|
一、中文文獻 (一)書籍 1.� 何孝元,工業所有權之研究,三民書局,民國八十年三版。 2.� 李茂堂,商標新論,元照出版公司,民國九十五年。 3.� 陳昭華,商標法,經濟部智慧財產局,民國九十六年。 4.� 陳昭華,商標侵害與救濟之實務及策略,經濟部智慧財產局,民國九十六年。 5.� 陳文吟,商標法論,三民書局,民國九十四年三版。 6.� 張澤平、張桂芳,商標法,書泉出版社,民國九十三年。 7. 陳瑞鑫,從商標刑事侵害談商標之使用,商標法制與實務論文集。 8.� 曾陳明汝,商標法原理,學林文化事業有限公司,民國九十三年。 9.� 馮震宇,了解新商標法,永然文化出版股份有限公司,民國八十九年。 10.�康炎村,工業所有權法論,五南圖書公司,民國七十六年。 11.�羅昌發,貿易與競爭之法律互動 國際經貿法研究(三),元照出版公司,民國八十七年。 12.�謝銘洋,「論網域名稱之法律保護」,國際貿易法暨智慧財產權法論文集,� 輔仁大學財經法律學系,民國八十八年十二月。 (二)期刊 1.� 王育慧,論網域名稱之保護-以註冊商標為中心,科技法律透析第十二期,民國九十三年十二月。2.� 呂瑋卿,你的商標,他的Domain Name-從Yahoo案看網域名稱的糾紛,智 慧財產權管理季刊第十三期,民國八十九年四月。 3.� 林發立,網域名稱爭議解決機制在我國實務運作之觀察,萬國法律第一百三十四期,民國九十三年四月。4.� 徐火明,從美德與我國法律論商標之註冊,中興法學,第三十二期,民國八十年十一月。5.� 何燦成,論商標識別性與著名商標之關係,智慧財產權第四十一期,民國九十一年。 6.� 陳昭華,商標權之耗盡原理—以歐洲聯盟及德國之實務為例,植根雜誌第十二卷第五期,民國九十五年。7.� 陳宏杰,關鍵字與商標─從搜尋引擊到消費者 ,智慧財產權月刊一百一十一期,民國九十七年三月。8.� 陳瑩真,2008年關鍵字廣告機會點仍佳,廣告雜誌,民國九十六年十二月。9.� 麥卡錫講述,趙晉枚譯,營業包裝與產品外觀之第二重意義,華岡法粹第二十四期,民國八十五年。 10. 賴文智律師.顏雅倫律師,網路關鍵字廣告的法律問題,網路資訊雜誌,第一百一十期,民國九十年一月。 11. 黃運湘,楊靜宜,網路廣告服務提供業者對關鍵字廣告之法律責任,萬國法律,一百五十三期,九十六年六月。12. 劉尚志&陳家麟,網域名稱與商標爭議之解決機制:台灣、美國與中國大陸之相關規範比較,萬國法律第一百一十七期,民國九十年六月。 13. 劉博文,網域名稱與商標權保護,智慧財產權第二十四期,民國八十九年十二月。(三)學位論文 1.� 林則言,論著名商標之保護-以美國聯邦商標淡化法為主,國立中正大學財經法律研究所碩士論文,民國九十四年。2.� 倪玲娜,網域名稱應否實質管理之探討,國立政治大學國際貿易研究所碩士論文,民國九十年。3.� 黃堅真,氣味商標之研究-以實務申請探討為中心,國立清華大學科技法律研究所碩士論文,民國九十五年。4.� 謝枚霏 ,美國商標權之保護─以網域名稱為主,國立中正大學財經法律學研究所碩士論文,民國九十二年。5.� 謝青蓉,「商標法上混淆誤認之虞之理論與實踐」,台灣大學法律學院法律學研究所碩士論文,民國九十五年。6.� 鐘一晟,我國非傳統性商標保護之研究-以立體、顏色與聲音商標為中心,輔仁大學財經法律研究所,民國九十四年。 (四)網路資料 1.� IP位置與URL的不同,http://webamp.giga.net.tw/blog.php?p=33 (上網時間民國九十六年十二月十一日)。 2.� Sony里程碑http://www.sony.com.tw/company/history/index.asp (上網日期:民國九十六年九月二十日)。 3.� 王俊明,網際網路簡介,http://wms.tyai.tyc.edu.tw/~admin/teachdata/internet/index.html (上網時間民國九十六年十二月九日)。 4.� 多角化發展,請參見http://www.lorealv2.com.tw/_zh/_tw/group/activities/activities.aspx (上網日期:民國九十六年九月十九日)。 5.� 宋逸婷,簡介美國實務最初興趣混淆理論之概況,http://www.saint-island.com.tw/report/data/IPR_200706.htm#a02 (上網日期:民國九十六年九月十九日)。 6.� 利用被誤導消費者原始興趣,行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,http://nthur.lib.nthu.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/10790/1/932414H007001.pdf (上網時間民國九十七年十一月三日)。 7.� 創市際®市場研究顧問公司,2006上網率創新高 近六成民眾連網,請參照http://www.insightxplorer.com/news/news_12_27_06.html (上網日期民國九十六年十月十六日)。 8.� 張智星,HTML的簡介與運用,http://neural.cs.nthu.edu.tw/jang/books/html/ (上網時間民國九十六年十二月十一日)。 9.� 張哲倫,關鍵字廣告可能侵害商標權,http://www.web66.com.tw/web/News?command=showDetail&postId=138588 (上網時間民國九十七年十月八日)。 10. 陳曉慧,網路連結與智慧財產權,行政院國家科學委員會專題成果報告,http://nthur.lib.nthu.edu.tw/bitstream/987654321/10790/1/932414H007001.pdf(上網時間民國九十七年十月八日)。 11. 黃暉,顏色商標的保護,請參照 http://www.cta315.com/infor_vewe.asp?infor_id=3571&class1_id=18&class2_id=75(上網日期民國九十六年十月十六日)。 12. 賴文智律師.顏雅倫律師,網路關鍵字廣告的法律問題,http://www.is-law.com/OurDocuments/NW0005LA.pdf (上網時間民國九十六年十二月十七日)。 13. 趙晉枚,商標權與混淆之虞,請參照www.tipo.gov.tw(上網日期民國九十六年十月十五日)。 14. 劉仲矩,論網際網路時代下的心靈改革,http://www.mcu.edu.tw/admin/rdoffice/mcuposter/053/post2.htm (上網時間民國九十六年十二月九日)。 15. 曠文琪,關鍵字廣告成搜尋網站金雞母,http://www.businessweekly.com.tw/webarticle.php?id=29047 (上網時間民國九十六年十二月十一日)。 二、英文文獻 (一)Book 1.� BEVERLY W. PATTISHALL, DAVID C. HILLIARD, JOSEPH N. WELCH, TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION (2d 2005). 2.� BEVERLY W. PATTISHALL, DAVID C. HILLIARD & JOSEPH N. WELCH II, TRADEMARK AND UNFAIR COMPETITION DESKBOOK (2003). 3.� FRANK H. FOSTER & ROBERT L. SHOOK, PATENTS, COPYRIGHTS, &TRADEMARKS (2d 1993). 4.� HORWITZ AND HORWITZ, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COUNSELING AND LITIGATION, VOL.1 (2005). 5.� JEROME GILSON, TRADEMARK PROTECTION AND PRACTICE, Vol.1 (2005). 6.� J. THOMAS MCCARTHY, MCCARTHY ON TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPETITION, (4th ed. 2004). 7.� RICHARD STIM, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: PATENTS, TRADEMARKS, AND COPYRIGHTS (1994). 8.� ROGER E. SCHECHTER & JOHN R. THOMAS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY THE LAW OF COPYRIGHTS, PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS (2003). 9.� SCHECHTER & THOMAS, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: THE LAW OF COPYRIGHTS, PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS (2003). 10. THOMAS J. SMEDINGHOFF, ONLINE LAW: THE SPA''S LEGAL GUIDE TO DOING BUSINESS ON THE INTERNET (1996). (二)Periodicals 1.� Anderson, Erik, Protection of Trademarks from Use in Internet Advertising Banner Triggers: Playboy v. Netscape, 40 JURIMETRICS J. 469 (2000). 2.� Abbati, G. Rita A., Metatags, Keywords, and Links: Recent Developments � Addressing Trademark Threats in Cyberspace, 40 SAN DIEGO L. REV. 341 (2003). 3.� Allen, Michael J., The Scope of Confusion Actionable Under Federal Trademark Law: Who Must Be Confused and When? 26 WAKE FOREST L. REV. 321 (1991). 4.� Bakken, Erlend, Unauthorized Use of Another''s Trademark on the Internet, 2003 UCLA J. L. TECH.3 (2003). 5.� Blavin, Jonathon H. & Cohen I. Glenn, Note, Gore, Gibson and Goldsmith: The Evolution of Internet Metaphors in Law and Commentary, 16 HARV. J.L. & TECH. 265 (2002). 6.� Beystehner, Kristen M., See Ya Later Gator: Assessing Whether Placing Pop-Up Advertisements on Another Company''s Website Violates Trademark Law, 11 J. INTELL. PROP. L. 87 (2003). 7.� Barrett, Margreth, Internet Trademark Suits and the Demise of "Trademark Use", 39 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 371 (2002). 8.� Bagley, Parker H. & Ackerman Paul D., Trigger Happy: The Latest Internet Assault on Trademark Rights, 16 COMPUTER LAW. 1 (1999). 9.� Caffarelli, Daniel J., Crossing Virtual Lines: Trespass on the Internet, 5 B.U. J. S CI. & TECH L. 6 PARA. 1 (1999). 10. Cody, Jason Allen, Initial Interest Confusion: What Ever Happened to Traditional Likelihood of Confusion Analysis? 12 FED. CIR. B.J. 643 (2003). 11. Cody, Jason Allen, Just Whenu Thought It was All Over, Gator''s Kin Pops Up and Slides Out of Dangerous IP Waters (for the Most Part): A Review of 2 Online Pop-Up Advertisers and 4 Internet Law Decisions, 7 PGH J. TECH. L. & POL''Y 3 (2004). 12. Cody, Jason Allen, One Cyberswamp Predator Pops up and Slides into Dangerous IP Waters, 14 ALB. L.J. SCI. & TECH. 81 (2003). 13. Cunningham, R.M, "Brand Loyalty-What, Where, How Much? ", 34 Harv. Bus. Rev. 116 (1956). 14. Chatterjee, Neel & Merriett Connie E., Casenote: U-Haul International, Inc. v. Whenu.com, Inc., Wells Fargo Co. v. Whenu.com, Inc. and 1-800 Contacts Inc. v. Whenu.com, Inc.: Pop-up Advertising as "Use in Commerce"; under the Lanham Act: A Case Analysis, 20 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER & HIGH TECH. L.J. 1113 (2004). 15. Doellinger, Chad J., Trademarks, Metatags, and Initial Interest Confusion: A Look to the Past to Reconceptualize the Future, 41 IDEA 173 (2001). 16. Doll, Ann E., Part Seven: Trademarks and the Internet: Review Essay: Hyperlinks, Frames and Metatags, 12 J. CONTEMP. LEGAL ISSUES 536 (2001). 17. Dogan, Stacey L. & Lemley, Mark A., Symposium: Trademark in Transition: Institute for Intellectual Property & Information Law Symposium: Trademarks and Consumer Search Costs on the Interne, 41 HOUS. L. REV. 777 (2004). 18. Frye, Patrick, An Internet Advertising Service can Constitute "Use in Commerce", 22 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER & HIGH TECH. L.J. 89 (2004). 19. Dunaevsky, Yelena, Comment: Don''t Confuse Metatags with Initial Interest Confusion, 29 FORDHAM URB. L.J. 1349 (2002). 20. Edgecombe, Jason R., Off The Mark: Bring The Federal Trademark Dilution Act in Line With Established Trademark Law, 51 Emory L.J. 1247 (2002). 21. Fritch, David M., Searching for Initial Interest Confusion and Trademark Protection in Cyberspace, 9 PGH J. TECH. L. & POL''Y 4 (2005). 22. Fishman, Isaiah A., Are Competitor''s Advertising Links Displayed When I Google My Product? An Analysis of Internet Search Engine Liability for Trademark Infringement, 5 J. MARSHALL REV. INTELL. PROP. L. 430 (2006). 23. Frey, Michael G., Comment, Is it Fair to Confuse? An Examination of Trademark Protection, the Fair Use Defense, and the First Amendment, 65 U. CIN. L. REV. 1255 (1997). 24. Felsten, Nancy J., Trademarks, Domain Names, Metatags, Cybersquatting and the Internet, 601 PLI/Pat 251 (2000). 25. Gamez, Alicia, Intellectual Property: Trademark: Note: WhenU.com, Inc. & Google Inc.: Parsing Trademark''s Use Requirement, 21 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 403 (2006). 26. Goldman, Eric, Deregulating Relevancy in Internet Trademark Law, 54 EMORY L.J. 507 (2005). 27. Garrett, Mark T., Recent Developments in Trademark Law, 8 TEX. INTELL. PROP. L.J. 101 (1999). 28. Grynberg, Michael, The Road Not Taken: Initial Interest Confusion, Consumer Search Costs, and the Challenge of the Internet, 28 SEATTLE UNIV. L. R. 97 (2004). 29. Hetzel, Dannean J., Whenu.com Gets Popped: How Trademark Law can Stop those Annoying Pop-Up Ads, 5 LOY. LAW & TECH. ANN. 53 (2005). 30. Janis, Daniel T., Internet Domain Names and the Lanham Act: Broadening Trademark Definitions and Their Implications for Speech on the Web, 25 COLUM. J.L. & ARTS 21 (2001). 31. Johnson, Jennifer D., Comment: Potential Liability Arising out of the Use of Trademarks in Web Site Meta Tags and Ensuring covering of Meta Tag Trademark Infringement Claims under Commercial Insurance Policies, 50 CATH. U.L. REV. 1009 (2001). 32. Kozinski, Alex, Trademark Unplugged, 68 N.Y.U.L. REV. 960 (1993). 33. Kaiser, Brian D., Note: Contributory Trademark Infringement by Internet Service Providers: An Argument for Limitation, 7 J. TECH. L. & POL''Y 4 (2002). 34. Kuester, Jeffrey R. and Nieves Peter A., Hyperlinks, Frames and Meta-Tags: An Intellectual Property Analysis, 38 IDEA 243 (1998). 35. Kucala, Joseph T., Jr., Note, Putting The Meat Back In Meta-tags! 2001 U. ILL. J.L. TECH. & POL''Y 129 (2003). 36. Kline, Melinda M., Comment: Missing the Mark: the Trademark Battle Over Software-Based Contextually Targeted Advertising on the Internet, 54 CASE W. RES. 917 (2004). 37. Kaminer, Matthew A., The Limitations of Trademark Law in Addressing Trademark Keyword Banners, 16 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER & HIGH TECH. L.J. 35 (1999). 38. King, Shannon N., Brookfield Communications v. W. Coast Entm''t, 15 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 313 (2000). 39. Khosla, Vikas, Internet Trademark Infringement: A Tale of Two Initial Interest Confusion Doctrines, 5 WAKE FOREST INTELL. PROP. L.J. 121 (2005). 40. Galbraith, Christine D., Electronic Billboards Along the Information Superhighway: Liability Under the Lanham Act for Using Trademarks to Key Internet Banner Ads, 41B.C. L. REV. 847 (2000). 41. Loundy, David J., E-Law 4: Computer Information Systems Law and System Operator Liability, 21 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 1075 (1998). 42. Lerner, Julieta L., Law and Technology: I. Intellectual Property : C. Trademark: 1. Notes: Trademark Infringement and Pop-up Ads: Tailoring the Likelihood of Confusion Analysis to Internet Uses of Trademarks, 20 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 229 (2005). 43. Lastowka, F. Gregory, Note, Search Engines, HTML, and Trademarks: What''s the Meta For? 86 VA. L. REV. 835 (2000). 44. Leon, Michael A., Note: Unauthorized Pop-up Advertising and the Copyright and Unfair Competition Implications, 32 HOFSTRA L. REV. 953 (2004). 45. Lemley, Mark A., Place and Cyberspace, 91 CAL. L. REV. 521 (2003). 46. Lemley, Mark A., The Modern Lanham Act and the Death of Common Sense, 108 YALE L.J. 1687 (1999). 47. Landes, William M. & Posner Richard A., Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective, 30 J.L. & ECON. 265 (1987). 48. Luther, Rep. Bill, A Commentary on the State of Online Privacy and the Efficacy of Self-Regulation, 27 WM. MITCHELL L. REV. 2125 (2001). 49. Mermin, Jonathan, Interpreting the Federal Trademark DilutionAct of 1995:The Logic of the Actual Dilution Requirement, 42 B. C. L. Rev. 211 (2000). 50. Meiners, Roger E. & Staaf Robert J., "Patents, Copyrights and Trademarks: Property or Monopoly? ", 13 Harv. J.L.& Pub. Pol’y 911 (1990). 51. Marroletti, William, Dilution, or delution? The need for a clear international standard to determine trademark dilution, 25 Brooklyn J. Int’l L. 664 (1999). 52. Nathenson, Ira S., Internet Infoglut and Invisible Ink: Spamdexing Search Engines with Meta Tags, 12 HARV. J. LAW & TEC 43 (1998). 53. McCoy, Barbara Anna, An Invisible Mark: A Meta-Tag Controversy, 2 J. SMALL & EMERGING BUS. L. 377 (1998). 54. Maynard, Bryce J., Note, The Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine and Trademark Infringement on the Internet, 57 WASH & LEE L. REV. 1303 (2000). 55. Manzano, Daniel E., Confusion in Cyberspace: Defending and Recalibrating the Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine, 117 HARV. L. REV. 2387 (2004). 56. McCuaig, Dan, Halve The Baby: An Obvious Solution To The Troubling Use Of Trademarks As Metatags, 18 J. MARSHALL J. COMPUTER & INfo. L. 643 (2000). 57. Manzano, Daniel E., Confusion in Cyberspace: Defending and Recalibrating the Initial Interest Confusion Doctrine, 117 HARV. L. REV. 2387 (2004). 58. Marra, Joseph V., Law and Technology: I: Intellectual Property : C. Trademark: I. Notes: Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications Corp.: Making Confusion a Requirement for Online Initial Interest Confusion, 20 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 209 (2000). 59. McLoughlin, Michael, Trademark Identity in Cyberspace: The Impact of Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp, 20 QUINNIPIAC L. REV. 595, (2001). 60. Macaw, Misha Gregory, Google, Inc. v. American Blind & Wallpaper Factory, Inc.: A Justification for the Use of Trademarks as Keywords to Trigger Paid Advertising Placements in Internet Search Engine Results, 32 RUTGERS COMPUTER & TECH. L.J.1(2005). 61. McGann, Melissa M., Case Note: Web Word War (WWW): A New Approach to Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition Claims under the Lanham Act in Brookfield Communication, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp. , 7 VILL. SPORTS & ENT. L.J. 363 (2000). 62. Mills, Terrell W., Metatags: Seeking to Evade User Detection and the Lanham Act, 6 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 22 (2000). 63. Monagan, Tom, Can an Invisible Word Create Confusion? The Need for Clarity in the Law of Trademark Infringement through Internet Metatags, 62 OHIO ST. L.J. 973 (2001). 64. Nester, Lisa A., Cmmwnt: Keywords, Trademarks, and the Gray Market: Why the Use is Not Fair, 7 MARQ. INTELL. PROP. L. REV. 235 (2003). 65. O''Rourke, Maureen A, Defining the Limits of Free-Riding in Cyberspace: Trademark Liability for Metatagging, 33 GONZ. L. REV. 277 (1988). 66. Oram, Jon H., Case Note, The Costs of Confusion in Cyberspace, 107 YALE L.J. 869 (1997). 67. Oram, Jon H., Will the Real Candidate Please Stand Up? Political Parody on the Internet, 5 J. INTELL. PROP. L. 467 (1999). 68. O''Rourke, Maureen A., Fencing Cyberspace: Drawing Borders in a Virtual World, 82 Menn. L. Rev. 609 (1998). 69. Padawer, Heidi S., Note: Google this: Search Engine Results Weave a Web for Trademark Infringement Actions on the Internet, 81 WASH. U. L. Q. 1099 (2003). 70. Posne, Rachel Jane, Manipulative Metatagging, Search Engine Baiting, and Initial Interest Confusion, 33 COLUM. J.L. & SOC. PROBS. 439 (2000). 71. Paylago, Stanley U., Trademark Infringement, Metatags, and the Initial Interest Confusion Remedy, 9 MEDIA L. & POL''Y 49 (2000). 72. Presson, Thomas F. & Barney James R., Trademarks as Metatags: Infringement or Fair Use? 26 AIPLA Q. J. 147 (1998). 73. Rubin, Janet, Comment and Recent Development: Pop-Up Ads and Trademark Infringement, Whenu.com Litigation, 24 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT LJ 323 (2006). 74. Rajzer, Julie A., Comment: Misunderstanding the Internet: How Courts are Overprotecting Trademarks Used in Metatags, 2001 L. REV. M.S.U.-D.C.L. 427 (2003). 75. Rothman, Jennifer E., Initial Interest Confusion: Standing at the Crossroads of Trademark Law, 27 CARDOZO L . REV. 105 (2005). 76. Romanos, William, Internet Accuracy Wars: How Trademarks Used in Deceptive Metatagging should be Dealt with to Increase Economic Efficiency, 7 U. BALT. INTELL. PROP. L.J. 79 (1998). 77. Rubin, Janet, Comment and Recent Development : Pop-Up Ads and Trademark Infringement: Whenu.com Litigation, 24 CARDOZO ARTS & ENT LJ 323 (2006). 78. Rossi, James A., Protection for Trademark Owners: The Ultimate System of Regulating Search Engine Results, 42 SANTA CLARA L. REV. 295 (2002). 79. Sinclair, Andrew J., Legal Update: Third Party Pop-up Advertisements : U-Haul Int''l, Inc. v. Whenu.com, 10 B.U. J. SCI. & TECH L. 198 (2004). 80. Sidbury, Benjamin F., Comparative Advertising on the Internet: Defining the Boundaries of Trademark Fair Use for Internet Metatags and Trigger Ads, 3 N.C. J.L. & TECH. 35 (2001). 81. Schiefelbine, Erich D., Comment: Stopping a Trojan Horse: Challenging Pop-up Advertisements and Embedded Software Schemes on the Internet Through Unfair Competition Laws, 19 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER & HIGH TECH. L.J. 499 (2003). 82. Schechter, Frank I., The Rational Basis of Trademark Protection, 40 Harv. L. Rev. 813 (1927). 83. Shea, Gregory, Note, Trademarks and Keyword Banner Advertising, 75 S. CAL. L. REV. 529 (2002). 84. Suh, James, Note: Intellectual Property Law and Competitive Internet Advertising Technologies: Why "Legitimate" Pop-up Advertising Practices should be Protected, 79 ST. JOHN''S L. REV. 161 (2005). 85. Schwartz, Jonathan L., Making the Consumer Watchdog''s Bark as Strong as its Gripe : Complaint Sites and the Changing Dynamic of the Fair Use Defense, 16 LB. L.J. SCI. & TECH. 59 (2006). 86. Saunders, Kurt M., Confusion is the Key: A Trademark Law Analysis of Key Word Banner Advertising, 71 FORDHAM L. REV. 543 (2002). 87. Smith, Richard M., Speech: Internet Privacy: Who Makes the Rules? 4 YALE SYMP. L. & TECH. 2 (2001). 88. Sees, Michael R., Notes & Comments, Use of Another''s Trademark in a Web Page Meta Tag: Why liability Should Not Ensue Under the lanham Act for Trademark Infringement, 5 Tex. Wesleyan L. Rev. 99 (1998). 89. Shipman, Scott, Comment, Trademark and Unfair Competition in Cyberspace: Can These Laws Deter "Baiting" Practices on Web Sites? 39 SANTA CLARA L. REV. 245 (1998). 90. Schlosser, Sarah Mayhew, The High Price of Coffee: The Chilling Effect of The Federal Trademark Dilution Act on Corporate Parody, 43 Ariz. L. Rev. 931 (2001). 91. Tucker, Robert L., Information Superhighway Robbery: The Tortious Misuse of Links, Frames, Metatags, and Domain Names, 4 VA. J.L. & TECH. 8 (1999). 92. Tucci, Veronica, The Case of the Invisible Infringer: Metatags, Trademark Infringement and False Designation of Origin, 5 J. TECH. L. & POL''Y 2 (2000). 93. Upadhye, Shashank, Trademark Surveys: Identifying the Relevant Universe of Confused Consumers, 8 FORDHAM INTELL. PROP. MEDIA & ENT. L.J. 549 (1998). 94. Weaver, Craig P., Signposts to Oblivion? Meta-Tags Signal the Judiciary to Stop Commercial Internet Regulation and Yield to the Electronic Marketplace, 22 SEATTLE U.L. REV. 667 (1998). 95. Weininger, Jonathan A., Notes and Comments: Trademark Metategging: Lanham Act Liability or Pareto Optimality? 23 WHITTIER L. REV. 469 (2001). 96. Warner, John R., Trademark Infringement Online: Appropriate Federal Relief from the Illicit Use of Trademarked Material in Web Site Meta Tags, 22 T. JEFFERSON L. REV. 133 (2000). 97. Widmaier, Uli, Use, Liability, and the Structuer of Trademark Law, 33 HOFSTRA L. REV. 603 (2004). 98. Yan, David, Note: Virtual Reality: Can We Ride Trademark Law to Surf Cyberspace? 10 FORDHAM INTELL. PROP. MEDIA & ENT. L.J. 773 (2000). 99. Yannone, Jennifer, Comment: The Future of Unauthorized Pop-Up Advertisements Remains Uncertain as Courts Reach Conflicting Outcomes, 7 TUL. J. TECH. & INTELL. PROP. 281 (2005).
(三)Internet
1.� 2004 State Legislation Relating to Internet Spyware or Adware, available at www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/spyware 04.htm (last visit 9/8/2008) 2.� BOB''S GARAGE, available at http://www.bobsgarage.com (last visited 11 /26 /2007). 3.� Cyvelliance, State of the Internet, available at http://www.cyveillance. com/about/stateint.html (last visited 12 /13 /2007). 4.� Dr. Ralph F. Wilson, Ins And Outs Of Displaying Banner Ads, available at � http://www.wilsonweb.com/wmta/adrev-serving.htm. (last visited 12 /13 /2007). 5.� Danny Sullivan, How Search Engines Work, available at: http://searchenginewatch.com/webmasters/work.html (last visited 12 /11 /2007). 6.� Gord Hotchkiss, Adware and Spyware: Beware!, Search Engine Position, available at: http://www.searchengineposition.com/info/netprofit/spyware.asp (last visited 9 /8 /2008). 7. Google Investor Relations Financial Data Income Statement, available at http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html (last visited 12/13 /2007). 8. Judge Blocks WhenU Pop-Ups, WEBADVANTAGE.NET, available at: http://www.webadvantage.net/tip_archive.cfm?tip_id=347&&a=l (last visited 9 /6 /2008). 9.� Keyword, available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keyword (last visited 12 /11 /2007). 10. Ralph F. Wilson, Using Banner Ads to Promote Your Web Site, available at: http://www.wilsonweb.com/articles/bannerad.htm. (last visited 12 /13 /2007). 11. Masterson, Companies Sue Over Banner Advertisements, available at: http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/print/0,1087,3_67521,00.html. (last visited 12 /15 /2007). 12. Magnus Pagendarm & Heike Schaumburg, Why Are Users Banner-Blind? The Impact of Navigation Style on the Perception of Web Banners, J. Digital Info., available at http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v02/i01/Pagendarm/ (last visited 12 /20 /2007). 13. Robert Mullens, Gator Corp. Threatens to Bite Back, The Business Journal, available at : http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2002/06/24/daily71.html (last visited 9 /5 /2008). 14. Search Engine - PC Webopaedia Definition and Links, available at: http://webopedia.internet.com/TERM/s/search engine.html (last visited 12 /11 /2007). 15. The New Meta Tags Are Coming -- Or Are They? The Search Engine Report, available at http://searchenginewatch.com/sereport/97/12-metatags.html (last visited 12 /15 /2007). 16. Yahoo! Investor Relations, Yahoo! Earnings Q2 2004 Yahoo! Earnings, available at http://yhoo.client.shareholder.com/earnings.cfm?concall=q22004 (last visited 12/13 /2007). (四)Case 1.� 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. WhenU.com, 309 F. Supp. 2d 467 (S.D.N.Y. 2003). 2.� 1-800 Contacts, Inc. v. WhenU.com, 414 F.3d 400 (2d Cir. 2005). 3.� Astra Pharmaceutical Products., Inc. v. Beckman Instruments, Inc., 718 F.2d 1201 (1st Cir. 1983). 4.� Adobe Systems Inc. v. One Stop Micro Inc., 84 F.Supp.2d 1086 (N.D.Cal.2000). 5.� American Enka Corp. v. Marzall, 92 U.S.P.Q. 111 (1952). 6.� American Express Co. v. CFK, Inc., 947 F. Supp. 310 (E.D. Mich.1996). 7.� American Home Prods. Corp. v. Johnson Chem. Co., 589 F.2d 103 (2d Cir. 1978). 8.� American Photographic Pub. Co. v. Ziff Davis Pub. Co., 135 F.2d 569, 574 (7th Cir. 1943). 9.� Armstrong Paint & Varnish Work v. Nu-Enamel Corp., 305 U.S. 315 (1938). 10. American Rakiator & Standard Sanitary Corp. V. Hoyt Heater Co., 145 U.S.P.Q. 618 (T.T.A.B. 1965). 11. Avery Dennison Corp. v. Sumpton, 189 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 1999). 12. Brookfield Communication, Inc., v. West Coast Entertainment Corp., 174 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 1999). 13. Bayer Corp. v. Custom School Frames, L.L.C., 259 F. Supp. 2d 503 (E.D. La. 2003). 14. Binney & Smith v. Rose Art Indus., 60 U.S.P.Q.2d 2000 (E.D. pa 2001). 15. Brand v. Fairchester Packing Co., 84 U.S.P.Q. 97 (Comm’r Pats. 1950). 16. Bally Total Fitness Holding Corp. v. Faber, 29 F. Supp. 2d 1161 (C.D. Cal. 1998). 17. Board of Trustees of University of Ala. v. Bama-Werke Curt Baumann, 231 U.S.P.Q. 408 (T.T.A.B. 1986). 18. Chatam International, Inc. v. Bodum, Inc., 157 F.Supp. 2d 549 (E.D. Penn. 2001). 19. Chanel, Inc. v. Smith (9th Cir. 1968). 20. Checkpoint Sys. V. Check Point Software Techs., Inc., 269 F.3d 270 (3d Cir. 2001). 21. Deere & Co. v. MTD Prods., Inc., 41 F.3d 39 (2d Cir. 1994). 22. Discovery Communications, Inc. v. Animal Planet, Inc., 172 F. Supp. 2d 1282 (C.D. Cal. 2001). 23. Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema, 604 F.2d 200, 206(2d Cir. 1979). 24. Dr. Seuss Enterprises, L.P. v. Penguin Books USA, Inc. 109 F.3d 1394 (9th Cir. 1997). 25. Eli Lilly & Co. v. Natural Answers, Inc., 233 F.3d 456 (7th Cir. 2000). 26. Edgar Rice Burroughs, Inc, v. Manns Theatres, 1976 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11754. 27. Eli Lilly & Co. v. Natural Answers, Inc., 86 F. Supp. 2d 834 (S.D. Ind). 28. Estee Lauder, Inc. v. The Fragrance Counter, Inc., 52 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1786 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 1999). 29. Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc. v. Capece. 141 F.3d 188 (5th Cir. 1998). 30. Fort Howard Paper Co. v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., 390 F.2d 1015 (1968). 31. Faeger & Benson, LLP, v. William Purdy, SR., 367 F. Supp. 2d 1238 (2005). 32. Grotrian, Helfferich, Schulz, Th. Steinweg Nachf. v. Steinway & Sons, 523 F.2d 1331 (2d Cir. 1975). 33. General Mills, Inc. v. Kellogg Co., 824 F.2d 622 (8th Cir. 1987). 34. Gray v. Meijer, Inc., 295 F.3d 641 (6th Cir. 2002). 35. Green-point Fin. Corp. v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co., 116 F. Supp. 2d 405 (S.D.N.Y.2000). 36. Hancock v. American Steel & Wire Co., 203 F.2d 737 (C.C.P.A. 1953). 37. Hasbro Inc. v. Clue Computing Inc., 232 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2000). 38. Hershey Foods Corp. v. Mars, Inc., 998 F. Supp. 500 (M.D. Pa. 1998). 39. H. Marvin Ginn Corp. v. Int’l Ass’n Fire Chiefs, Inc., 782 F.2d 987 (Fed. Cir. 1986). 40. Horphag Research, Ltd. v. Pelligrini, 337 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2003). 41. Intermatic, Inc., v. Toeppen, 947 F. Supp. 1227 (1996). 42. Investacorp, Inc. v. Aravian Investment Banking Corp., 931 F.2d 1519 (11th Cir. 1991). 43. In re Clarke, 17 U.S.P.Q.2d 1238 (T.T.A.B 1990). 44. In re Castleton China, Inc., 156 U.S.P.Q. 691 (T.T.A.B. 1968). 45. In re Dial-A-Mattress Operating Corp., 240 F.3d 1341 (Fed. Cir. 2001). 46. In re Marriott Corp., 459 F. 2d 525 (C.C.P.A. 1972). 47. In re Societe Generale, 824 F.2d 957 (Fed. Cir. 1987). 48. Insituform Techs., Inc. v. National Envirotech Group, L.L.C., No. 97-2064 (E.D. La., 49. final consent judgment entered Aug. 26, 1997). 50. In re Volvo Cars of North Am., Inc., 46 U.S.P.Q.2d 1455 (T.T.A.B. 1998). 51. Jordache Enters. v. Levi Strauss & Co., 841 F. Supp. 506 (S.D.N.Y. 1993). 52. Japan Telecom, Inc. v. Japan Telecom Am., Inc., 287 F.3d 866 (9th Cir. 2002). 53. Jerry Finn v. Cooper’s, Inc., 292 F.2d 555 (C.C.P.A. 1961). 54. J.K. Harris & Co. v. Kassel, 253 F. Supp. 2d 1120 (2003). 55. Kellogg Co. v. Toucan Golf, Inc., 337 F.3d 616 (6th Cir. 2003). 56. Ken Roberts Co. v. Go-To.Com. (2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6740). 57. Kenner Parker Toys, Inc. v. Rose Art Industries, Inc., 963 F. 2d 351 (Fed. Cir. 1992). 58. KiKi Undies Corp. v. Promenade Hosiery Mills, Inc., 411 F.2d 1097 (2d Cir. 1969). 59. Lindy Pen Co., Inc. v. Bic Pen Corp., 796 F.2d 254 (9th Cir. 1986). 60. Lucien Picard Watch Corp. V. Since 1868 Crescent Corp., 314 F. Supp. 329 (S.D.N.Y. 1970). 61. Matrix Essentials, Inc. v. Emporium Drug Mart, Inc., 988 F.2d 587 (5th Cir. 1993). 62. Mattel, Inc. v. Internet Dimensions, Inc., 55 U.S.P.Q.2d 1620 (S.D.N.Y.2000). 63. Metro Pub.Ltd. v. San Jose Mercury News, 987 F.2d 637 (9th Cir. 1993). 63. Michael Caruso & Co. v. Estefan Enters., Inc., 994 F. Supp. 1454 (S.D. Fla. 1998). 65. Mobil Oil Corp. v. Pegasus Petroleum Corp., 818 F.2d 254 (2d Cir. 1987). 66. Norwich Pharmacal Co. v. Sterling Drug, Inc., 271 F.2d 569 (2d Cir. 1959). 67. Niton Corp. v. Radiation Monitoring Devices, Inc., 27 F. Supp. 2d 102 (D. Mass. 1998). 68. Oppedahl & Larson v. Advanced Concepts, No. C-97-Z-1592 (D. Colo. filed July 23, 1997). 69. Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Calvin Designer Label, 985 F. Supp. 1220 (N.D. Cal. 1997). 70. Playboy Enters., Inc. v. AsiaFocus Int''l, Inc., No. 97-734-A (E.D. Va. Apr. 10, 1998). 71. Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998). 72. Pinehurst, Inc. v. Wick, 256 F. Supp. 2d 424 (M.D.N.C. 2003). 73. Promatek Indus, v. Equitrac Corp., 300 F.3d 808 (7th Cir. 2002). 74. Playboy Enters., Inc. v. Welles, 279 F.3d 796 (9th Cir. 2002). 75. Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications Corp., 55 F. Supp. 2d 1070 (C.D. Cal. Feb. 11. 1999). 76. Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Netscape Communications Corp., 354 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2004). 77. Polaroid Corp. v. Polarad Electronics Corp., 287 F.2d 492 (2d Cir. 1961). 78. Polo Fashions, Inc. v. Craftex, Inc., 816 F.2d 145 (4th Cir. 1987). 79. powerlineman.com, LLC, v. Robert Jackson, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86261. 80. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Inc. v. Doughney, 113 F. Supp. 2d 915 (E.D. Va. 2000). 81. Processed Plastic Co. v. Warmer Communications, Inc., 675 F.2d 852 (7th Cir. 1982). 82. Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Prods. Co., 514 U.S. 159 (1995). 83. Ross v. Analytical Tech., Inc. and Orion Research, Inc., 51 U.S.P.Q.2d 1269 (T.T.A.B.1999). 84. Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Innovator Corp., 105 F. Supp. 2d 816 (S.D. Ohio 2000). 85. Reed v. Bakers Engineering & Equip., 100 U.S.P.Q. 196 (Ex. Ch. 1954). 86. Rust Environment & Infrastructure, Inc. v. Teunissen, 131 F.3d 1210 (7th Cir. 1997). 87. Sally Beauty Co. v. Beautyco, Inc., 304 F.3d 964 (10th Cir. 2002). 88. Sara Lee Corp. v. Kayser-Roth Corp., 81 F.3d 455 (4th Cir. 1996). 89. Shell Oil Co. v. Commercial Petroleum, Inc., 928 F.2d 104 (4th Cir.1991). 90. Sleep Country USA, Inc. v. Northwest Pacific, Inc., 72 U.S.P.Q.2d 1261 (W.D. Wash.2003). 91. Slayton v. House of Sebastian Ltd., Inc., 151 U.S.P.Q. 33 (S.D.N.Y. 1966). 92. Stahly, Inc. v. M. H.Jacobs Co, Inc., 183 F.2d 914 (7thCir. 1950). 93. Star Markets, Ltd. v. Texaco, Inc., 950 F. Supp. 1030 (D. Haw. 1996). 94. SNA, Inc. v. Array, 51 F. Supp. 2d 554 (E.D. Pa. 1999). 95. Sunmark, Inc. v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., 64 F.3d 1055 (7th Cir. 1995). 96. TCPIP Holding Co. v. Haar Communication Inc., 244 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 2001). 97. TeleTech Customer Care Mgmt., Inc. v. Tele-Tech Co., 977 F. Supp. 1407 (C.D. Cal. 1997). 98. Thane Int’l, Inc. v. Trek Bicycle Corp., 305 F.3d 894 (9th Cir. 2002). 99. The new Kids on the Block v. News America Publishing, Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992). 100. The New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants v. Eric Louis Associates, Inc. 79 F. Supp. 2d 331 (S.D.N.Y. 1999). 101. Tisch Hotels, Inc. v. Americana Inn, Inc., 350 F.2d 609 (7th Cir. 1965). 102. Trans Union LLC, vs. Credit Rrsearch, INC., 142 F. Supp. 2d 1029 (2001). 103. Unit Drug Co. v. Theodore Rectanus Co., 248 U.S. 90 (1918). 104. U-Haul Int''l, Inc. v. WhenU.com, Inc. 279 F. Supp. 2d 723 (E.D. Va. 2003). 105. U.S. Navy v. United States Mfg. Co., 2 U.S.P.Q.2d 1254, 1256 (T.T.A.B. 1987). 106. Vitek systems, Inc. v. Abbott Labs, 675 F.2d 190 (8th Cir. 1982). 107. Weiss Assoc., Inc. v. HRL Assoc., Inc., 902 F.2d 1546 (Fed. Cir. 1990). 108. WhenU.com, Inc. v. The State of Utah, Case No. 040907578 (D. Utah, April 12, 2004). 109. Worden v. California fig syrup company, 187 U.S.516 (1903). 110. Worthington v. Anderson, 386 F.3d 1314 (10 th Cir. 2004). 111. Wells Fargo & Co. v. WhenU.com, Inc. 293 F. Supp. 2d 734 (E.D. Mich. 2003). 112. Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Company v. Gator Corporation No 02-909-A (E.D. Va. June 25, 2002).
|
| |