本文透過硏究近年來歐洲法院針對著名商標之判決，試圖釐清不同著 名商標侵害態樣及法理基礎，並針對與一般商標減損侵害不同之「搭便車」 行爲，深入探討其適用範圍及限制。特別是我國實務判決在處理著名商標 案件時，常以特定商標利用著名商標之高知名度，拉抬身價，「變相鼓勵了 搭便車不勞而獲之行爲」爲由，拒絕特定商標註冊或認定侵權。然而我國 商標法僅規範「減損著名商標之識別性或信譽者」視爲商標侵害，若一商 標並未減損著名商標之識別性或信譽，而僅藉由著名商標之聲譽獲取利 益，是否構成我國商標法下的著名商標侵害？本文就著名商標侵害要件及 態樣進行詳述，並闡述禁止「搭便車」行爲之意義及其適用限制，最後透 過分析歐洲法院之判決，討論歐洲對於保護著名商標之趨勢發展，並回歸 我國立法例及判決實務，檢討目前對於著名商標之保護，是否得以維持商 標權人及公共利益間平衡。本文以爲，在「搭便車」行爲判斷上，儘管混 淆誤認之虞並非判斷要件，但至少應該將商標本身及所指定商品服務之相 似性，納入考量，且當以較嚴格的態度檢視，此外必須嚴謹區分一般商標 減損侵害及「搭便車」行爲不同，避免造成過於寬鬆認定侵權，而形成著 名商標保護之過度擴張。

Three types of injury against which European trademark law ensures such protection for the benefit of trade marks with a reputation are, first, detriment to the distinctive character of the earlier mark, secondly, detriment to the repute of that mark and, thirdly, unfair advantage taken of the distinctive character or the repute of that mark. The first two types of injury, known as dilution, have been much discussed in recent year, however, for the last type of injury, the definition and application is not clarified: does an imitator take unfair advantage of a trade mark where its use of a similar sign gives the imitator an advantage but there is no likelihood of confusion or detriment to the proprietor? This article reviews the recent judgments of Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in famous trademark protection cases and the problematic expansionist approach created by them. Study also revealed that the current Courts practices in Taiwan do not distinguish clearly the different types of injury which cause even more questionable scope of the trademark protection. The author argued that applying restrictively the infringement criteria of harm, detriment and unfair advantage is crucial. Otherwise, excessive trademark protection will be created and trademark law will gradually lose its conceptual contours.