereinafter as the “Trade Mark Regulation”, 本文簡稱為「商標條例」)。

41 Directive 2008/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2008 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (Codified version) (Text with EEA relevance) [2008] OJ L299/25 and Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (codified version) (Text with EEA relevance) [2009] OJ L78/1.

42 Case C-324/09, L’Oreal SA v. eBay Int’l AG, 2011 E.C.R. I-0000 ¶¶ 50, 86.

標識，且與此使用行為相關的商品或服務，與此商標指定之商品或服務相

43 Article 5 of Trade Mark Directive, entitled “Rights conferred by a trade mark”, provides that:

1. The registered trade mark shall confer on the proprietor exclusive rights therein. The pro-prietor shall be entitled to prevent all third parties not having his consent from using in the course of trade:

(a) any sign which is identical with the trade mark in relation to goods or services which are identical with those for which the trade mark is registered;

(b) any sign where, because of its identity with, or similarity to, the trade mark and the identity or similarity of the goods or services covered by the trade mark and the sign, there exists a likelihood of confusion on the part of the public, which includes the likelihood of association between the sign and the trade mark.

2. Any Member State may also provide that the proprietor shall be entitled to prevent all third parties not having his consent from using in the course of trade any sign which is identical with, or similar to, the trade mark in relation to goods or services which are not similar to those for which the trade mark is registered, where the latter has a reputation in the Member State and where use of that sign without due cause takes unfair advantage of, or is detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the trade mark.

3. The following, inter alia, may be prohibited under paragraphs l and 2:

(a) affixing the sign to the goods or to the packaging thereof;

(b) offering the goods, or putting them on the market or stocking them for these purposes under that sign, or offering or supplying services thereunder;

(c) importing or exporting the goods under the sign;

(d) using the sign on business papers and in advertising.

…

It is necessary to note that the wording of Article 9(1)(a) of Trade Mark Regulation corre-sponded in substance to that of Article 5(1) of Trade Mark Directive.

44 Case C-324/09, L’Oreal SA v. eBay Int’l AG, 2011 E.C.R. I-0000 ¶¶ 50, 86.

45 Id. ¶¶ 50, 98.

3.歐盟電子商務指令（Directive on electronic commerce）的第 2 章第 4 節 的標題為「中間服務提供者之責任」（Liability of intermediary service provid-ers），該節涵括了第 12 條至第 15 條⁴⁶。根據第 14 條第一項：若一資訊社會 服務之內容，包括儲存服務接受者所提供之資訊，則歐盟會員國應確保，若 服務提供者符合以下條件，則其對於應服務接受者之請求而儲存的資訊，無 須負擔法律責任：

(1)該提供者對於違法行為或違法資訊並未明確知悉（does not have actual knowledge）。此外，若事涉損害賠償之請求，該提供者對於涉及明顯之違法 行為或違法資訊之事實或情況，並不知情（not aware）；或者

(2)該提供者於明確知悉（knowledge）或知情（awareness）之後，迅速移 除（to remove）或中止該資訊的連線（to disable access to the information）⁴⁷。

英格蘭高院請求歐盟法院，就以下問題做出解釋：線上市場經營者所提 供的服務，是否可適用電子商務指令第 14 條第一項關於免責事由的條款？若 可適用免責條款，則一線上市場經營者於何種情況下，將被認定符合免責條 款中的「知情」要件⁴⁸？

46 Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce) [2000] L178/1.

47 Article 14(1) of Directive on electronic commerce provides that:

1. Where an information society service is provided that consists of the storage of informa-tion provided by a recipient of the service, Member States shall ensure that the service provider is not liable for the information stored at the request of a recipient of the service, on condition that:

(a) the provider does not have actual knowledge of illegal activity or information and, as regards claims for damages, is not aware of facts or circumstances from which the il-legal activity or information is apparent; or

(b) the provider, upon obtaining such knowledge or awareness, acts expeditiously to re-move or to disable access to the information.

48 Case C-324/09, L’Oreal SA v. eBay International AG, 2011 E.C.R. I-0000 ¶¶ 50, 106.