On The Judicial Application Of The Legal Norms Of Punitive Compensation For Trademark Infringement

Article 63 of the Trademark Law,which was revised in 2013 in China,officially established a punitive damages system,which,because of its distinctive punishment property,can more effectively curb infringement and maintain market order.However,since this is the first time that China has established a punitive damages system in the intellectual property law,the lack of relevant legislative experience has led to the incompleteness of Article 63 of the Trademark Law,which has also raised concerns about the judicial effectiveness of the system.Nowadays,it has been more than four years since the new "Trademark Law" was officially implemented.What is the application status and the lack of judicial application? It is necessary to conduct further research.Therefore,this topic starts from the judicial practice,through the analysis of the judgment documents,clarifies the judicial status and deficiencies of the punitive system of trademark infringement,and then analyzes the causes of the problems and puts forward suggestions for improvement.The punitive damages system is a civil damage compensation system that corresponds to the compensatory compensation system and the court decides that the defendant bears monetary compensation in excess of the amount of compensatory compensation.The system began in the 18 th century in the UK and gradually developed in the United States.The characteristics of the punitive damages system are mainly reflected in the more stringent application conditions,more diverse functions,and more considerations for calculating punitive damages.Although the legal provisions on punitive damages in China’s Trademark Law have been implemented for many years,the author has found that the judicial status of the relevant judgment documents is not optimistic.The current problems mainly include: the local courts for the sixth issue of the Trademark Law.There are deviations in the understanding and application of Article 13;the plaintiff generally lacks the enthusiasm for punitive damages to the court;the court’s support for the plaintiff’s claim for compensation is not satisfactory,and the court has a tendency to apply statutory compensation;the court has not strictly implemented the trademark law.Article 63: Regarding the provisions on punitive damages,the courts in various places have found that the standards for punitive damages are extremely non-standard.The above problems are caused by a combination of factors: First,the meaning of “malicious” in Article 63 of the Trademark Law is unclear;second,the “severe serious situation” in Article 63 of the Trademark Law lacks refinement.Clear criteria;third is the burden of proof and the personal tendency of the judge to aggravate the generalization of statutory compensation;fourth,the enthusiasm of the right holders for punitive damages is low.Stones from other hills,can learn.The author takes the United States and Taiwan Province as the reference objects,and studies in detail the provisions of the trademark law and intellectual property law on the punitive damages system,and explores the applicable conditions of punitive damages in the United States and Taiwan through analysis of specific cases,consideration factors and calculation standards,etc.,for the improvement of China’s trademark infringement punitive damages system for reference and reference.Through the above empirical research and comparative research,the author contacted the reality of China,and put forward suggestions for improving the applicable conditions and calculation standards of the punitive damages system for trademark infringement,mainly including the meaning of “malicious” and “serious circumstances”,statutory compensation and reasonable expenses.It shall not be used as the calculation base for punitive damages and the consideration of factors for calculating punitive damages.