Border Measures Provisions of Counterfeiting: A Comparision Study of TRIPs, NAFTA and Taiwan Trademark Law

Border Measures Provisions of Counterfeiting: A Comparision Study of TRIPs, NAFTA and Taiwan Trademark Law

 

Title
Border Measures Provisions of Counterfeiting: A Comparision Study of TRIPs, NAFTA and Taiwan Trademark Law
Author
Jiann-Ming Yih
Keywords
Border Measures, Counterfeiting, TRIPs, NAFTA, Trademark Law
Abstract
This Article tries to compare the regulations of border measures among
TRIPs Agreement, NAFTA and Taiwan Trademark Law. The TRIPs Agreement
distinguishes between infringement, for which civil judicial procedures and
remedies must be available, and counterfeiting and piracy. In the case of
counterfeiting, additional procedures and remedies, including border measure,
must be made available. Special requirements related to border measures are
contained in Section 4 (Article 51-Article 60) of the enforcement part of the
TRIPs Agreement. Parties and must, under Article 51, provide border
enforcement procedures for goods bearing a counterfeit. Taiwan Trademark Law
has been amended in order to enable Taiwan to meet the requirement of TRIPs
Agreement in 2003. NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is the most
important Free Trade Agreement (FTA), and when Taiwan tries to establish FTA
with U.S., NAFTA may be a model.
This article attempts to examine how the border measures provisions of
counterfeiting might be incorporated into the existing Custom regulations. This
article explains relation of border measures provisions of counterfeiting and
trade policy, and compares border measures provisions of counterfeiting among
TRIPs, NAFTA, and Taiwan Trademark Law. The conclusions of this Article as follow:
I. Notice of suspension among TRIPs, NAFTA and Taiwan Trademark Law
is similar but duration of suspension is different. Prima facie evidence is very
important regulation in TRIPs, NAFTA, but Taiwan Trademark Law did not
mention the Prima facie evidence.
II. Customs services may take action on their own action on their own
initiative (ex officio action) under Article 58 based upon prima facie evidence that
an intellectual property right is being infringed, which is not regulated in 2003
Trademark Law of Taiwan. It is worth noticing that ex officio action may become
a trend when establishing FTA with Taiwan.
Abstract Article

9 Downloads

67 Downloads

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *