ㄽ  ㄝჷႎᝠငඥƱ‫̈ژ‬ᅠഥᙹር  Barton BEEBE༡㒊 ᭸Ꮚ ヂ ̿┠ ḟ̿
ࡣࡌࡵ࡟
Ϩ㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊࡜ࢥࣆ࣮ᢏ⾡ࡢၥ㢟Ⅼ 㸿㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊࡜ὶ⾜ࡢࣉࣟࢭࢫ 㹀㸬➇தⓗᾘ㈝ࡢ㝈⏺ 㹁㸬ࢥࣆ࣮ᢏ⾡ࡢ♫఍ⓗၥ㢟Ⅼ㸦௨ୖࠊ➨ྕ㸧ϩ㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ 㸿㸬ࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ 㹀㸬ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ  㸯㸬ᕼ㔘໬ࡢἲⓗ࣭ᩥ໬ⓗᴫᛕ  㸰㸬ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢၟᶆἲ㸦௨ୖࠊᮏྕ㸧  㸱㸬ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢⴭసᶒἲ  㸲㸬ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥಖㆤἲ 㹁㸬┿ṇᢸಖἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ  㸯㸬ᆅ⌮ⓗ⾲♧ࡢಖㆤ  D 㼀㻾㻵㻼㻿 ༠ᐃ᮲  E ᖺࡢ⡿ 㻱㻯 ࣡࢖ࣥ༠ᐃ  㸰㸬ఏ⤫ⓗᩥ໬ⓗ⾲⌧ࡢಖㆤϪ㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢኻᩋ 㸿㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ↓┈ᛶ 㹀㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࠿ࡽ༤ឡ୺⩏ⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡬⤖ㄽ㸸ࣇ࢕࢔ࢵࢺ࣭ࣉࣟࣃࢸ࢕㸦㻲㼕㼍㼠㻌㻼㼞㼛㼜㼑㼞㼠㼥㸧ϩ㸬ዝౘ⚗Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ㻌ᢏ⾡ⓗ࡟ࡣࠊᡃࠎࡣ୓⬟ࣉࣜࣥࢱ࣮ࡢୡ⏺࠿ࡽࡣ㐲ࡃ㞳ࢀࡓ࡜ࡇࢁ࡟࠸
▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡿࡀࠊࡇࡇ࡛❧ࡕṆࡲࡗ࡚ࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ୡ⏺࡛ᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙࠸ࡓ♫఍ⓗ༊ู࡜࡟࡞ࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋࡑࡋ࡚ࠊᢏ⾡ࡢ㐍Ṍࡢྡࡢୗ࡟ࠊ☜ᐇ࡟┦ᑐⓗ᭷⏝ᛶࡢไᗘࡀ࡝ࡢࡼ࠺࡟ᶵ⬟ࡍࡿ࠿࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ၥ࠺࡚ࡳࡼ࠺ࠋ➃ⓗ࡞⟅࠼࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢಁ㐍ࡀ⤯ᑐⓗ᭷⏝ᛶࡢಁ㐍࡜⾪✺ࡋ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡟ࡍࡿࡓࡵࠊᡃࠎࡣࠊᚋ⪅ࡣࠊఱࡽ࠿ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ಖㆤࡢᙧែ࡞ࡃࡋ࡚ࡣࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ไᗘࡣ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝

ࢆ୚࠼ࡿࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡣࠊ≉チ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡢࡳಖㆤࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜୺ᙇࡍࡿ

ᶵ⬟ࡋ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡟࡞ࡿࠋ」〇࡜ᶍೌ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚࡯࡜ࢇ࡝ࡢ┦ᑐⓗၟရ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋせࡍࡿ࡟ࠊᡃࠎࡣࠊ」〇ᢏ⾡ࡀࠊၟရ໬ྍ⬟࡞ᕼᑡᛶࡢ」〇࠶ࡢ㆑ู໬⬟ຊࡣᛴ㏿࡟ῶẅࡉࢀ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋ୍ᐃࡢ┦ᑐⓗၟရ㸦౛ࡿ࠸ࡣᶍೌࡢ㝈⏺ࢆ༟㉺ࡋࡓୡ⏺࡟┤㠃ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞㝈⏺ࢆᏲ࠼ࡤࠊࢫ࣮ࣃ࣮ࣚࢵࢺࠊᏱᐂ᪑⾜ࠊⱥᅜࡢࢧࢵ࣮࢝ࢡࣛࣈ㸧ࡣ኱ᐩ㇦ࢆ௚

ࡿࡓࡵ࡟▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࢆ౑࠸ࠊྠἲࡀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ኱㔞࡟⏕ࡌ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ࢥࣆ࣮ࢆ

⪅࠿ࡽ༊ูࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚Ꮡ⥆ࡍࡿ࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࡀࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡢ኱ከᩘࡣࠊ

ಶேࡀᾘ㈝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚௚⪅࡜ᕪู໬ࡋ⥆ࡅࡽࢀࡿ≧ἣࢆ☜ಖࡍࡿᕷሙ࡟࠶ࡿၟရࡀࠊᙜヱᾘ㈝⪅࡜௚⪅࡜ࢆ༊ูࡋࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞

࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋ

༊ูࢆࡍࡿࡢࡀࠊၟရࡀࡍࡄ࡟ࢥࣆ࣮ࡉࢀࠊ࠶ࡾࡩࢀࡓࡶࡢ࡟ࡉࢀ࡚ࡋࡲ

ࡇࢀࡣࡶࡕࢁࢇࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡀ᪤࡟⾜ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡾࠊᡃࠎࡢୡ⏺

࠺๓ࡢ࡯ࢇࡢ▷࠸㛫ࡔࡅ࡛࠶ࡿࡼ࠺࡞ᕷሙ࡟࠾ࡑࡽࡃ┤㠃ࡍࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋ

ࡀ୓⬟ࣉࣜࣥࢱ࣮࡜໬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡼ࠺࡜࡞࠿ࢁ࠺࡜㛵ಀࡣ࡞࠸ࠋᡃࠎࡣ᪤࡟ࠊ

࡞ࡿ࡯࡝ࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ୡ⏺࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃᕪู໬ࡢไᗘࡣࠊ⡿ᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃ༊ูࡢไᗘࡀᶵ⬟ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ᚲせ࡞ࠊၟရ໬ྍ⬟࡞ᕼᑡᛶࡢ

ᅜ࡟࠾࠸࡚⌧ᅾ࢔ࣃࣞࣝࣇ࢓ࢵࢩࣙࣥࡢไᗘࡀᶵ⬟ࡍࡿࡢ࡜ᐇ࡟ྠࡌࡼ

≧ែࢆಖᣢࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲཬࡧࡇࢀ࡟㢮ఝࡍࡿἲ࡟౫Ꮡࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ

࠺࡟ᶵ⬟ࡍࡿ࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋ⡿ᅜ࡛ࡣὒ᭹ࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡣ኱ࡋࡓ▱ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⡆༢࡞౛࡜ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊࣁࣥࢻࣂࢵࢢࡢ࣓࣮࣮࢝ࠊ౛࠼ࡤ 㻸㼛㼡㼕㼟㻌ⓗ㈈⏘ಖㆤࢆ୚࠼࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋᕪ␗ࡢᚩೃࡀࡇࢀࡲ࡛࡟࡞࠸ຍ㏿ࡋࡓ࣮࣌ࢫ

㼂㼡㼕㼠㼠㼛㼚 ࡸ 㻯㼛㼍㼏㼔 ࡣࠊ㛗࠸㛫ࠊ⮬ᕫࡢၟᶆࢆ〇ရࡢ⾲㠃ࡢぢ࠼ࡿሙᡤ࡟⧞

࡛ᾘኻࡋࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᚩೃࢆࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡋࡓ⪅ࡀࠊ↓チㅙࡢࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࡟ࡼࡾ㏉ࡋࡢࣃࢱ้࣮࡛ࣥ༳ࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺᪉⟇࡟㢗ࡗ࡚ࡁࡓࡀࠊࡑࢀࡣ༢࡟ࢫࢸ

ࡗ࡚⮬ศࡓࡕࡀ◚⏘࡬࡜㏣࠸㎸ࡲࢀ࡚࠸ࡃࡢࡔ࡜ࡇࢀࡲ࡛࡟࡞ࡃ⤯ᮃⓗ࣮ࢱࢫࢩࣥ࣎ࣝࡢᢞᙳࢆᣑ኱ࡍࡿࡓࡵࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ࠾ࡑࡽࡃࡼࡾ㔜せ࡞࡟୙‶ࢆッ࠼࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊᡃࠎࡢ┠ᶆࡀࠊᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙

┠ⓗ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊࢥࣆ࣮ࢆࡍࡿ⪅ࡀࠊಖㆤࡢᑐ㇟࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠸≀㉁ⓗၟရࡃ♫఍ⓗ༊ูࡢไᗘࢆỌ⥆ࡉࡏࡿࡇ࡜࡟࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍࢀࡤࠊ࠾ࡑࡽࡃࠊ㆑ูᛶ

ࡢࡶࡗ࡜ࡶࡽࡋ࠸ࢥࣆ࣮ࢆࠊಖㆤࡢᑐ㇟࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿၟᶆࡢၟᶆᶒࢆ౵ᐖ

ࡢ࠶ࡿၟရࡢ↓ᙧࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚᤼௚ⓗᶒ฼ࢆ୚࠼ࡿ࠿ࠊᑡ࡞ࡃ࡜ࡶ

ࡏࡎ࡟సࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ☜ᐇ࡟㜼Ṇࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢほⅬ࠿ࡽࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡑࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡢ୰ࡢ㆑ูᛶࡢ࠶ࡿఱࡽ࠿ࡢ≉ᚩ㸦ᩥᏐࡸ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࡢᶆ❶࠶ࡢ୍␒ࡢ㝈⏺ࡣࠊྠἲࡀࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡢ≉ᚩࡢ୰࡛ࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘࡜ࡋ࡚ಖㆤࡢᑐ

ࡿ࠸ࡣࡑࡢ௚ࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡢእᙧⓗ≉ᚩ࡞࡝㸧࡟ࡘ࠸࡚᤼௚ⓗᶒ฼ࢆ୚࠼࡚ࠊ

㇟࡜࡞ࡿࡶࡢࡢᕼᑡᛶࡋ࠿ಖᏑࡋ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺Ⅼ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡔ࠿ࡽࡇࡑࠊᡃࠎ

ࡑࢀࡽࡢ↓チㅙࡢࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆ㜵ࡀ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠋᡃࠎࡀࡑ࠺ࡍࡿࡢ

ࡢ┦ᑐⓗၟရࡢከࡃࡀ㠀≀㉁໬ࡋࡓᙧែࢆ࡜ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ≉࡟ࠊၟᶆ

ࡣࠊ㸦ࢹࢨ࢖ࢼ࣮࡟ࠊ⮬ᕫࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࢆ๰㐀ࡋᐉఏࡍࡿࢥࢫࢺࢆᅇ཰ࡍࡿ

࡜࠸࠺㠀≀㉁໬ࡋࡓᙧែࡣࠊ඾ᆺⓗ࡟ࡣド᫂ࡀᐜ࡛᫆࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺㛗ᡤࢆ᭷ࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࡇ࡜ࢆಖドࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆࡶࡗ࡚࢖ࣥࢭࣥࢸ࢕ࣦࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡇ࡜

ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟ࠊ㠀ᖖ࡟ᙉຊ࡞ࢥࣆ࣮ᢏ⾡ࡀฟ⌧ࡋࡓࡇ࡜ࡣࠊ

࡛㸧ၟရ໬ࡉࢀࡓ㆑ูᛶࡢᙧែࡢࡉࡽ࡞ࡿไసࢆ༢࡟ಁ㐍ࡍࡿࡓࡵࡔࡅ࡛

▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚༴ᶵ࡛ࡶ࠶ࡾࢳࣕࣥࢫ࡛ࡶ࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡀࢃ࠿ࡗ

࡞ࡃࠊ㸦ࢹࢨ࢖ࣥཪࡣࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡢእᙧⓗ≉ᚩࡢᕼᑡᛶࢆಖᏑࡋࠊࡑࢀ࡟ࡼ

ࡓࡢࡔࡀࠊᡃࠎࡣ๓⪅࡟ࡢࡳ╔┠ࡋࡀࡕ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡟ࡼࡿྲྀ⥾ࢆࡗ࡚ࠊ㆑ู⬟ຊࢆಖᣢࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛㸧᪤࡟ၟရ໬ࡉࢀࡓ㆑ูᛶࢆ⥔ᣢࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡛ࡶ࠶ࡿࠋࡉࡽ࡟ࠊࢹࢨ࢖ࢼ࣮㸦ཬࡧᾘ㈝⪅㸧ࡀࠊࡇࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊಖㆤ
ࡢᑐ㇟࡜࡞ࡿࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࢆไస㸦ཬࡧᾘ㈝㸧ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡬࡜ᘬࡁᐤࡏࡽࢀࡿࡇ




See Hemphill & Suk, supra note 38, at 1177-78㸦ࠕࣟࢦࣇ࢕ࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࠖ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽ

ࡌ࡚࠸ࡿࠋid. at 1178 . But see Kate Betts, Fashion: The Height of Luxury, TIME, Apr. 23,



2006, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1186563,00.html㸦ࠕᾘ㈝⪅ࡣࠊࣟࢦ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃ〇ရࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥ࡜ရ㉁࡛ࣈࣛࣥࢻࢆㄆ㆑ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࠖࡇ࡜ࢆ๓

See, e.g., Hearing on H.R. 5055, supra note 133, at 12 ࣇ࢓ࢵࢩࣙࣥࢹࢨ࢖ࢼ࣮

Jeffrey Banks ࡢ Council of Fashion Designers of America ࢆ௦⾲ࡋ࡚ࡢⓎゝ .

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ᥦ࡜ࡋࡓ࣎ࢵࢸࣦ࢙࢞ࢿࢱࡢࣟࢦࢆ౑ࢃ࡞࠸ᡓ␎࡟ࡘ࠸࡚グ㏙ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 㠀ᖖ࡟ᅔ㞴࡟ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿᢏ⾡ࡑࡢࡶࡢ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊᡃࠎࡣࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࡢࠖ౑⏝࡟ࡘ࠸࡚᤼௚ⓗᶒ฼ࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡢ࡟࠿࡞ࡾៅ㔜࡛࠶ࡿ୍᪉ࠊᡃࠎ

ࡣᆅ఩ࢆ♧ࡍၟရ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡍࡼ࠺ồࡵࠊ࠿ࡘ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡟ᑐࡋࡢ≉チไᗘࡣࠊⓎ᫂ࡢ᭷⏝ᛶ࡜ࡋ࡚グ㍕ࡉࢀࡓࡶࡢࡀᛶ㉁ୖ⤯ᑐⓗ࡜࠸࠺࡚ࡣዝౘ⚗Ṇἲࡢᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡍࡼ࠺ồࡵࡊࡿࢆ࠼࡞ࡃ࡞ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ࡼࡾ┦ᑐⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ᫂☜࡞ሙྜ࡛ࡶࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞Ⓨ᫂࡟≉チࢆ௜୚ࡍᡃࠎࡢࢥࣆ࣮ᢏ⾡ࡀࠊ౛࠼ࡤࡶࡗ࡜ࡶࡽࡋ࠸ࢲ࢖ࣖࣔࣥࢻࡢᶍೌရࢆ〇㐀ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆམࢃ࡞࠸ࠋ᭱ᚋ࡟ࠊᡃࠎࡢࣃࣈࣜࢩࢸ࢕࣮ᶒಖㆤἲࡣࠊࢭࣞࣈ

࡛ࡁࡿ࠿ࡽࡇࡑࠊ➇தⓗᾘ㈝ࡢไᗘ࡛ࡣࠊࢲ࢖ࣖࣔࣥࢻࡢࣈࣛࣥࢻࡸࠊࡑ

ࣜࢸ࢕ࡢಶᛶ ࢆᶍೌࡋࡍࡂࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࡢࡀ

ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࣈࣛࣥࢻࢆྠࡌᢏ⾡ࢆࡶࡗ࡚ᶍೌࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㜵ࡄࡇ࡜࡟↔Ⅼࢆ᭱ࡶ㐺ษ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࢭࣞࣈࣜࢸ࢕ࡢಶᛶࡣࡑࢀ⮬యᵝࠎ࡞ᶍೌάືࡢ≛≅࡟⨨ࡃࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

࡞ࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ౛࠼ࡤぢࡓ┠ࡢࡑࡗࡃࡾࡉࢇࠊኌࡢࡑࡗࡃࡾࡉࢇࠊ

▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗഃ㠃ࡣᵝࠎ࡞᫂☜࡞ែᵝ࡛⌧ࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ᭱ࡶὀ
┠ࡍ࡭ࡁࡣࠊᶍೌ㜵Ṇἲ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࢀࡣḢᕞ࡛≉࡟ཝࡋࡃࠊ⡿ᅜ࡛ࡶࡲ
254, 255 (2d Cir. 1942) (per curiam)㸦ࠕ㉎ධ⪅ࡀࢫࣀࢵࣈ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆᮃࡴࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ

ࡍࡲࡍཝࡋࡃ࡞ࡗ࡚࠾ࡾ ࠊᡃࠎࡢ⿢ุᡤࠊ㆙ᐹཬࡧ⛯㛵⫋ဨࢆ⌧௦ࡢἲࡀ㉎ධ⪅ࢆࢫࣀࢵࣈ࡛࠸ࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺ಖㆤࡋ࡚ࡃࢀࡿ㹿㺁 .

㻼㼞㼛㼢㼢㼑㼐㼕㼠㼛㼞㼕㻌㼟㼛㼜㼞㼍㻌㼘㼑㻌㻼㼛㼙㼜㼑 ࡟ኚ࠼ࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ▱ⓗ㈈⏘࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃㆡΏ࡜୪

See, e.g., Boston Prof’l Hockey Ass’n v. Dallas Cap & Emblem Mfg., Inc., 510 F.2d

⾜㍺ධࡢไ㝈ࡶࠊ〇ရࡢ᤼௚ᛶࢆ⥔ᣢࡍࡿࡢ࡟ᙺ❧ࡘ ࠋᡃࠎࡢᅜෆࡢၟ

1004 (5th Cir. 1975); see also Univ. of Ga. Athletic Ass’n v. Laite, 756 F.2d 1535 (11th Cir.

ᶆไᗘࡣࠊࢫࢸ࣮ࢱࢫࢩࣥ࣎ࣝཬࡧၟᶆࡢᐉఏⓗཪࡣࠕ㈍኎ಁ㐍ࡢࡓࡵ1985); Arsenal Football Club Plc v. Reed, [2003] EWCA (Civ) 696 (Eng.); Stacey L. DoganEMORY L.J. 461 (2005); Jane C. Ginsburg, Exploiting the Artist’s Commercial Identity: The





See, e.g., Corrigendum to Council Directive 2004/48, 2004 O.J. (L 195) 16 (EC); Coun-

cil Regulation 1383/2003, 2003 O.J. (L 196) 7 (EC).
See, e.g., Prioritizing Resources and Organization for Intellectual Property Act of 2008,& Mark A. Lemley, The Merchandising Right: Fragile Theory or Fait Accompli?, 54
Merchandizing of Art Images, 19 COLUM.-VLA J.L. & ARTS 1 (1994-1995).
See, e.g., Long-Sleeved Garment with Wristwatch Accommodations, U.S. Patent No.7,380,287 (filed July 1, 2005); Watch Cuff, U.S. Patent No. 7,120,936 (filed June 17, 2004).

Pub. L. No. 110-403, 122 Stat. 4256 (codified as amended in scattered sections of 15, 17,

and 18 U.S.C.); see also Margot Kaminski, Recent Development, The Origins and Poten-ࢆಖㆤࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ேᕤⓗ࡟Ḟஈ≧ែࢆసࡽ࡞ࡅࢀࡤࠊࡑࡢ⫝̸ീࡣࠊࡑࡢ฼⏝ࡢ㝈⏺

See, e.g., Matthews v. Wozencraft, 15 F.3d 432, 437-38 (5th Cir. 1994)㸦
ࠕ࠶ࡿ⪅ࡢ⫝̸ീtial Impact of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), 34 YALE J. INT’L L. 247

౯್ࡀࢮࣟ࡟࡞ࡿࡲ࡛ၟᴗⓗ࡟฼⏝ࡉࢀ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺㹿㺁 ; see also LANDES & POSNER,(2009) 㻭㻯㼀㻭 ࡢ᮲ᩥ᱌࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿ .

supra note 71, at 224㸦ࠕ࣮࣎࢞ࣝࡢ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࡢ᤼௚ᛶࡀኻࢃࢀࠊ⤖ᯝ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡑࡢ⃭ቑSee, for example, Case C-59/08, Copad SA v. Christian Dior Couture SA (Apr. 23,

ࡀ࠶ࡗࡓࡇ࡜࡛ࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡓࡿබ⾗࡟࠾ࡅࡿΰྠࠊ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࡢởᰁࠊཪࡣ┿ࡢ೏ᛰ࡬2009), http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/j_6 㺀Case noࠖ㡯┠࡛ࠕC-59/08ࠖ࡜ධຊࡋࠊ

࡜ࡘ࡞ࡀࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊ᭷⏝ᛶ඲యࡀⴠࡕ㎸ࡴ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺㹿࠸ࡎࢀࠊࡑࡢ࢖࣓࣮ࢪ

ࠕSearchࠖࢆ㑅ᢥ Ḣᕞྖἲ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ㧗⣭ရࡢ㔞㈍ᗑ࡬ࡢ෌㈍኎ࢆ⚗Ṇࡍࡿࣛ࢖ࡣ౯್ࡢ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡜࡞ࡿ࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸㹿㺁 . But see Stacey L. Dogan & Mark A. Lemley,ࢭࣥࢫዎ⣙ࡢ᮲௳ࡢ୙ᒚ⾜ࡣࠊ〇㐀⪅ࡀࠊ෌㈍኎࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠕၟရ࡟㧗⣭ရࡢ࣮࢜ࣛ

What the Right of Publicity Can Learn from Trademark Law, 58 STAN. L. REV. 1161, 1185

ࢆࡲ࡜ࢃࡏࡿ㨩ຊ࡜୍ὶࡢ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࢆẋᦆࡍࡿࠖࡇ࡜ࢆド࡛᫂ࡁࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊၟ

(2006)㸦
ࠕࢭࣞࣈࣜࢸ࢕ࡢ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࡀ⃭ቑࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊࡑࡢ࢖࣓࣮ࢪ࡟ᡭࡢᒆࡃ⠊ᅖᶆᶒ౵ᐖࢆᵓᡂࡍࡿ࡜ุ᩿ࡋࡓࠋId. at Ruling 1; see also Case C-337/95, Parfums

ࢆᗈࡆࡿ࡟ࡍࡂࡎࠊ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࢆ฼⏝ࡋᴦࡋࡳࡓ࠸࡜⪃࠼ࡿ⪅࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࡼࡾ฼⏝ྍ⬟

Christian Dior SA v. Evora BV, 1997 E.C.R. I-6013, I-6033 Jacobs ἲົᐁࡢពぢ 㸦ࠕၟ࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ࡍࡿࡔࡅ࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 ; Mark P. McKenna, The Right of Publicity and Autonomousᶆᶒ⪅ࡣࠊ෌㈍኎⪅ࡀᗈ࿌ࡢࡓࡵ࡟ၟᶆᶒ⪅ࡢၟᶆࢆ౑⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ᑐࡋࠊࡑࡢᗈ

Self-Definition, 67 U. PITT. L. REV. 225, 269 (2005)㸦ࠕ࢔࢖ࢹࣥࢸ࢕ࢸ࢕ࡢ౑⏝ࡀቑ࠼ࡿ࿌ࡀᙜヱၟᶆ࡜ࡑࡢၟᶆᶒ⪅ࡢྡኌࢆⴭࡋࡃẋᦆࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡞ሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊ␗㆟ࢆ㏙࡭ࡇ࡜ࡣࠊㄡ࠿௚ࡢ⪅࡟ࡼࡿ࢔࢖ࢹࣥࢸ࢕ࢸ࢕ࡢ฼⏝ࢆጉࡆࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊࡲࡓࠊ

ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࡿࠋ㤶Ỉࡢࡼ࠺࡞㧗⣭ရࡢሙྜ࡟ࡣࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ẋᦆࡣࠊᙜヱၟရࡢ≀⌮ⓗព࿡࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡑࡢ㈨※ࢆ౑࠸ᯝࡓࡍࡶࡢ࡛ࡶ࡞࠸㹿㺁 .

㧗⣭࡞࢖࣓࣮ࢪࢆẋᦆࡍࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺㹿㺁 .





ࡑࡗࡃࡾࡉࢇ ; Onassis v. Christian Dior-N.Y., Inc., 472 N.Y.S.2d 254 (Sup. Ct. 1984)

See Jeffrey L. Harrison, Essay, Trademark Law and Status Signaling: Tattoos for thePrivileged, 59 FLA. L. REV. 195 (2007); cf. Benton Announcements, Inc. v. FTC, 130 F.2d

See, e.g., Allen v. Nat’l Video, Inc., 610 F. Supp. 612 (S.D.N.Y. 1985) Woody Allen ࡢ

Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis ࡢࡑࡗࡃࡾࡉࢇ  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࣑ࢽࢳࣗ࢔ேᙧࠊࡑࡋ୍࡚␒༳㇟ⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊࢭࣞࣈࣜࢸ࢕ࡢ࢖࣓
࣮ࢪ࡛ᙧ࡙ࡃࡽࢀࡓ➼㌟኱ࡢࠊ࢔ࢽ࣓ᕤᏛ࡟ࡼࡿࣟ࣎ࢵࢺࡀ࠶ࡿ ࠋ

ࡶࡢ࡟㈶ྠࡋࠊࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࡜㐍Ṍࢆྠ➼࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ࡳ࡞ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡢ࢖ࢹ
࢜ࣟࢠ࣮࡟ࡼࢀࡤࠊࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡣ㸦ࡑࡢᑐ㇟ࡀ᭩⡠࡛࠶ࢁ࠺࡜⮬ື㌴࡛࠶

▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡀࠊዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ࢆつᐃࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟࡝ࢀ࡯࡝฼⏝ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ

ࢁ࠺࡜㸧ไ㝈ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊไ㝈ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛⤖ᒁࡣࡼࡾከࡃࡢཪࡣⰋ㉁ࡢ࠿ࡣࡸࡸࢃ࠿ࡾ࡟ࡃ࠸ࡀࠊᮏ❶ࡢ୺㢟࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡇࢁࡢࠊ஧ࡘࡢᐦ᥋࡟㛵࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࡟ࡘ࡞ࡀࡿሙྜࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ⎔ቃಖㆤୖࡢไ⣙࡟┤㠃ࡍࡿ୰࡛ࠊ

㐃ࡍࡿ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ಖㆤࡢ᪉ἲ࡟╔┠ࡍࡿ࡜ࡼࡾ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟࡞ࡿࠋࡑࡢ୍ࡘࡣᕼ

⤖ᒁࡣࡼࡾᑡ࡞࠸ཪࡣ㉁ࡢᝏ࠸ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆᅇ㑊ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡘ࡞ࡀࡿሙ

㔘໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ୺࡟ᅜෆⓗᛶ㉁ࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊࡶ࠺୍ࡘ

ྜࡢࡳไ㝈ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡟࡞ࡿࠋࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡣࠊᚭ

ࡣ┿ṇࢆᢸಖࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢಖㆤ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ୺࡟ᅜ㝿ⓗᛶ㉁ࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ᗏⓗ࡟⌧௦ⓗ࡞᪉㔪ࢆ࡜ࡾࠊၨⵚ㐠ືࡢ⪃࠼᪉࡜ඹ㏻ࡋ࡚ࠊࡼࡾከࡃࡢࢥ

ࡇࢀࡽ஧ࡘࡢ᪉ἲࡣࠊ࠸ࡎࢀࡶࢥࣆ࣮ᢏ⾡ࡢ♫఍ⓗᙳ㡪ࢆᢚᅽࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ

ࣆ࣮ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊࡼࡾከࡃࡢ⾲⌧ࡀᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡜ྠᵝ࡟ࠊᖖ࡟ᮃ

┠ᣦࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡑࡢ┠ⓗ㐩ᡂࡢࡓࡵ࡟๓⪅ࡣၟရ໬ࡉࢀࡓ㆑ูᛶࡢᙧែ୍

ࡲࡋ࠸࡜ࡍࡿ⪃࠼᪉ࢆ࡜ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞⪃࠼᪉ࢆࡍࡿࡢࡣࠊ▱ⓗ๰స≀ࡣ⯡ࢆࠊᕼ㔘໬ࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࠿ࡽಖㆤࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ┠ᣦࡋࠊᚋ⪅ࡣබඹ≀࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢᛶ㉁ࢆ᭷ࡋࠊ౑࠸ᯝࡓࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡜ࡶ࡞ࡅࢀࡤᾘ㈝ࡀ➇ྜࡍ≉࡟ၟရ໬ࡉࢀࡓᆅ⌮ⓗ࣭Ṕྐⓗ┿ṇᛶࡢᙧែࢆࠊ┿ṇ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽⓎࡿࡇ࡜ࡶ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆ๓ᥦ࡟ࡍࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀ࡟㛵㐃ࡋ࡚ࠊࢥࣆ

⏕ࡍࡿࠕ࣮࢜ࣛࠖࢆࡴࡋࡤࡴࡼ࠺࡞ࠊᕼ㔘໬ࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢᙧ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡣࠊ▱ⓗ๰స≀ࡣ⤯ᑐⓗ᭷⏝ᛶࡋ࠿ࡶࡓࡽࡉ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺

ែ࠿ࡽಖㆤࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ┠ᣦࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ┿ṇࢆᢸಖࡍࡿࡓࡵࡢಖㆤࡣࠊᮏ㉁ࡇ࡜ࢆ๓ᥦ࡟ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋᡃࠎࡣࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ๰స⪅ࡀ๰స≀ࢆ๰సࡍࡿ࢖

ⓗ࡟ࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤࡀࠊࡼࡾලయ໬ࡋࡓᙧែ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊࡲࡎ

ࣥࢭࣥࢸ࢕ࣦࢆಖࡘࡓࡵ࡟ࠊ㸦⿕࿌ࡀࡑࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࢆࡶࡗ࡚ࡋ࡚ཎ࿌ࡢࢥࣆ

ࡇࢀࡽࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ಖㆤࡢ᪉ἲ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ㆟ㄽ࡟⫼ᬒࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡓࡵࠊᮏ❶࡛ࡣࠊ࣮࡟௦᭰ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㜵ࡄ࡭ࡃ㸧ಖㆤࡢᑐ㇟࡜࡞ࡿ๰స≀ࡢ↓チㅙࡢࢥࣆ࣮

ዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡀᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲཬࡧ┿ṇᢸಖἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ᶵ⬟ࡍࡿሙ⾜Ⅽࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ๰స≀࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ⿕࿌ཪࡣཎ࿌ࡢ⾜ື࡟࠿࠿ࢃ

ྜ࡟ࡣᑐ❧ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡜࡞ࡿࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡞▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࢆṇ☜࡟ࡽࡎᦆ࡞ࢃࢀ࡞࠸ࡲࡲ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜⪃࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠊ๰స≀ࡑࢀ⮬యࡢ᭷⏝ᛶࢆಖ♧ࡍࡢ࡟኱࠸࡟ᙺ❧ࡘࠊ஧ࡘࡢⴭస࡟ࡘ࠸࡚⪃࠼ࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽጞࡵࡿࠋ

ࡘࡓࡵ࡟ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸  ࠋ㼀㼔㼛㼙㼍㼟㻌 㻶㼑㼒㼒㼑㼞㼟㼛㼚䛜㻵㼟㼍㼍㼏㻌㻹㼏㻼㼔㼑㼞㼟㼛㼚 ࡬ᐄ࡚ࡓ᭷ྡ࡞ᡭ⣬࡟⾲ࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࠊࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟ

㸿㸬ࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮

ࢠ࣮࡛ࡣࠊ▱ⓗ๰స≀ࢆࠊ≀㉁ⓗ࡞ල⌧໬ࡢ㉁࡜㔞ࡢᙳ㡪ࢆཷࡅࡎࠊ♫఍࡜ࡢ᥋ゐ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡶ⭉㣗ࡋ࡞࠸๰స≀࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡋ࡚ᴦほⓗ࡞ࠊ࡯ࡰ༢⣧࡞ఏ⤫ⓗ࡞ࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡞▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࠊࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮࡜ࡶ࠸࠺࡭ࡁ

ゝⴥ࡛⾲⌧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ




See Waits v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 978 F.2d 1093 (9th Cir. 1992) Tom Waits ࡢኌࡢࡑࡗࡃ

ࡾࡉࢇ ; Midler v. Ford Motor Co., 849 F.2d 460 (9th Cir. 1988) Bette Midler ࡢኌࡢࡑࡉࡽ࡟࠸࠼ࡤࠊࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡣࠊ඲ࡃឤയⓗ࡜ࡣ࠸࠼࡞࠸࢖ࢹ
࢜ࣟࢠ࣮࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊṔྐⓗ㉳※ࢆ㍍どࡋࠊࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࡜ࡣᑐᴟ࡟࠶ࡿࡶࡢ

ࡗࡃࡾࡉࢇ .





See, e.g., Landham v. Lewis Galoob Toys, Inc., 227 F.3d 619, 621 (6th Cir. 2000) ᫎ⏬

See, e.g., Mark A. Lemley, Property, Intellectual Property, and Free Riding, 83 TEX. L.

ࣉࣞࢹࢱ࣮ࡢತඃࡢࠕBilly, the Native American Trackerࠖ࡜࠸࠺ᙺ᯶࡟ᇶ࡙࠸ࡓ࢔ࢡ

REV. 1031, 1055 (2005).ࢩࣙࣥࣇ࢕ࢠࣗ࢔ .





INGS OF THOMAS JEFFERSON 326, 334 (Andrew A. Lipscomb & Albert Ellery Bergh eds.,

See Wendt v. Host Int’l, Inc., 125 F.3d 806 (9th Cir. 1997); see also White v. Samsung

Letter from Thomas Jefferson to Isaac McPherson (Aug. 13, 1813), in 13 THE WRIT-

Elecs. Am., Inc., 971 F.2d 1395 (9th Cir. 1992); Young v. Greneker Studios, Inc., 261905)㸦
ࠕ⚾࠿ࡽ࢔࢖ࢹ࢔ࢆᚓࡓ⪅ࡣࠊ⚾ࡢ▱㆑ࢆῶࡽࡉࡎࡋ࡚⮬ࡽ▱㆑ࢆᚓࡿࠋࡑ

N.Y.S.2d 357, 358 (Sup. Ct. 1941) ཎ࿌࡟ఝࡏࡓ࣐ࢿ࢟ࣥࡣࠊἲ࡛࠸࠺࡜ࡇࢁࡢࠕ⫝̸ࢀࡣࠊ⚾ࡢᑠ⻽⇵࡛⮬ศࡢᑠ⻽⇵ࢆⅉࡋࡓ⪅ࡀࠊ⚾ࡢ࿘ࡾࢆᬯࡃࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡞ࡃ⮬ࡽീཪࡣ෗┿ࠖ࡟ヱᙜࡍࡿ᪨ุ᩿ࡋࡓ .

᫂࠿ࡾࢆᚓࡿࡀࡈ࡜ࡃ࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 .

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡜ࡋ࡚ᐃ⩏ࡉࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞ࡶࡢ㸦౛࠼ࡤࠊ┿ṇ࡛ᮏ≀ࡢཎసရ㸧ࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ

ࡽ࡜ࢥࣆ࣮ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞⾲⌧ࡢࡶࡘ㨱ຊࢆኻࢃࡏ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺࡜ࡢ

ࡑ࠺࡛࡞ࡃ࡜ࡶࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆᣄ⤯ࡍࡿࡶࡢ㸦౛࠼ࡤࠊ⛎ᐦࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࡼࡾ

ᅵ╔ࡢಙ௮ࡢࡈ࡜ࡃࡃࡔࡽ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡞ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

୍⯡ⓗ࡟ࡣዟ⩏㸧࡟ᑐࡋ࡚᠜␲ⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟ឤയⓗ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜

ࡇࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࢆࠊㄞ⪅ࡢከࡃࡀ඲ࡃࠕ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮࡛ࠖࡣ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ

ࡣࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡞▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢṔྐࡢ୰࡟᭱ࡶ᫂☜࡟⾲ࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࠕ㐍Ṍࢆಁ࡜ࡋ࡚⪃࠼ࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࡀࠊࡇࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡀࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡛ᢏ⾡ⓗ࠿ࡘ⤒῭㐍ࡍࡿࡓࡵࠖ࡟タ⨨ࡉࢀࡓ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࠊᚑ᮶࠿ࡽࠊ㠉᪂࡜᩿⤯ࠊࡍ࡞ⓗ࡞ᙳ㡪ࢆࡶࡓࡽࡍࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࡣࡗࡁࡾࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡼࡃ▱ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࢃࡕఏ⤫࠿ࡽࡢࠕ㐍Ṍᛶࡢ࠶ࡿ ࠖᛴ⃭࡞ኚ໬࡟≉ᶒࢆ୚࠼࡚࠸ࡿࠋ㉳※ࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡣࡲࡓࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡛ࠊᛴ㐍ⓗ࡜ࡉ࠼࠸࠼ࡿ

࡜㛵ࢃࡾࡢ࠶ࡿ⠊ᅖ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚࠸࠼ࡤࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡛ࡣࠊ඾ᆺⓗ࡟ࡣࡑࡢࡼ

ࡼ࠺࡞ᩥ໬ⓗ࠿ࡘ♫఍ⓗ࡞ᙳ㡪ࢆࡶࡓࡽࡍࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙳ㡪ࢆ࠺࡞㉳※ࡀ⌧ᅾ࠶ࡿࡶࡢ࡞ࡢ࠿ࠊࡑࡋ࡚ࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡑࢀࡀᑗ᮶ࡢ㈈ᢚไࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡇࡑࢆࠊᡃࠎࡣዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ࡞▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡟ồࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛࠶

⏘ᶒࡢᇶ♏࡜࡞ࡾ࠺ࡿࡢ࠿ࢆỴᐃࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟㛵ᚰࡀྥࡅࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ㉳※ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙳ㡪࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚᭩࠿ࢀࡓࠊ୙ᛮ㆟࡜ࡀ㐣ཤࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕṔྐୖ࡟Ꮡᅾࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞㈈⏘ᶒࡣ⏕ࡌ㛵㐃ࡍࡿ஧ࡘࡢⴭస࡟࠾࠸࡚㝿❧ࡗ࡚᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑࢀࡣࠊ㼃㼍㼘㼠㼑㼞㻌࡞࠸ࠋ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࠊṔྐࡀ⤊ࢃࡿ࡜ࡇࢁ࠿ࡽጞࡲࡿࠋྠࡌࡃࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡞㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡢⴭྡ࡛࠶ࡾ࠿ࡘᢈホࡢከ࠸  ᖺࡢ࢚ࢵࢭ࢖࡛࠶ࡿ 㼀㼔㼑㻌▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡛ࡣࠊ┿ṇ࡞ཎసရ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ᩗពࢆᡶࢃࡎࠊ௚ࡢࡶࡢ࡜ྠᵝ࡟㼃㼛㼞㼗㻌㼛㼒㻌㻭㼞㼠㻌㼕㼚㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻭㼓㼑㻌㼛㼒㻌㻹㼑㼏㼔㼍㼚㼕㼏㼍㼘㻌㻾㼑㼜㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚ཬࡧ 㻭㼚㼠㼛㼚㼕㼚㻌㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦ࡑࢀࢆࠕࢥࣆ࣮ࠖ࡜࿧ࡪࠋ⡿ᅜࡢⴭసᶒἲࡣࠊ௚࡜ྠࡌࡼ࠺࡟↓ᙧࡢࠕⴭࡢ᭱㏆ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘஦௳࡛࠶ࡿ 㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞㻌 㻯㼛㼞㼜㻚㻌 㼢㻚㻌 㼀㼣㼑㼚㼠㼕㼑㼠㼔㻌 㻯㼑㼚㼠㼡㼞㼥㻌 㻲㼛㼤㻌 㻲㼕㼘㼙㻌స≀ࠖ㸦ཪࡣࢹࢨ࢖ࣥ㸧࡜ࡑࢀࡀᅛᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜ࡇࢁࡢ᭷ᙧࡢࠕࢥࣆ࣮ࠖ

㻯㼛㼞㼜㻚 ࡛ࡢ≉➹ࡍ࡭ࡁពぢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡓࡋ࠿࡟ࠊ㼃㼍㼘㼠㼑㼞㻌 㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚㸦ࢻ࢖ࢶ㸦ཪࡣල⌧㸧࡜ࢆ༊ูࡍࡿࠋ
ࠕཎసရࠖࡢࡇ࡜ࡣཱྀ࡟ࡋ࡞࠸ࠋ⊂≉࡞⤮⏬࡛ࡢ࣐ࣝ࢟ࢫࢺ࡛ᢈุ⌮ㄽᐙ㸧࡜ 㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦㸦⡿ᅜࡢಖᏲⓗ࡞ἲᚊᐙ㸧࡜ࡣࠊ࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ⏬ᐙࡀ୍ᗘࡋ࠿ᥥ࠿࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡶࡢ࡛ࡉ࠼ࠊ⏬ᐙࡢᚰ࡟Ꮡᅾࡋࡲࡓ

ወጁ࡟ࡶࠊࡑࡋ࡚㛫㐪࠸࡞ࡃ㠀ពᅗⓗ࡟ࠊ⌮ㄽୖࡢᥦᦠ㛵ಀ࡟࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿

ࡣᏑᅾࡋ࡚࠸ࡓⴭస≀ᛶࡢ࠶ࡿసရࡢ㸦ࡓࡔ୍ࡘࡋ࠿࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡿ

ࡋࠊ୧⪅ࡣ࡜ࡶ࡟ᡃࠎࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࠊࡑࡋ࡚ᩥ໬ࡢᛴ㐍ⓗ࡞ྍࡀ㸧ࠕࢥࣆ࣮࡛ࠖ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢⴭస≀ࡢಖㆤᮇ㛫ࡀ㐣ࡂࢀࡤࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ⬟ᛶ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚㏙࡭࡚࠸ࡿࠋ

ࡣࠊᚑ᮶࠿ࡽࠊ௚ࡢಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸▱ⓗ๰స≀࡜ྠᵝ࡟ᙜヱⴭస≀ࡀ⮬⏤࡞ࡲࡎࠊ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡢ࢚ࢵࢭ࢖ 㼃㼛㼞㼗㻌 㼛㼒㻌 㻭㼞㼠 ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡓࡔࡁࡓ࠸ࠋ

ࢥࣆ࣮ࡢᑐ㇟࡜ࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡢⅬ࡛ࡣࠊ࠸࠿࡞ࡿⴭస≀ࡇࡢ࢚ࢵࢭ࢖࡛ࡣࠊ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡣⱁ⾡ࡢᨻ἞໬ࠊ≉࡟ࠊᫎ⏬ࡢᨻ἞໬ࢆࠊḢᕞࡶ౛እ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ㐍Ṍⓗ࡞▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ᧦ㆤ⪅ࡢ⪃࠼᪉࠿ࡽࡍࢀࡤࠊⴭస

ࡢࣇ࢓ࢩࢬ࣒࡟ࡼࡿᨻ἞ࡢ⪮⨾୺⩏໬࠿ࡽࡢ㜵ᚚᡭẁ࡜࡞ࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚

≀ࢆࡉࡽ࡟ࢥࣆ࣮ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊࡑࡢⴭస≀ࡢࡶࡘ⊂⮬ᛶࡢ࣮࢜ࣛࢆᦆ࡞࠺

ᮇᚅࡋࡓࠋࡑࡢ㐣⛬࡛ࠊ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡣḟࡢࡼ࠺࡞᭷ྡ࡞୺ᙇࢆᒎ㛤ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ

ࡇ࡜࡛ᙜヱⴭస≀ࢆᐖࡍࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࠿࡜࠸࠺ᠱᛕࡣࠊ⪷࡞ࡿ⾲⌧ࢆࡸࡓ

ᶵᲔⓗ」〇ࡢ᫬௦࡟⾶࠼࡚࠸ࡃࡢࡣࠊⱁ⾡సရࡢ࣮࡛࢜ࣛ࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡣⱁ⾡ࡢ

U.S. CONST. art. I, §8, cl. 8.

35 U.S.C.§103 (2006).ఏ⤫ⓗ࡞㡿ᇦ࠿ࡽ」〇ࡢᑐ㇟ࢆᘬࡁ㞳ࡍ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࠋከࡃࡢ」〇

See 17 U.S.C. § 101㸦ࠕࠗࢥࣆ࣮࠘࡜࠸࠺ᩥゝࡣࠊࣞࢥ࣮ࢻ┙ࡢ࡯࠿ࠊసရࡀ᭱ึ

ࢆసࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ」ᩘࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࡀࠊࡓࡔ୍ࡘࡋ࠿࡞࠸Ꮡᅾ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚࠿ࢃࡿ

㡿ᇦࡢඛࢆᣦࡋ♧ࡍᚩೃ࡜࡞ࡿ㐣⛬࡛࠶ࡿࠋ୍⯡ⓗ࡟࠸࠺࡞ࡽࡤࠊ」〇ᢏ⾡ࡣ࡟ᅛᐃࡉࢀࡓ≀యࢆࡶྵࡴ㺁 ; cf. WALTER BENJAMIN, The Work of Art in the Age of

Mechanical Reproduction, in ILLUMINATIONS 217, 224 (Hannah Arendt ed., Harry Zohntrans., Schocken Books 1968) (1955)㸦ࠕࡇࢀࡲ࡛࡟࡞࠸࡯࡝࡟ࠊⱁ⾡సရࡢ」〇≀ࡣࠊat Once-and Become Famous for It, in MAPPING BENJAMIN: THE WORK OF ART IN THE

See, e.g., Antoine Hennion & Bruno Latour, How To Make Mistakes on So Many Things」〇ࡀྍ⬟࡜࡞ࡿࡼ࠺࡟సࡽࢀࡿࡇ࡜࡜࡞ࡿࠋ෗┿ࡢࢿ࢞ࢆ౛࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ぢࡿ࡜ࠊࡑDIGITAL AGE 91 (Hans Ulrich Gumbrecht & Michael Marrinan eds., 2003).ࡇ࠿ࡽ࠸ࡃࡽ࡛ࡶ෗┿ࢆࣉࣜࣥࢺ࡛ࡁࡿࠋ
ࠗ┿ṇࡢ࠘ࣉࣜࣥࢺࢆồࡵࡿព࿡ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࠖ



BENJAMIN, supra note 158, at 217.

(citation omitted) .

539 U.S. 23 (2003). ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡍࡿ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ᶒ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢពぢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡀ㈶⨾ࡋࡓࠕఏ⤫ⓗ࡞㡿ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ᇦࠖ࠿ࡽࡢ኱ࡁ࡞ኚ໬ࢆ኱࠸࡟ᨭᣢࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࡑࡢ⌮⏤ࡣࠊ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡢぢ᪉࡟ࡼࢀࡤࠊከᩘࡢ」〇ࢆసᡂࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊࡉࡶ࡞ࡅࢀࡤࠕࡓ
㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡀ࠶ࡆࡓࡶࡢ࡜ࡣ඲యⓗ࡟␗࡞ࡿࠋ᭱ࡶព⩏῝࠸ࡢࡣࠊ㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ㸦⨾ࡋ࠸㸧ᑐ㇟≀ࠖࡢࠕ┿ࡔ୍ࡘࡋ࠿࡞࠸Ꮡᅾ࡛ࠖ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽ⏕ࡌࡿ ࠕ஦ࡢពぢࡀࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞኱ࡁ࡞ኚ໬ࡀ᪤࡟㉳ࡇࡗࡓࡶࡢ࡜⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡿⅬ࡛ṇᛶࠖཬࡧࠕᶒጾࠖࡍ࡞ࢃࡕྐᐇᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࠕ࣮࢜ࣛࠖࢆ◚ቯࡍࡿࡢ࠶ࡿࠋ㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ஦௳࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊ㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦ࡣࠊ⿕࿌࡛࠶ࡿ 㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ♫ࡀࣃࣈ࡛࠶ࡿࠋṔྐⓗ㉳※ࡶ࡞ࡅࢀࡤࡓࡔ୍ࡘࡋ࠿࡞࠸࢜ࣜࢪࢼࣝ࡜࠸࠺ࡢࡶᏑ

ࣜࢵࢡࢻ࣓࢖ࣥ࡟࠶ࡿ 㻲㼛㼤 ♫ࡢసရࡢᨵゞ∧ࢆ⮬ᕫࡢⴭస≀࡜ࡋ࡚ไస

ᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠊࠕఏ⤫ⓗ࡞㡿ᇦࠖࡶ࡞ࡅࢀࡤࠊࡑࡢ㡿ᇦࡢ⊂⮬ࡢ⾲⌧࡜࠸࠺ࡢ

ࡋ㈍኎ࡋࡓ㝿ࠊࣜࣂ࣮ࢫ࣭ࣃࢵࢩࣥࢢ࣭࢜ࣇࡣ⾜ࡗ࡚࠸࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡢࡔ࡜ุ

ࡶᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡞ᩥ໬ⓗ⾲⌧ࡢࣞࢪ࣮࣒ࡢ㔜せ࡞᮲௳ࢆࠊ」〇ᢏ⾡ࡣ⠏᩿ࡋࡓࠋࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡟ㄆᐃࡍࡿ㝿ࠊ㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦ࡣࠊ⤒㦂๎ୖࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡣࠊ⮬ࡁୖࡆࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡢࣞࢪ࣮࣒࡛ࡣࠊ௦ࢃࡾ࡟ࠊ」ᩘࡢࠊ኱㔞ࡢࢥࣆ࣮

ࡽࡀᾘ㈝ࡍࡿ᭷ᙧ≀ࡓࡿࢥࣆ࣮࡟ල⌧໬ࡉࢀࡓ↓ᙧࡢ๰స≀ࡢฟᡤ࡟ࡘ

ࡀ࠶ࡿࡔࡅ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ᭱ึ࡟ᡤᣢࡉࢀࡓࡶࡢ࡜ྠࡌ≧ែࡢࡶࡢࡀ␒┠ࠊ࠸࡚࠶ࡲࡾ㛵ᚰࢆࡶࡓ࡞࠸ࡶࡢࡔ࡜୺ᙇࡋࡓࠋ

୓␒┠࡟ࡶ࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡢࡍ࡭࡚ࡀ஫࠸࡟༊ูࡢࡘ࠿࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ

ࣈࣛࣥࢻ〇ရࢆ㉎ධࡍࡿᾘ㈝⪅ࡣࠊࣈࣛࣥࢻྡ࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ఍♫ࡀᙜヱ〇ရࢆࡇࢀ࡟཯ࡋ࡚ࠕ࣮࢜ࣛࠖࢆᖏࡧࡿࡶࡢࡣ୍ࡘࡶ࡞࠸ࠋ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࠊ

Ⓨ᝿ࡋࡓ⪅࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡸࠊᙜヱ〇ရࢆࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡋࡓ⪅࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜

ᶵᲔⓗ」〇ࡣࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ࡛⮬⏤୺⩏ⓗ࡞ᢏ⾡࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᶵᲔⓗ」〇

ࢆᙜ↛࡟᥎ ࡍࡿࢃࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡋࠊ୍⯡ⓗ࡟ࡣࠊࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿ࠿ྰ࠿࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡶ

࡟ࡼࡿࠕᩥ໬ⓗ㑇⏘ࡢఏ⤫ⓗ౯್ࡢΎ⟬ ࠖ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᩥ໬ⓗ⾲⌧ࢆಖᏲⓗ㛵ᚰࡀ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࣛࣥࣁ࣒ἲࡢᩥゝࢆࠊ㉎㈙⪅࡟㏻ᖖᙳ㡪ࢆཬࡰࡉ࡞࠸஦

࡞ࠕ൤ᘧࠖࡢไ⣙࠿ࡽゎᨺࡋࠊ኱⾗ࡢࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊඹ⏘୺⩏ࡢࠕᨻ἞ࠖࡢ
㠉࿨ⓗࢲ࢖ࢼ࣑ࢬ࣒ࢆ௜୚ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ 㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦ࡢ 㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ஦௳࡟࠾ࡅࡿពぢࡣࠊ࠸ࡳࡌࡃࡶᨻ἞ⓗᫎ⏬࡟ᑐ



BENJAMIN, supra note 158, at 221.

See id.㸦ࠕࣔࣀࡢ┿ṇᛶࡣࠊࣔࣀࡢᐇ㉁ⓗ࡞Ꮡ⥆ᮇ㛫࠿ࡽࠊࡑࡢࣔࣀࡀ⤒㦂ࡋ࡚㡯࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡶつไࡢᑐ㇟࡜ࡋ࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ࡼ࠺࡟ࡣᣑᙇゎ㔘ࡍ࡭ࡁ࡛࡞࠸ࠋ

㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦ࡣࠊᑠㄝࡸ 㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ஦௳ࡢࣅࢹ࢜ࢩ࣮ࣜࢬࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࠕࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ
࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡢࡓࡵࡢ〇ရࠖ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡀࠊࠕᙜึࡣࠖࠊㄡࡀࠕ≀㉁ⓗၟရࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚ఏ㐩ࡉࢀࡿࢥࣥࢸࣥࢶࡢไస⪅ࠖ࡞ࡢ࠿࡟ࡘ࠸࡚㛵ᚰࢆࡶࡘࠕࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮
ࡔࢁ࠺࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣㄆࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍 ุ஦ࡣࠊࡁࡓṔྐࢆド᫂ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡟⮳ࡿࡲ࡛ࠊᙜึ࠿ࡽఏ㐩࡛ࡁࡿࡇ࡜ࡢ୰࡛ࡶ᭱ࡶ㔜せ࡞ࢩࣙࣥࡢࡓࡵࡢ〇ရ࡟≉ูࡢಖㆤࢆ୚࠼ࡿࡇ࡜ࠖࡣࠊ᰿ᮏⓗ࡛ඃඛⓗ࡞㒊ศ࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 .

ཎ๎࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢࠊࠕ࠸ࡗࡓࢇⴭసᶒಖㆤᮇ㛫ࡀ‶஢ࡍࢀࡤ」〇ᶒཬࡧⴭస⪅



Id.



See id. at 224.



See Dastar, 539 U.S. at 25-27. Dastar ஦௳ࡢᇶ♏࡜࡞ࡿ஦ᐇࡣḟࡢ࡜࠾ࡾ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ࢆ≉ᐃࡏࡎ࡟」〇ࡍࡿᶒ฼ࠖࡣ㛫㐪࠸࡞ࡃࠕබ⾗࡟ᖐᒓࡍࡿࠖࠊ࡜࠸


ᖺ௦࡟ࠊFox ♫ࡣࠊDwight D. Eisenhower ኱⤫㡿ࡢྠྡࡢⴭ᭩࡟ᇶ࡙࠸ࡓࢸࣞࣅ

㝿࡟ࡣ Fox ♫ࡀไసࡋࡓ〇ရ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊ⮬ᕫࡀไసࡋࡓࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚㈍኎ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓ࡜

␒⤌ࡢࢻ࣓࢟ࣗࣥࢱ࣮ࣜࢩ࣮ࣜࢬ࡛࠶ࡿ Crusade in Europe ࡢⴭసᶒࢆ᭦᪂ࡍࡿࡢ

ࡢ୺ᙇࢆ⾜ࡗࡓࠋId. at 27 (internal quotation marks omitted).

ࢆᛰࡾࠊࡑࡢ⤖ᯝࡑࡢࢸࣞࣅ␒⤌ࢩ࣮ࣜࢬࡣࣃࣈࣜࢵࢡࢻ࣓࢖ࣥ࡟ᖐᒓࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜



Id. at 32-33.

࡞ࡗࡓࠋId. at 26.ᖺ࡟ࠊDastar ♫ࡣࠊWorld War II Campaigns in Europe ࡜㢟ࡋࡓ

Id. at 33.ࣅࢹ࢜ࢩ࣮ࣜࢬࢆ㈍኎ࡋጞࡵࡓࡀࠊࡑࢀࡣ Fox ♫ࡀ࠿ࡘ࡚ไసࡋࡓࢩ࣮ࣜࢬ࡟ᴟࡵ



Id.

࡚㏆ఝࡋࡓ⩻᱌࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊᐇ㉁ⓗ࡟ࡣᢤ⢋࡜࠸࠺࡭ࡁࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊ



Id.

Fox ♫ࡢࢡࣞࢪࢵࢺࢆධࢀ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋId. at 26-27.᭱㧗⿢ࡀᑂ⌮ࡋࡓッゴཎᅉ࡟࠾࠸



Id. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co., 376 U.S. 225, 230 (1964) ࢆᘬ⏝ (internal࡚ࠊFox ♫ࡣ Dastar ♫ࡀࠕࣜࣂ࣮ࢫ࣭ࣃࢵࢩࣥࢢ࣭࢜ࣇࠖࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕ Dastar ♫ࡀᐇ

quotation marks omitted). ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࠺ࡇ࡜࡜▩┪᢬ゐࡍࡿ࡜⤖ㄽ࡙ࡅࡓࠋࡉࡽ࡟ࠊ
ࠕࣛࣥࣁ࣒ἲ D ᮲ࡢࠗฟ㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡢ࢚ࢵࢭ࢖ 㼃㼛㼞㼗㻌 㼛㼒㻌 㻭㼞㼠 ࡜ 㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍㻌ุ஦ࡢ 㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ஦௳࡟࠾ࡅࡿព

ᡤ㸦㼛㼞㼕㼓㼕㼚㸧࠘࡜࠸࠺ᩥゝ࡟ᇶ࡙ࡁࠊⴭసᶒ࡛ಖㆤࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ⴭ

ぢࡣࠊࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡢ⤖ᮎࢆ๓ࡶࡗ࡚♧ࡋࡓ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡀࢃ࠿ࡿࠋ

స⪅ࢆ≉ᐃࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆせồࡍࢀࡤࠊ㔜኱࡞ᐇົୖࡢၥ㢟ࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡍࡇ࡜ࢥࣆ࣮ཬࡧ㡺ᕸࡢᚲせᛶࡣࠊ㔜኱࡞ᢏ⾡ⓗ⤒῭ⓗ㐍Ṍࢆࡶࡓࡽࡍ࡜࡜ࡶ࡟ࠊ

࡟࡞ࡿࠖ࡜㏙࡭ࠊࡑࢀࡣࠕฟᡤ㸦㼛㼞㼕㼓㼕㼚㸧ࠖ࡜࠸࠺ᩥゝࢆ↓ᙧࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡸ

⥅⥆ⓗ࡟ࠕ࣮࢜ࣛࠖࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕ⊂⮬ᛶࡢ࣮࢜ࣛ࡜┿ṇᛶࡢ࣮࢜ࣛࡢ཮᪉ࢆ

ࢥ࣑ࣗࢽࢣ࣮ࢩࣙࣥࡢࡓࡵࡢࢥࣥࢸࣥࢶ࡟ゝཬࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ゎ㔘ࡍࡿྲྀࡾᡶ࠺ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟ྲྀࡾᡶ࠺ࡇ࡜࡛ࠊ⊂⮬ᛶࡢ࠶ࡿ≀ࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸࡜ࠊࠕࠗฟᡤ㸦㼛㼞㼕㼓㼕㼚㸧࠘࡜࠸࠺ᩥゝࡣㄆ㆑ྍ⬟࡞㝈⏺ࡀ࡞࠸ࠖ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜

ࡣ┿ṇ࡞≀ࡢᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙࠿࡞࠸࡛㆑ูࡀ࡞ࡉࢀࡿ♫఍ᵓ㐀ࡢⓎᒎ࡬࡜ᑟࡋࡓࠋ㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍㻌ุ஦ࡣࠊ㻯㼍㼞㼙㼑㼚㻌㻶㼛㼚㼑㼟 ࡢᫎ⏬ࢆ౛࡟ฟࡋࠊ)R[♫ࡀᥦ᱌ࡍࡿ

ࡃࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊ⊂⮬ᛶཬࡧ┿ṇᛶࡣࠊࡶࡣࡸ⥔ᣢ࡛ࡁࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ

ࠕฟᡤ㸦㼛㼞㼕㼓㼕㼚㸧ࠖࡢゎ㔘࡟ࡼࡿ࡞ࡽࡤࠊྠᫎ⏬ࡢࣅࢹ࢜∧࡛ࡣࠊฟᡤ㸦㼛㼞㼕㼓㼕㼚㸧࡞࠸࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࢥࣆ࣮ࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡢ⌮᝿ⓗ࡞᭱⤊ẁ㝵ࡣࠊḞஈࡢ࡞࡜ࡋ࡚ 㻹㻳㻹 ࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊ࡯࠿࡞ࡽࡠ 㻴㼍㼙㼙㼑㼞㼟㼠㼑㼕㼚ࠊ㻮㼕㼦㼑㼠 ཬࡧ 㻹㽴㼞㼕㼙㽴㼑 ࡶ࠸ᩥ໬࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡇ࡛ࡣࠕ」ᩘࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࠖࢆࠊࡑࢀࢆḧࡍࡿࡍ࡭࡚ࡢ⪅ࡀࠕࣛࣥࣁ࣒ἲࡀࢼ࢖
⾲グࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆᣦ᦬ࡋࡓ ࠋ㻿㼏㼍㼘㼕㼍㻌ุ஦ࡣࠊᡤᣢࡋࠊࡇࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࢥࣆ࣮ࢆᡤᣢࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ⤯ᑐⓗ᭷⏝ᛶࢆ௜୚ࡍࡿࡀ

ࣝᕝࡢ※Ἠཬࡧࡑࡢᨭὶࡢࡍ࡭࡚ࢆㄪᰝࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡞ࡇ࡜ࢆồࡵ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜

┦ᑐⓗ᭷⏝ᛶࢆ௜୚ࡋ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡜࡞ࡾࠊゝⴥࢆ᥮࠼ࢀࡤࠊࢥࣆ࣮ࢆᡤᣢࡍ

ࡣᛮࢃࢀ࡞࠸ࠖ࡜⤖ㄽ࡙ࡅࡓࠋ

ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊࡑࡢᩥゝࡀᬯ♧ࡍࡿ࡜࠾ࡾࠊ㆑ูᛶࡢᇶ♏ࢆᙧᡂࡋ࠼࡞ࡃ࡞ࡿ

㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ஦௳ࡣࠊཝ᱁࡞ࠊឤ᝟࡟ື࠿ࡉࢀ࡞࠸୓⬟ࣉࣜࣥࢱ࣮ࡢୡ⏺ࡢឤࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ᛶࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕ࣏ࢫࢺ⏘ᴗ໬᫬௦ࡢࡓࡵ࡟᭱᪂໬ࡉࢀࡓࠕၟရࣇ࢙ࢸ࢕ࢩࢬ
ᡃࠎࡣࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ㐍Ṍⓗഃ㠃࠿ࡽぢࢀࡤᢏ⾡ⓗ⤒῭ⓗ㐍Ṍࢆࡶࡓࡽ࣒ ࠖࡢឤᛶࢆணᮇࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ㻰㼍㼟㼠㼍㼞 ஦௳ࡣࠊసရཬࡧࡑࡢࢥࣆ࣮

ࡍ᭷┈࡞ฟ᮶஦࡜ࡋ࡚࡜ࡽ࠼ࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞♫఍ⓗᩥ໬ⓗᖹ➼໬ࢆࠊྠἲࡀ

ࡢ᭷⏝ᛶࡣᮏ᮶ഛࢃࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ⤯ᑐⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ᬯ♧ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡑࡢ᭷

ῶẅࡍࡿࡼ࠺ồࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࢆ㏻ࡌࠊᡃࠎࡣࠊ

⏝ᛶࡣࠊࡑࡢไసࢆྲྀࡾᕳࡃ≧ἣࠊࡲࡋ࡚ࡸࡑࡢᾘ㈝ࢆྲྀࡾᕳࡃ≧ἣ࡟ᕥࢥࣆ࣮ࢆ෌ᗘ㨩ຊⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ࡋࠊ࡝࠺࡟࠿⊂⮬ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࠿┿ṇ࡞ࡶࡢ࡜ࡍ

ྑࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࢥࣆ࣮⾜ⅭࡢᚲせᛶࡣࠊṔྐࡸ┿ṇᛶ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ࠸࠿ࡿࡓࡵࡢᮏ㉁ⓗ࡞ᡭẁࢆồࡵ࡚࠸ࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢព࿡࡛ࡣࠊ㐍Ṍⓗ▱ⓗ࡞ࡿᠱᛕ࡟ࡶඃඛࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࠸࠿࡞ࡿ࡜ࡁࡶࠊ┿ṇ࠿࡝࠺࠿ࡣ✲ᴟⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ᪉ྥᛶࡣࠊᮏ㉁ⓗ࡟⌧௦ⓗ࡞ࡢ࡟ᑐࡋࠊዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࠊ࡟ࡣࢃ࠿ࡽ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋṔྐ࡟ࡣࠕㄆ㆑ྍ⬟࡞㝈⏺ࡀ࡞࠸ ࠖࡢ࡛࠶ᮏ㉁ⓗ࡟㠀⌧௦ⓗ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇ࡜࠸࠺ಖㆤࡢᙧែࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚ࠊዝౘ⚗ࡿࠋࠕࢼ࢖ࣝᕝࡢ※Ἠࠖࡀ࡝ࡇ࡞ࡢ࠿࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡣ࠾ࢁ࠿ࠊἲ

Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࠊ≉ᐃࡢࢥࣆ࣮ࡣࠊ༢࡞ࡿࢥࣆ࣮࡟ࡍࡂ࡞࠸ࡀࠊ⊂⮬ᛶࡢ㛵ᚰࡢ࠶ࡿ࡜ࡇࢁ࡛ࡶ࡞࠸ࠋᕝࡀὶࢀ࡚ࡉ࠼࠸ࢀࡤࡼ࠸ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ࡢ࣮࢜ࣛࢆࡲ࡜ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡢ▱ぬࢆ⥔ᣢࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶



ࡿࠋ┿ṇࢆᢸಖࡍࡿಖㆤᙧែ࡟ࡼࡾࠊዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࡉࡽ࡟✺ࡁ

Id. at 35. Fox ♫ࡣࠊDastar ♫ࡀࠊࣅࢹ࢜ࢩ࣮ࣜࢬࡢᮏᙜࡢࠕฟᡤࠖࡀ Fox ♫࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆṇࡋࡃ⾲♧ࡋ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡾࠊࣛࣥࣁ࣒ἲ D ᮲ࡢつᐃ࡟㐪཯ࡋࡓ࡜୺ᙇࡋࡓࠋSee id. at 31.


Id.



Id. at 35-36.



ÉTIENNE BALIBAR, THE PHILOSOPHY OF MARX 56 (Chris Turner trans., Verso Books

1995) (1993).
Cf. MAX HORKHEIMER & THEODOR W. ADORNO, DIALEKTIK DER AUFKLÄRUNG 244(1988)㸦ࠕල⌧໬ࡢࡍ࡭࡚ࡣᛀ༷࡛࠶ࡿࠋ
ࠖ Alle Verdinglichung ist ein Vergessenࢆ⩻ヂ
ࡋࡓࡶࡢ

.

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  㐍ࢇࡔ࡜ࡇࢁ࡟⾜ࡃࠋዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣࠊ≉ᐃࡢࢥࣆ࣮࡟ࠊࡑࢀࡀ
ࢥࣆ࣮࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࡴࡋࢁ࢜ࣜࢪࢼ࡛ࣝ࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆ๓ᥦ࡟ࠊ┿ṇᛶࡢ࣮࢜ࣛࢆࡲ࡜ࢃࡏࡿ᪉ἲࢆᥦ౪ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲࡎࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤ࡟
ࡘ࠸࡚⪃ᐹࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡜ࡍࡿࠋ
㹀㸬ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ⾰ᩱရࡑࡢ௚ࡢ᫂ⓑ࡞ᾘ㈝ࡢᙧែ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢ᪂ࡓ࡞ὶ⾜ࢆ⚗Ṇࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡋࡓ❧ἲᶵ㛵ࡣࠊ࣋ࢿࢳ࢔ࡢୖ㝔ࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋᐇ㝿࡟ࡣࠊ㐣ཤࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ዝౘ⚗Ṇయไࡢ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࡇ࡜ࢆ┠ᣦࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࠋ౛࠼
࡟㐺ྜࡉࡏࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡗࡓࡢ࠿ࢆぢᴟࡵࡿࡇ࡜࡜ࡍࡿࠋ

ࡤࠊᖺࡢⱥᅜࡢᕸ࿌࡛ࡣࠊࠕ⾰ᩱရࡢ᪂ࡓ࡞ᙧែࢆ⪃᱌ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ ࠖࢆ୓ே࡟⚗ࡌࠊ୍᪉ࡑࡢ  ୡ⣖ᚋ࡟ࢳ࣮ࣕࣝࢬ  ୡࡀࠕ⾰㢮ࡢὶ⾜ࢆỴࡵᲫᲨࠎ᣷҄Ʒඥႎȷ૨҄ႎಒࣞ̿⡿ᅜࡢၟᶆᑓ㛛ࡢᘚㆤኈව◊✲⪅࡛࠶ࡿࡿỴ㆟࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ ᗘ࡜ኚ᭦ࡍࡿணᐃࡀ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ ࠖࢆᐉゝࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢ㛫ࠊ㻲㼞㼍㼚㼗㻌㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊၟᶆࡢᕼ㔘໬⌧㇟ࢆࠊᮏㄅ࡟ᥖ㍕ࡉࢀ኱࠸࡞ࡿ཯㡪ࢆࢫࢥࢵࢺࣛࣥࢻ㆟఍ࡶᇶᮏⓗ࡟ࡣྠᵝ࡞ࡇ࡜ࢆࡋࡓࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ᪂ࡓ࡞ὶ

࿧ࢇࡔࠕၟᶆಖㆤࡢྜ⌮ⓗ᰿ᣐࠖ࡜㢟ࡍࡿᖺࡢㄽᩥ࡛ᣦ᦬ࡋࠊࡑࡢ⾜ࢆ⚗ࡌࡿࡇ࡜࡟ព࿡ࡀ࠶ࡿࡢࡣࠊ௬࡟ఱࡽ࠿ࡢព࿡ࡀ࠶ࡗࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ

ㄽᩥࡣᮍࡔ࡟⿢ุᡤࡸホㄽᐙ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚⡿ᅜ࡛ࡶ௚ᅜ࡛ࡶ㢖⦾࡟ᘬ⏝ࡉࢀ᪤Ꮡࡢὶ⾜ࡢୗ࡛㆑ู໬ࡀᡂຌࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ㛫ࡔࡅ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊዝ

࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡇ࡛ 㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊᙜ᫬࠿࡞ࡾṇ☜࡟ࠊ⡿ᅜၟᶆἲࡀฟᡤ࡟

ౘ⚗Ṇἲࡣࠊᴫᣓⓗ࡟࠸࠼ࡤ஧ࡘࡢ⚗Ṇ஦㡯࠿ࡽᡂࡾ❧ࡗ࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡑࡢ୍

㛵ࡍࡿᾘ㈝⪅ࡢΰྠࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡋ࠿࡞࠸࡜ࡢពぢࢆ㏙࡭ࡓࠋࡇࢀ

ࡘࡣ᪂ࡓ࡞ὶ⾜ࡢ⚗Ṇ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡶ࠺୍ࡘࡣ᪤Ꮡࡢὶ⾜ࢆ↓チㅙ࡛౑⏝ࡍࡿࡣࠊⴭྡ࡞ၟᶆࡢᶒ฼⪅࡟࡜ࡗ࡚㔜኱࡞ၥ㢟ࢆᥦ♧ࡋࡓࠋᙼࡽࡣࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡇ࡜ࡢ⚗Ṇ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢ⚗Ṇ஦㡯ࡢ  ␒┠ࡢࢱ࢖ࣉࡢ⌧௦∧࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊ⚾࡟ၟရࡢ┿ࡢฟᡤ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢΰྠࡀ⏕ࡌ࡞࠸㝈ࡾࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ⴭྡ࡞ၟᶆ

ࡣࠊࠕᕼ㔘໬ࠖ࡜࠸࠺㢟ྡࡢୗ࡛⪃ᐹࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡜ࡍࡿࠋ

ࢆࠊ௚⪅ࡀ࠶ࡽࡺࡿၟရཬࡧᙺົ࡟⤖ࡧࡘࡅࡿࡇ࡜㸦౛࠼ࡤࠕ㼀㼥㼘㼑㼚㼛㼘 ࢫ ᕼ㔘໬ࡣࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ඲యࡢ୰࡛ࡶ᭱ࡶ⌮ゎࡋ࡟ࡃ࠸ᴫᛕ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡲࡓ

ࣀ࣮࣮࣎ࢻࠊ㻺㼑㼠㼟㼏㼍㼜㼑 ࣏ࣝࣀࢩࣙࢵࣉࠊࡑࡋ࡚ 㻴㼍㼞㼞㼥㻌㻼㼛㼠㼠㼑㼞 ࢻࣛ࢖ࢡ࣮ࣜ᭱ࡶ㔜せ࡞ࡶࡢࡢ࠺ࡕࡢ୍ࡘ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࡇࡢᴫᛕ࡟ṇᙜ࡞ホ౯ࢆ୚࠼ࡿ⪅ࢽࣥࢢ㺁㸧ࢆ㜼Ṇࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡢ࡛ࡁࡿἲⓗᡭẁࢆࡶࡓ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ࡣ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡇࡢᴫᛕࡀ⌮ゎࡋ࡟ࡃ࠸ࡢࡣࠊࡑࢀࡀᮏ㉁ⓗ࡟⤒῭ⓗ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊⴭྡ࡞ၟᶆࡀࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡟฼⏝ࡉࢀࠊ┘どࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡲࡲ࡜࡞

࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᨻ἞ⓗᴫᛕ࡜࠸࠺ࡼࡾࠊグྕㄽⓗᴫᛕ࡛࠶ࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡾࠊẚ㍑ⓗࢀࡤࠊᕷሙ࡟࠾ࡅࡿᙜヱၟᶆࡢ㆑ูᛶࡀࠕᚎࠎ࡟๐ࡾྲྀࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡃ࠿ศᩓ

⌮ゎࡀᐜ᫆࡞࢔࢖ࢹࣥࢸ࢕ࢸ࢕ࡢ☜❧࡜ࡣ࠶ࡲࡾ㛵ࢃࡗ࡚࠾ࡽࡎࠊࡴࡋࢁ

ࠕࡶࡋࠗ㻷㼛㼐㼍㼗࠘ࡀ㢼࿅㔩ࡋ࡚࠸ࡃࠖ⤖ᯝ࡜࡞ࡿ࡜୺ᙇࡋࡓࠋࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ

⌮ゎࡀᐜ᫆࡜ࡣ࠸࠼࡞࠸㆑ูᛶࡢ☜❧࡜㛵ࢃࡿࡶࡢࡔ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢᴫ

ࡸࢣ࣮࢟࡟ࡶ౑⏝ࡉࢀࠊࠗ㻹㼍㼦㼐㼍࠘ࡀ࣓࢝ࣛࡸ㠐࡟౑⏝ࡉࢀࠊཪࡣࠗ㻾㼕㼠㼦㻌ᛕࡀ㔜せ࡞ࡢࡣࠊࡲࡍࡲࡍከࡃࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡀᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢᛶ㉁㻯㼍㼞㼘㼠㼛㼚࠘ࡀࢥ࣮ࣄ࣮࡟౑ࢃࢀࡓࡽࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢၟᶆࡀࠊࡑࡢ࢔࢖ࢹ࢔ࡢ⊂๰ࢆഛ࠼ࡿࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⃭ࡋࡉࢆቑࡍࣈࣛࣥࢻᩥ໬ࡢ୰࡟

ᛶࡸ๰ព࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊࡑࡢゝㄒࡢ࠶ࡾࡩࢀࡓᩥゝࡢ୰࡟⣮ࢀ㎸ࢇ࡛ࡋ࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊၟᶆἲࡀࠊᏛㄝୖࡢ╔᝿ࡢᇶᮏⓗ࡞Ⓨ⏕※࡜ࡋ࡚㢌ゅࢆ⌧ࡋࡘࡘ࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣࠊ㦫ࡃ࡭ࡁࡇ࡜࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡣࡎ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᮏ⠇࡛ᚋ㏙ࡍࡿ࡜




Frank I. Schechter, The Rational Basis of Trademark Protection, 40 HARV. L. REV. 813,࠾ࡾࠊ⚾ࡣࡲࡎᕼ㔘໬࡜࠸࠺⌧㇟ࢆᐃ⩏ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆヨࡳࠊࡑࡢḟ࡟▱ⓗ㈈821-24 (1927).⏘ἲࡢᵝࠎ࡞㡿ᇦࡀᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢᙺ๭ࢆᯝࡓࡍࡼ࠺࡟࡝ࡢࡼ࠺



See, e.g., Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., 537 U.S. 418, 429 (2003) (citing

Schechter, supra note 180); Case C-252/07, Intel Corp. v. CPM U.K. Ltd. (June 26, 2008),




http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/j_6㸦ࠕ஦௳␒ྕࠖࡢ㡯┠࡛ࠕC-252/07ࠖ࡜ධຊࡋࠊ

HUNT, supra note 2, at 120 (quoting HUMPHREY DYSON, A BOOKE CONTAYNING ALL

ࠕSearchࠖࢆ㑅ᢥ , at ¶10 Sharpston ἲົᐁࡢពぢ  Schechter ࡢᕼ㔘໬⌮ㄽ࡟ゝཬࡋ

SUCH PROCLAMATIONS AS WERE PUBLISHED DURING THE REIGN OF THE LATE QUEEN

࡚࠸ࡿ ; Case C-408/01, Adidas-Salomon AG v. Fitnessworld Trading Ltd., 2003 E.C.R.

ELIZABETH No. 168 (1618)) (internal quotation marks omitted).

I-12537, I-12548 Jacobs ἲົᐁࡢពぢ (same); see also TONY MARTINO, TRADEMARKSAMUEL PEPYS, THE DIARY OF SAMUEL PEPYS 427 (Macmillan & Co. 1905)

DILUTION 16 (1996) Schechter ࡢㄽᩥࢆࠕ  ༓ࡶࡢッゴࢆᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡋࡓㄽᩥࠖ࡜⾲(1825)(footnote omitted).

⌧ࡋࡓ .



1621 Scot. Parl. Acts 25 § 13, available at http://www.rps.ac.uk/mss/1621/6/37㸦ࠕ⌧ᅾSchechter, supra note 180, at 821-22.౑⏝ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ⾰㢮ࡢὶ⾜ࡀ⏨ᛶཪࡣዪᛶ࡟ࡼࡾኚ᭦ࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡟࡜ἲᚊ࡛つMattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc., 296 F.3d 894, 903 (9th Cir. 2002).ᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ͐㺁 .



Schechter, supra note 180, at 825.

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡲ࠺ࠖ࡜୺ᙇࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊࢻ࢖ࢶࡢ୙ṇ➇த㜵Ṇࡢุ౛ᛶࠖࡢ⌮ㄽ࡜࠸࠺࡭ࡁࡶࡢࢆᙧᡂࡍࡿ࡟࠶ࡓࡗ࡚ࡢࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡢὝᐹࡢἲࢆࡶ࡜࡟ࠊᕼ㔘໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤࡢⓎᒎࢆၐ࠼ࠊಖㆤࡢᑐ㇟࡜࡞ࡿၟᶆࢆࢥ

୰࡛Ḟࡃࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ࡶࡢࡣࠊ≉ᐃࡢᙧែࡢࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ▱ⓗࣆ࣮ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡣࠊࡑࢀࡀᾘ㈝⪅࡟ฟᡤ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢΰྠࢆ⏕ࡌࡉࡏࡿ࠿ྰ࠿

๰స≀ࡑࡢࡶࡢࡀᦆ࡞ࢃࢀࠊ༢࡟ࡑࢀࢆ๰సࡋࡼ࠺࡜࠸࠺๰స⪅ࡢ࢖ࣥࢭ࡟࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎ⚗ࡌࡽࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡋࡓ ࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟ᥦၐࡍࡿ࡟࠶ࡓ

ࣥࢸ࢕ࣦࡀᦆ࡞ࢃࢀࡿࡔࡅ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆㄆ㆑ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ

ࡾࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊၟᶆࡢࡶࡘゝእࡢព࿡ࡸၟᶆ࠿ࡽ㧗⣭ရࡑࡢ௚ࡢࡶࡢ

ୖ㏙ࡢ࡜࠾ࡾࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡣఏ⤫ⓗ࡟▱ⓗ๰స≀ࡀ஫࠸࡟➇ྜࡏࡎࠊ౑࠸

ࡀ㐃᝿ࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣゐࢀ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡀලయ౛࡜ࡋ࡚࠶

ᯝࡓࡉࢀࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࡜ࡢ๓ᥦ࡟❧ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ๰స⪅ࡀ▱ࡆࡓᕼ㔘໬ࡉࢀࡓၟᶆࡢከࡃࡣࠊ࡜࡚ࡶ㧗⣭ࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡜ࡣ࠸࠼࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡞

ⓗ๰స≀ࢆ๰సࡍࡿ࢖ࣥࢭࣥࢸ࢕ࣦࢆ㧗ࡵࡿࡓࡵ࡟↓チㅙࡢࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ



ࠋࡴࡋࢁ
ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓ㸦౛࠼ࡤࠊཱྀෆὙί๣ࡢࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡛࠶ࡿࠕ㻻㼐㼛㼘㺁 㸧ࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊᙜヱ๰స≀⮬యࡢ᭷⏝ᛶࢆಖㆤࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࡑ࠺ࡍ

ᙼࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤ࡜࠸࠺ࡢࡣࠊ
ࠕၟᶆࡢ⊂⮬ᛶࡸಶูᛶࠖࠊࡑࡢࠕ㠀ࡿࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ఏ⤫ⓗ࡞⌮ㄽࡢᯟ⤌ࡳࡀࠊၟᶆ࡟





ࠊ
ࠕὀពࢆᘬࡃ⊂⮬ᛶ ࠖࢆ⥔ᣢࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ┠ᣦࡋ࡚࡞ࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ซ ࠖ㛵ࡋ࡚ࡣ࠶࡚ࡣࡲࡽ࡞࠸࡜⪃࠼ࡓࠋ࠶࡚ࡣࡲࡽ࡞࠸ࡢࡣࠊ⿕࿌ࡀ↓チㅙ࡛ࡾࠊ࡝ࢀࡔࡅࠕᙜヱၟᶆࡀ௚ࡢၟᶆ࡟ẚ࡭࡚ᐇ㝿࡟⊂⮬ᛶࡀ࠶ࡾ␗࡞ࡿ ࠖၟᶆࢆ౑⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊၥ㢟ࡢၟᶆࡀཎ࿌ࢆ☜ᐇ࡟≉ᐃࡍࡿ⬟ຊࢆᦆ࡞ࢃ

࠿࡟ᛂࡌ࡚࡞ࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜⧞ࡾ㏉ࡋᙉㄪࡋࡓࠋ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊၟᶆࡏࡿ࠿ࡽ࡜࠸࠺༢⣧࡞⌮⏤࡟ࡼࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊ⿕࿌ࡀ↓チㅙ࡛ၟᶆࢆ౑

ࡢᙧᘧⓗ㆑ูᛶࡢಖᣢ࡟ࡢࡳ㛵ᚰࡀ࠶ࡗࡓࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊ௚⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊཎ࿌ࡢࡳࡀ౑⏝ࡋࠊ௚ࡢㄡࡶ౑⏝ࡋ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ၟᶆࡢ⊂⮬⪅ࡶᙜ᫬Ẽࡀࡘ࠸࡚࠸ࡓࡼ࠺࡟ࠊࠕ㠀ᕪู໬ࠖࡢ≉ᚩࢆ᭷ࡍࡿ኱㔞໬ᛶࢆᕼ㔘໬ࡍࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢព࿡࡛ࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊၟᶆࡢ᭷⏝ᛶࡣࡉࢀࡓᩥ໬࡛ࡣࠊ㆑ูᛶࡑࡢࡶࡢࡀ౯್ࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᙼࡢゝⴥ࡛࠸࠼ࡤࠕ㈍ᐇ㝿࡟ࡣ㝈ࡾࡢ࠶ࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊၟᶆࡢ౑⏝ࡣᐇ㝿࡟ࡣ௚⪅࡜➇ྜࡋ࡚ࡋ኎ຊࠖࢆᵓᡂࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆㄆ㆑ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ࡲ࠺ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡟Ẽࡀࡘ࠸ࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡇ࡜ࢆᇶ♏࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊၟᶆࡢࡓࡵࡢࠊࡑࡋ࡚ᬯ࡟ᾘ㈝⪅ࡢࡓࡵࡢࠊせ⣙ࡍࢀࡤࠕ⊂⮬ᛶࡢᚲせ

㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊࠕ㸦ၟᶆࡢ ಖㆤࡢᮏᙜࡢྜ⌮ⓗ᰿ᣐࠖࡣࠊ௦᭰ᛶࡢ࠶ࡿࢥࣆ
࣮⾜Ⅽࡢ㜵Ṇ࡜࠸࠺ࡼࡾࠊࡴࡋࢁᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃၟᶆࡢࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢ㜵ṆId. at 830 (footnote omitted).



See id. at 831-32.



Id. at 830.



Id. at 822.

Id. at 831.

 ၟᶆࡀ௚ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ࡢᙧែ࡜ẚ࡭࡚ወጁ࡞≉ᚩࢆ᭷ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽࡍࢀ



Id. at 830.

ࡤࠊၟᶆᑓ㛛ᘚㆤኈࡀࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ࡢᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢ㔜せId. at 831.

See, e.g., WARREN I. SUSMAN, CULTURE AS HISTORY: THE TRANSFORMATION OFᛶ࡟ὀ┠ࡋࡓ᭱ึࡢ⪅࡛࠶ࡗࡓ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣ⣡ᚓࡢ࠸ࡃࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡲAMERICAN SOCIETY IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY 271-85 (1973); T.J. Jackson Lears, From
Salvation to Self-Realization: Advertising and the Therapeutic Roots of the Consumer Cul-࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡢ⌮⏤ࡣࠊ๓⪅ࡀᾘ㈝⪅ࢆΰྠࡉࡏࡿ࡟ࡍࡂ࡞࠸ࡢ࡟ᑐࡋࠊᚋ
⪅ࡣၟᶆࡢࠕ㈍኎ຊࠖࢆ◚ቯࡍࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺࠿࡞ࡾ㦫ࡃ࡭ࡁ⤖ㄽ࡟㐩ࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡀࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡢၟᶆ࡬ࡢഴಽࡢ⤖ᯝ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ

ࡓࠊၟᶆᑓ㛛ᘚㆤኈࡀࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡟ὀ┠ࡋࡓࡢࡀすḢࡢ⏘ᴗ⤒῭࡟࠾࠸࡚ᾘ
㈝⪅ྥࡅ〇ရࡢ኱㔞⏕⏘ཬࡧ኱つᶍᗈ࿌ࡀᐇ㝿࡟ᗈࡀࡗ࡚࠸ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ

ture, 1880-1930, in THE CULTURE OF CONSUMPTION: CRITICAL ESSAYS IN AMERICANHISTORY, 1880-1980, at 1 (Richard Wightman Fox & T.J. Jackson Lears eds., 1983).



See STEPHEN CROOK, JAN PAKULSKI & MALCOLM WATERS, POSTMODERNIZATION:Snyder, supra note 35, at 11.CHANGE IN ADVANCED SOCIETY 47-48 (1992); see also JONGRYUL CHOI, POSTMODERNSchechter, supra note 180, at 831㸦ࠕၟᶆࡢ⊂⮬ᛶࡢ⥔ᣢࡔࡅࡀࠊၟᶆಖㆤࡢྜ⌮ⓗ

AMERICAN SOCIOLOGY: A RESPONSE TO THE AESTHETIC CHALLENGE 5-7 (2004).᰿ᣐ࡜࡞ࡿ࡜࠸࠺࡭ࡁ࡜࠸࠺ᡃࠎࡢ⤖ㄽࠖ࡟ゝཬࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .





Schechter, supra note 180, at 819.

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  

See id. at 830.

▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ᖺ௦࡛࠶ࡗࡓ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࡇ࡜ࡶ࠺࡞ࡎࡅࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣᕼ㔘ၥ㢟୍⯡࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣㄒࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࡀ࡞ࡃࠊࡲࡋ࡚ࡸࡑࡢᩥ໬ⓗᙳ㡪࡟ࡘ࠸࡚໬ࡢ୰࡛ࡶၟᶆࡢᕼ㔘໬࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢࡳㄒࡗ࡚࠾ࡾࠊ㔜せ࡛ࡣ࠶ࡿࡅࢀ࡝ࡶࠊ

ࡶㄒࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࡀ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛ࠊၟᶆἲ௨እࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢศ㔝࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊᙼࡢ

࠾ࡑࡽࡃࡼࡾ୍⯡ⓗ࡞ᩥ໬ⓗ≧ἣ࡜࡞ࡗࡓࡶࡢࡢึᮇࡢᚩೃࡢ୍ࡘࢆᣦ

ᕼ㔘໬ࡢᴫᛕࢆ᏶඲࡟ᾘ໬྾཰ࡋࡓࡇ࡜ࡣ࡞࠸ࠋࡴࡋࢁࠊၟᶆἲ௨እࡢ▱᦬ࡋࡓ࡟ࡍࡂ࡞࠸ࠋࡑࡢᩥ໬ⓗ≧ἣ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊ௨᮶ࠊ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ௚ࡢⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢศ㔝࡛ࡑࡢᴫᛕࢆ෌ᗘ๰ࡾฟࡍ㐣⛬࡟࠶ࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

㡿ᇦ࡟࠾࠸࡚ᑐฎࡍࡿࡼ࠺せㄳࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓࠋࡉࡽ࡟኱㞧ᢕ࡟⌮ゎࡍࡿ࡞ࡽࡤࠊᕼ㔘໬ࡣࠊᖹ➼໬ࡢࣉࣟࢭࢫࢆ♧ࡍࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࢀࡣᾐ㏱స⏝ࡢ୍ᲬᲨࠎ᣷҄᧸ഥඥƱƠƯƷՠ೅ඥ̿⓶⫗࡞ࡇ࡜࡟ࠊᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢ

✀࡟㏆࠸ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᡃࠎࡢᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃ༊ูࡢไᗘࡣࠊᖹ➼໬ࡢࣉࣟࢭ

ᶵ⬟ࢆᯝࡓࡍࡇ࡜ࢆᡃࠎࡀᮇᚅࡍࡿ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ୍ศ㔝ࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕၟᶆἲ

ࢫ࡟ࡼࡾࠊၟရ໬ྍ⬟࡞ᕪ␗ࡢᙧែࢆ⥅⥆ⓗ࡟᥈ࡋฟࡋࠊ」〇ࡋࠊࡑࡋ࡚

ࡢ୰࡛ࡲࡉ࡟ᡃࠎࡀࠕᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲࠖ࡜࿧ࡪ㒊ศࡀࠊࡑࡢ࡜࠾ࡾࡢᶵ⬟ࢆᬑཬࡉࡏࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ⌧௦࡛ࡣࡲࡉ࡟ᾘ㈝࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃ༊ูࡢྍ⬟ᛶࡑࡢࡶᯝࡓࡉ࡞࠸ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡑࡢࡓࡵࠊ௚ࡢ㛫᥋ⓗ࡞ᙧែ࡛ࡢᕼ㔘໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤ

ࡢࢆ⬣࠿ࡍࡼ࠺࡞㏿ᗘཬࡧᆅ⌮ⓗ⠊ᅖ࡛ࡶࡗ࡚ၟရ໬ྍ⬟࡞ᕪ␗ࡢᙧែ

ࢆࠊၟᶆἲཬࡧࡑࡢ௚ࡢศ㔝࡛Ⓨᒎࡉࡏࡿᚲせᛶࡀ⏕ࡌࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇ

ࢆᖹซ࡞ࡶࡢ࡬࡜ኚ࠼࡚ࡋࡲ࠺ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᕼ㔘໬ࡣࠊゝⴥࢆ᥮࠼ࢀࡤࠊࢥ

ࡢࡼ࠺࡞ᙧែ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌࡿ๓࡟ࠊ⚾ࡣࠊࡲࡎᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢၟᶆ

ࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢ࢖ࢹ࢜ࣟࢠ࣮ࡢ♫఍ⓗᩥ໬ⓗᙳ㡪ࢆ♧ࡍࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ

ἲࡀࡑࡢྡࡢ࡜࠾ࡾࡢാࡁࡀ࡛ࡁ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࡇ࡜࡟ࡘ࠸࡚⪃ᐹࡋࡓ࠸ࠋ

㻮㼑㼚㼖㼍㼙㼕㼚 ࡀࠕΎ⟬ࠖࢆゎᨺⓗ࡜࡜ࡽ࠼ࡓࡢ࡟ᑐࡋࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬㏆ᖺࡢᐇドⓗ◊✲࡟ࡼࡾ☜ㄆࡉࢀࡓ࡜ࡇࢁ࡟ࡼࢀࡤࠊ6FKHFKWHUࡢ᫬ࢆつไࡋ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࡀࠊ₯ᅾⓗ࡟◚⁛ࢆᣍࡃࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚࡜ࡽ࠼ࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ

௦࠿ࡽᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢၟᶆἲࡣࠊ⡿ᅜ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊእᅜ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ࡜ྠ

ࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞࡜ࡽ࠼᪉ࡣ⌧ᅾࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲࡢ኱㒊ศ࡜ྠᵝ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽ

ᵝ࡟Ṛᩥ໬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࡀࢃ࠿ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡟Ṛᩥࡤࠊᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡀࠊ༢࡟ၟᶆࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊⴭస≀㸦౛࠼ࡤࠊ

ᑠㄝࠊᘓ⠏≀ࠊᴦ᭤ࠊᫎ⏬࡞࡝ࠊࡑࡢᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡀࠊࡇࢀࡽࡢᣢࡘ⊂⮬ᛶࡢࡳ࡞ࡽࡎࡑࢀࢆᾘ㈝⪅࡟୚࠼ࡿ⬟ຊࡉ࠼ࡶᦆ࡞࠺

& CONTEMP. PROBS. 611, 612 (2008)㸦ࠕᕼ㔘໬ࡀ㸦࢖ࣥࢻ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ㸧ࣃࢵࢩࣥࢢ࣭࢜

࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ㸧ཬࡧ≉チࡢᑐ㇟࡜࡞ࡗࡓࡶࡢ㸦౛࠼ࡤࠊࣂ࢖࢜ࢸࢡ
ࣀࣟࢪ࣮ࠊࢯࣇࢺ࢙࢘࢔ࠊព໶࡞࡝ࠊࡑࡢᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽ

Cf. Dev Gangjee, The Polymorphism of Trademark Dilution in India, 17 TRANSNAT’L L.

ࣇࢆ⫼ᬒ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡣࡧࡇࡿ≧ἣࡢ୰ࠊࡑࢀࡀ⣛వ᭤ᢡࢆ⤒࡚ἲ௧࡟ࡼࡾ౵ᐖ⾜Ⅽࡢ୍ᙧែ࡜ᐃࡵࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗࡓࡶࡢ࡜ᛮࢃࢀࡿ㹿㺁 .
See Barton Beebe, The Continuing Debacle of U.S. Antidilution Law: Evidence from theࡀࠊࡑࡢᶒ฼⪅ࡀࠕᣢ⥆ⓗ࡞ᕪู໬ࠖࢆ୺ᙇࡍࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡲ࡛ࡣᐖࡉ࡞࠸࡟

First Year of Trademark Dilution Revision Act Case Law, 24 SANTA CLARA COMPUTER &ࡋ࡚ࡶࡑࢀ⮬యࡢ㆑ูᛶࢆᐖࡍࡿ࠿ࡶࡋࢀ࡞࠸ࡶࡢ㸧࡟ࡶᐖࢆ୚࠼ࡿྍ

HIGH TECH. L.J. 449 (2008); see also Clarisa Long, Dilution, 106 COLUM. L. REV. 1029

⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡣᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢ

(2006) ᖺ࠿ࡽᖺ࡟࠿ࡅ࡚ࠊᕼ㔘໬࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃㄳồࡀㄆᐜࡉࢀࡓᩘ࡟┠❧ࡗࡓῶᑡࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆⓎぢࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .







Remedy in Search of a Wrong, 21 INTELL. PROP. J. 49, 72 (2007) ࢝ࢼࢲ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊࢢࢵ

See generally JACKSON LEARS, FABLES OF ABUNDANCE: A CULTURAL HISTORY OF

See, e.g., William Michael Darling, Depreciation in Canadian Trade-Mark Law: A

ADVERTISING IN AMERICA 218-34 (1994).ࢻ࢘࢕ࣝࡢ౯್ࡢୗⴠࢆ⌮⏤࡜ࡍࡿἲᐃࡢッゴཎᅉ࡟ᑐࡍࡿྖἲ⏺ࡢ㛵ᚰࡀ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࢆᣦ᦬ ; Gangjee, supra note 201, at 611 ᖺ࡟ຠຊࢆ⏕ࡌ࡚࠿ࡽࠊ࢖ࣥࢻࡢ

See, e.g., Ice Music Ltd. v. Schuler, No. 95 CIV. 4669 (KMW), 1995 WL 498781, at *3(S.D.N.Y. Aug. 21, 1995) ⿕࿌ࡢ⾜ⅭࡀࠕIce Music ♫ࡢⴭసᶒࡢ౯್ࡢᕼ㔘໬ࠖࢆᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢἲᚊ᮲㡯࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊࠕᡭࢆࡘࡅࡿ⪅ࡀ࠾ࡽࡎࠊࡑࡢከࡃࡣ༙ୡ⣖ࡶᣍࡃ࡜ࡢཎ࿌ࡢ୺ᙇ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿ(internal quotation marks omitted) .

ࡢ㛫ᨺࡗ࡚࠾࠿ࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠖࡇ࡜ࢆᣦ᦬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Kenneth L. Port, Trademark Dilutionࠕ᪥ᮏࡢ⿢ุᐁࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬࡜in Japan, 4 NW. J. TECH. & INTELL. PROP. 228, 231 (2006)㸦

ࢸࢡࣀࣟࢪ࣮఍♫࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࡢࠕᣢ⥆ⓗ࡞ᕪู໬ࠖࡢ㔜せᛶ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ㆟ㄽ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊsee Ronald J. Mann, Do Patents Facilitate Financing in the Software Industry?, 83࠸࠺ᴫᛕ࡟ᮏ㉁ⓗ࡟ಙ㢗ࢆᐤࡏ࡚࡞࠸ࡼ࠺࡟ᛮࢃࢀࡿࠋ᪥ᮏࡢ⿢ุᐁࡣࠊἲᚊࢆᩥ

TEX. L. REV. 961, 974-97 (2005).ゝ㏻ࡾ㐺⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ᾘᴟⓗ࡞ࡼ࠺࡛࠶ࡾࠊࡑࡢ௦ࢃࡾࠊၟᶆᶒࡢᣑᙇࢆไ㝈ࡍࡿ ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ໬ࡋࡓ୺࡞⌮⏤࡜ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊࡇࡢศ㔝ࡢၟᶆ⌮ㄽ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚ࠊᡃࠎࡢ⌮ゎࡀ⤒ࡢㄽᩥࢆᚊ⩏࡟ᘬ⏝ࡍࡿࡀࠊၟᶆἲࡢุ౛ࡸゎㄝ᭩࡛ࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬࡜࠸࠺ᴫ῭ᑓ㛛ᐙⓗ࡞㌿᥮ࢆ㏄࠼ࡓࡇ࡜ࡀ࠶ࡆࡽࢀࡿࠋከࡃࡢᅜ࡛ࡣࠊ⡿ᅜࡶྵࡵࠊ

ᛕࡀࠊ୺࡜ࡋ࡚ὶ⾜ࡢࣉࣟࢭࢫࡢ⌮ㄽ࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃࡶࡢ࠿ࡽࠕ᳨⣴ࢥࢫࢺࠖࡢ

ၟᶆࢆᕼ㔘໬࠿ࡽಖㆤࡍࡿἲᚊࢆఱࡽ࠿ࡢᙧ࡛ᡂᩥ໬ࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊḢᕞ㐃⌮ㄽ࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃࡶࡢ࡬࡜ኚ㉁ࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋᡃࠎࡣຠ⋡໬ࡢᯟ⤌ࡳ࡟ᕼ㔘໬ྜࡶྠᵝ࡛࠶ࡿ ࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇ࡜࠸࠺ッゴཎᅉ⮬యࡣࠊୡ⏺୰ࡢࡢᴫᛕࢆ࠶࡚ࡣࡵࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊᕼ㔘໬ࢆ࠸ࢃࡺࡿࠕࡰࡸ࠿ࡋࠖ
ࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ

⿢ุᡤ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ⥅⥆ⓗ࡟᢬ᢠࢆཷࡅࠊ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝↓ຠ࡟㏆࠸ࡶࡢ࡜࡞ࡗ࡚

⿕࿌ࡀཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆ࡜㢮ఝࡢཪࡣ඲ࡃྠ୍ࡢၟᶆࢆ౑⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ

࠸ࡿ ࠋࡇࢀ࡟ࡣ༢⣧࡞⌮⏤ࡀ࠶ࡿࠋᡃࠎࡣࠊᮍࡔ࡟ 㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡢᖺ

ࡇ࡜ࢆពᅗࡋ࡚௚ࡢ᪉ἲࢆ㏣ồࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡼ࠺࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 .

ཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆ࡜ཎ࿌⮬㌟࡜ࡢ┤᥋ࡢ⤖ࡧࡘࡁࢆࠕࡰࡸ࠿ࡍࠖ࡜࠸࠺ほⅬ࠿ࡽࠊㄒࡿࡇ࡜࡜࡞ࡗࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀࡣࠊ⿬㏉ࡏࡤࠊᾘ㈝⪅࡟ᑐࡋࠊᙜヱၟᶆࢆཎ࿌࡜⤖ࡧࡘࡅࡿ๓࡟ࠕ୍▐⪃࠼ࡿࠖࡇ࡜ࢆせồࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜⪃࠼ࡽࢀࠊSee, e.g., 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c) (2006); The Trade Marks Act, 1999, No. 47 § 29(4)(c),ࡇࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᾘ㈝⪅ࡢࠕ᝿ീࢥࢫࢺࠖࢆቑຍࡉࡏࠊຠ⋡ࢆୗࡆࡿࡇ࡜࡟

Current Indian Statutes [C.I.S.], 2000 (India); Trade Marks Act 2002, 2002 Statutes of New࡞ࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊࡶ࡜ࡶ࡜ࡣࠊࣈࣛࣥࢻၟရྠኈཬࡧࡑࢀࢆᾘ㈝ࡍࡿ⪅Zealand [S.N.Z.] No. 49 § 89(1)(d) (N.Z.); Trade Marks Act 194 of 1993 § 34(1)(c) (S.

ྠኈࡢᕪู໬ࢆಁ㐍ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟タィࡉࢀࡓἲᚊࡀࠊࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡜ࡑࡢၟရࢆ

Afr.); Trademark Act, Act No. 4210 art. 7 § 1(12) (1990) (S. Kor.); Trademark Act art. §12,⤖ࡧࡘࡅࡿࡇ࡜ࢆಁ㐍ࡍࡿἲᚊ࡜ࡋ࡚⌮ゎࡉࢀࡿࡶࡢ࡬࡜ኚ࠼ࡽࢀࡓࡢ࡛



available at http://www.tipo.gov.tw/en㸦ࠕLaws & Regulationsࠖࡢࣁ࢖ࣃ࣮ࣜࣥࢡࢆࡓ࡝
ࡾࠊḟ࡟ࠕTrademarkࠖࡢࣁ࢖ࣃ࣮ࣜࣥࢡࢆࡓ࡝ࡾࠊࡑࡢḟ࡟ࠕTrademark Act of 2003ࠖ
ࡢᚋࡢࠕEnglishࠖࡢࣁ࢖ࣃ࣮ࣜࣥࢡࢆࡓ࡝ࡿ (Taiwan); Decree-Law No. 556 Pertaining࠶ࡿࠋࡇࢀ࡟ࡼࡾၟᶆࡢ⌮ㄽᐙࡀࠊၟᶆࡣ⤯ᑐⓗ᭷⏝ᛶࡋ࠿୚࠼ࡎࠊၟ
ᶆࡣࡑࢀࡀ௜ࡉࢀࡓၟရࡢฟᡤࢆ♧ࡍ௨ୖࡢࡇ࡜ࡣࡋ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺ࣇ࢕ࢡ

to the Protection of Trademarks, as amended by Law No. 4128 of June 27, 1995, art. 9(c)ࢩࣙࣥࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡀᚲṚ࡟᤼㝖ࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡋࡓࣇ࢕ࢡࢩࣙࣥࢆ

(Turkey).୰ᅜ࡟ࡣࡲࡔἲᚊୖࠊᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢ᫂ᩥつᐃࡀᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࠋSee Luckie⥔ᣢࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀྍ⬟࡜࡞ࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋࠊ⤖ᯝ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊ㆑ูᛶࡸ⊂Hong, China’s Dilution of the Dilution Doctrine, WORLD TRADEMARK REV., April/May⮬ᛶࢆࠊఱࡽ࠿ࡢ♫఍ⓗ౯್࠶ࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ಖㆤࡋࡼ࠺࡜⪃࠼ࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺

2009, at 24, 25; Jing “Brad” Luo & Shubha Ghosh, Protection and Enforcement of⿢ุᐁ㸦ࡲࡶ࡞ࡃᙼࡽࡀ☜ᐇ࡟ࡑ࠺ࡋࡼ࠺࡜⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡀࢃ࠿

Well-Known Mark Rights in China: History, Theory and Future, 7 NW. J. TECH. & INTELL.
PROP. 119, 155 (2009).





See, e.g., Moseley, 537 U.S. at 425 (internal quotation marks omitted).

(EC) [hereinafter Trade Marks Directive].

Richard A. Posner, When Is Parody Fair Use?, 21 J. LEGAL STUD. 67, 75 (1992); seealso Ty Inc. v. Perryman, 306 F.3d 509, 511 (7th Cir. 2002) (Posner, J.) ᳨⣴ࢥࢫࢺࡢཎ

Parliament and Council Directive 2008/95, arts. 4(4)(a), 5(2), 2008 O.J. (L 299) 28, 29
See, e.g., Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc., 537 U.S. 418 (2003) ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࢆ୺ᙇࡍࡿཎ࿌࡟ᑐࡋࠊᕼ㔘໬ࡢ࠾ࡑࢀࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࡼࡾࡶࡴࡋࢁᕼ㔘໬ࡋࡓ࡜ࡢ஦ᐇࡢ

⌮࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿ ド᫂ࢆồࡵ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Case C-252/07, Intel Corp. v. CPM U.K. Ltd. (Nov. 27, 2008),



http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/jcms/j_6㸦ࠕCase noࠖࡢ㡯┠࡛ࠕC-252/07ࠖ࡜ධຊࡋࠊ
ࠕSearchࠖࡋ࡟ࡼࡿᕼ㔘໬࡟㛵ࡍࡿࡼࡾㄝᚓຊࡢ࠶ࡿㄝ࡛᫂࠶ࡿࡶࡢࡢࠊᮍࡔ࡟⿢ุᡤ࡟᥇⏝LANDES & POSNER, supra note 71, at 207 (internal quotation marks omitted). ࡰࡸ࠿ࢆ㑅ᢥ , at ¶ 77 ⿢ุᡤࡢุ᩿  ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࢆ୺ᙇࡍࡿཎ࿌࡟ᑐࡋࠊ⿕࿌ࡢၟᶆࡀ

ࡉࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊsee Laura R. Bradford, Emotion, Dilution, and the Trademark

ᖹᆒⓗᾘ㈝⪅ࡢ⤒῭ⓗάື࡟ኚ໬ࢆ୚࠼ࡓࡇ࡜ཪࡣኚ໬ࢆ୚࠼ࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ

Consumer, 23 BERKELEY TECH. L.J. 1227 (2008).࡜ࡢドᣐࢆᥦฟࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆせồࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin v. BoutiquesSee, e.g., Louis Vuitton Malletier v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc., 340 F. Supp. 2d 415,

Cliquot Ltée, [2006] 1 Supreme Court Reports [S.C.R.] 824 (Can.) ࢢࢵࢻ࢘࢕ࣝࡢ౯್

450-51 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) ⿕࿌ࡢ⾜Ⅽࡀཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆࡢࠕ㆑ูᛶࠊ᤼௚ᛶࠊ౯್ཬࡧᮃ

ࡢୗⴠࡣ࡞࠸࡜ุ᩿ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Remo Imports Ltd. v. Jaguar Cars Ltd., [2008] 2 Federal

ࡲࡋࡉࠖ(id. at 450)ࢆῶᑡࡍࡿ࠿࡝࠺࠿ࢆၥ࠺ᕼ㔘໬ࡢ࢔ࣥࢣ࣮ࢺࢆࠕ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝㔜

Courts Reports [F.C.] 132 (Can.) ྠ๓ ; Raymond Ltd. v. Raymond Pharms. Private Ltd.,

どࡋ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠖ(id. at 451)ࠋࡑࡢ⌮⏤࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ≉࡟ࠊࠕၟᶆࡢᮃࡲࡋࡉࡣࠊၟᶆࡀࠊ

(2007) Patents and Trade Marks Cases [P.T.C.] 35 (Bom.) 334 (High Ct. of Bombay, India)

Louis Vuitton ࡢࣁࣥࢻࣂࢵࢢࢆ≉ᐃࡋ௚࡜༊ูࡍࡿ⬟ຊ࡜㛵㐃ࡋ࡞࠸ࠖࡇ࡜ࢆ࠶ࡆ

ᕼ㔘໬ࡣ࡞࠸࡜ุ᩿ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

࡚࠸ࡿࠋid. at 450-51 .

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡿ㸧ࡀࠊࠕෆ㒊ⓗ࡞᳨⣴ࢥࢫࢺࠖࡀࢃࡎ࠿࡟ቑຍࡍࡿࡔࡅ࡛࠶ࢀࡤ⚗ࡎ

ࠕⓎ⏕ࡍࡿྡኌࡢపୗࠖ࡞ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

࡭ࡁᐖᝏࡀ࡞࠸࡜ࡢ⪃࠼࠿ࡽࠊࡴࡋࢁၟᶆࡢᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢッゴཎᅉ࡟ᑐࡋ

౛࠼ࡤࠊ㈍኎ᚋࡢΰྠࡢ⌮ㄽ㸦࣏ࢫࢺࢭ࣮ࣝࢫࢻࢡࢺࣜࣥ㸧࡟ࡘ࠸࡚⪃࡚ࡣ෭ῐ࡞ࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⓶⫗࡞ࡇ࡜࡟ࠊᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢッゴཎᅉ࡜࠸࠺ᙉຊ࡞

࠼࡚࠸ࡓࡔࡁࡓ࠸ࠋࡇࡢ⌮ㄽࡣࠊࡓ࡜࠼ᾘ㈝⪅ࡀࠊ㈍኎᫬࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ⮬ࡽ㜵ᚚཬࡧࡑࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚୚࠼ࡽࢀࡿ௜ຍⓗ࡞㈈⏘ᶒࢆᥦ౪ࡋࡼ࠺࡜᳨⣴ࢥࡀ㉎ධࡍࡿၟရࡢ┿ࡢฟᡤ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ΰྠࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠿ࡗࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ௚ࡢᾘ

ࢫࢺࡢཎ⌮ࢆ㏣ồࡋࡓ⌮ㄽᐙ⮬㌟ࡀࠊ࠿࠼ࡗ࡚ࡑࡢཎ⌮ࢆⴿࡗ࡚ࡋࡲࡗࡓ

㈝⪅ࡀࠊ㈍኎ࡢᚋ࡟ࠊᙜヱၟရࡢฟᡤ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ΰྠࡍࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜ࡍ

࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡟࡞ࡿ ࠋ

ࡿࠋ᭱㏆ࡢ୰ᅜࡢุ౛ἲ࠿ࡽලయ౛ࢆ♧ࡍ࡜ࠊ㻿㼔㼍㼚㼓㼔㼍㼕㻌 㻺㼛㻚㻌 㻝㻌 㼅㼍㼛㼔㼍㼚㻌ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢッゴཎᅉ⮬యࡣኻᩋ࡛࠶ࡿ࡟ࡏࡼࠊ⿢ุᡤࡣၟᶆἲࡢ௚ࡢ

㻰㼑㼜㼍㼞㼠㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌 㻿㼠㼛㼞㼑 ࡛ 㻳㼡㼏㼏㼕 ࡢ㠐ࡢᶍೌရࢆ㉎ධࡋࡓ⪅ࡣࠊࡑࡢ㠐ࡢ┿ࡢฟ㒊ศࢆ࠺ࡲࡃ฼⏝ࡋ࡚ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲࡀࡶ࡜ࡶ࡜ᢸ࠺ࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ᮇᚅࡉࢀ

ᡤࢆࡶࡕࢁࢇΰྠࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊලయⓗ࡟ࡣࡑࡢ㠐ࡢ࢖ࣥࢯ࣮ࣝ

࡚࠸ࡓㄪᩚᶵ⬟ࢆᯝࡓࡏࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢ㐣⛬ࡢ୰࡛ࠊ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊᕼ㔘࡟ࡣࡗࡁࡾ࡜ࠕ㻿㼑㼚㼐㼍ࠖ㸦୰ᅜࡢⴭྡ࡞㠐ࡢ〇㐀ᴗ⪅㸧ࡢၟᶆࡀ௜ࡉࢀ࡚࠾

໬࠿ࡽࡢಖㆤࡢᇶ♏࡜࡞ࡿ♫఍⌮ㄽࢆ࡞࠾ࡉࡽ᫂☜࡟ࡋࡓࠋࡇࡢࡇ࡜ࡣࠊ

ࡾࠊࢹࣃ࣮ࢺෆࡢࠕ㻿㼑㼚㼐㼍ࠖࡢᲴ࡛ẚ㍑ⓗᏳ࠸್ẁ࡛኎ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛

⿢ุᡤࡀᇶᮏ࡛࠶ࡿΰྠ㜵Ṇࡢッゴཎᅉ㸦⿕࿌ࡢၟရࡢ┿ࡢฟᡤ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ࠶ࡿࠋࡋ࠿ࡋ࡞ࡀࡽࠊ୰ᅜࡢ⿢ุᡤࡣḟࡢ࡜࠾ࡾㄝ᫂ࡋࡓ㸸ᾘ㈝⪅ࡢΰྠࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ┠ᣦࡍࡶࡢ㸧ࢆࠊ௦᭰ᛶࢆ⏕ࡌࡉࡏࡿࢥࣆ



࣮⾜Ⅽࡼࡾࡶࡴࡋࢁᕼ㔘໬ࢆ⏕ࡌࡉࡏࡿࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿࡶᾘ㈝⪅ࡀၥ㢟ࡢ㠐ࢆᒚ࠸࡚࠸ࡿ㛫ࠊ㏻⾜ேࡣ㊊ࡢୗ࡟㞃ࢀࡓࠕ㻿㼑㼚㼐㼍㻙㼣㼛㼙㼍㼚ࠖࡢ࡬࡜ࠊᵝࠎ࡞᪉ἲ࡛ᣑᙇࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽ᭱ࡶࡼࡃぢ࡚ྲྀࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁ

ࡢࣛ࣋ࣝࢆぢࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁ࡞࠸ࡶࡢࡢࠊ㸦㻳㼡㼏㼏㼕 ࡢ㸧஧ࡘࡢ 㻳 ࡢ㔜࡞ࡾྜࡗࡓ
ࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࡀୖ㒊ࡢᕸ࡟࠶ࡿࡢࢆࡣࡗࡁࡾ࡜ㄆ㆑ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡛ࡁࠊࡇࢀ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚

ࡿࠋ࢝ࢼࢲࡢ࠶ࡿணᑂἲᘐ࡟࠾࠸࡚⋡┤࡟᩿ゝࡉࢀࡓࡼ࠺࡟ࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞

➨୕⪅ࢆࡋ࡚㉎ධ⪅ࡀ㉎ධࡋࡓ〇ရࡢᐇ㝿ࡢࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚㛫㐪ࡗࡓㄆ㆑஦௳࡛ࡣࠊࠕᮏᙜࡢၥ㢟ࡣ኎ୖࡆࡢῶᑡ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠖᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃ⾜Ⅽ࠿ࡽࢆࡶࡘ࡟⮳ࡽࡋࡵࡿࡇ࡜࡜࡞ࡿࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞≧ἣࡣࠊ஧ࡘࡢ 㻳 ࡢ㔜࡞ࡾྜࡗࡓࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࡢၟᶆࡢ౯್ࢆ㛫㐪࠸࡞ࡃῶᑡࡉࡏࠊ᥎ዡࡢⓗ࡜࡞ࡿᛶ㉁࡟ᝏᙳ㡪


Rebecca Tushnet, Gone in Sixty Milliseconds: Trademark Law and Cognitive Science,

86 TEX. L. REV. 507, 509 (2008). Tushnet ࡣࡇࡢᴫᛕࢆᙉࡃᢈุࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋSee id. atࢆཬࡰࡍࡇ࡜࡜࡞ࢁ࠺ࠋ

୰ᅜࡢ⿢ุᡤࡢࡼ࠺࡟ࠊ⡿ᅜࡢ⿢ุᡤཬࡧୡ⏺୰ࡢ⿢ุᡤࡀࠊࡇࡢࡼ

527-46.







༳㇟ⓗ࡞ࡢࡣࠊ⿕࿌ࡀ Oscar ࡢᑠീࡢᶍೌရࢆ㈹ရ⏝࡟㈍኎ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟〇㐀ࡋࡓHermès Canada Inc. v. Park, No. S046494, [2004] B.C.S.C. 1694 ¶ 44 (Dec. 17, 2004)ࡇ࡜ࡀၥ㢟࡜࡞ࡗࡓ Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences v. Creative House Pro-

(Can.), available at http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/sc/04/16/2004bcsc1694.htm.

motions, Inc., 944 F.2d 1446 (9th Cir. 1991) ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤࡀࠊ

ᕼ㔘໬ࡢἲ⌮ࢆ౑࠸ࠊ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟ዝౘ⚗Ṇⓗ࡞┠ⓗࢆ㐩ᡂࡋࡓࡀࠊࡑࡢ㝿࡟ࠕࡰࡸ࠿

Chu Zi, at *6 (People’s Ct. of Shanghai Pudong New Dist., Apr. 7, 2008) (ChinaLawInfo),

Guccio Gucci S.P.A. v. Jiangsu Senda Group Co., (2007) Case 78 of Pu Min San (Zhi)ࡋࠖ࡟ゝཬࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ㑊ࡅ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋ௦ࢃࡾ࡟ࠊᆅ᪉⿢ุᡤࡢᕼ㔘໬ࡀ࡞translated by Zhujun Zhang (on file with the Harvard Law School Library); see also Gene࠸࡜ࡍࡿุ᩿ࢆ⩻ࡍ࡟࠶ࡓࡾࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤࡣ Schechter ࡢࠕᚎࠎ࡟

M. Grossman & Carl Shapiro, Foreign Counterfeiting of Status Goods, 103 Q.J. ECON. 79,

๐ࡾྲྀࡿࠖ࡜࠸࠺ᴫᛕ (id. at 1457 (internal quotation marks omitted)) ࢆᘬ⏝ࡋࠊ㆑ู82 (1988)㸦ࠕၟရࡀᾘ㈝ࡉࢀࡿࡢࢆぢ࡚ࠊ༑ศ࡟㸦ࡋ࠿ࡋㄗゎࡢୗ࡟㸧ឤ㖭ࢆཷࡅᛶࡢᕼ㔘໬࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ḟࡢ࡜࠾ࡾ୍⯡ㄽࢆᒎ㛤ࡋࡓStar Award ࡣࠊ௻ᴗࠊࢸࣞࣅᒁࠊ

࡚࠸ࡿࠖഐほ⪅࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿ .

ᫎ⏬ᅋయࠊࡑࡢ௚ࡑࡢ㉎ධࢆᕼᮃࡍࡿ୍⯡බ⾗ࡢㄡ࡟࡛ࡶ฼⏝ྍ⬟࡞ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

Star Award ࡀᏳࡗࡱࡃぢ࠼ࡓࡾぢ࠿ࡅಽࡋ࡟ぢ࠼ࡓࡾࠊ᭱⤊ⓗ࡞ཷ㈹⪅ࢆ⪃៖ࡍࡿing Paper No. 1407793), available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1407793.

ࡇ࡜࡞ࡃࡤࡽࡲ࠿ࢀࡓࡾࡍࢀࡤࠊAcademy ࠿ࡽ㉎ධࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ୙ྍ⬟࡞ࠊ⚽㐓ࡉࡢࢩࣥ࣎ࣝ࡜ࡋ࡚ⓙࡀḧࡋࡀࡿ Oscar ㈹ࡢ≉㉁ࡀࠊ⬣࠿ࡉࢀࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋId.

315, 316-20 (2007); Peter McAleese, Italy: No More Confusion About Post-Sale Confusion,

See Mark McKenna & Mark A. Lemley, Irrelevant Confusion (Stanford Pub. L. WorkSee Peter O’Byrne & Ben Allgrove, Post-Sale Confusion, 2 J. INTELL. PROP. L. & PRAC.

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࠺࡞ᙧែ࡛ࡢΰྠࡣࠊࡓ࡜࠼ࡑࢀࡀ 㻳㼡㼏㼏㼕 ࡢ㠐ࢆ⤯ᑐ࡟㈙ࢃ࡞࠸⪅ࡢᚰࡢ࡛ࡣࠊ⿕࿌ࡓࡿ㈍኎⪅ࡀ 㻳㼡㼏㼏㼕 ࡢ᫬ィࡢᶍೌရࢆ㈍኎ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ⚗ࡌࡽࢀ୰࡛⏕ࡌࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊᙜヱࣈࣛࣥࢻࡢ᤼௚ᛶ࡟㛵ࡍࡿホุࡀࡓࡀࠊ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊྠࡌࡃࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡀࠕ㻳㼡㼏㼏㼕 ࡢ〇ရࡀ࠶ࡾࡁࡓࡾࡢࡶࡢ࡜

ẋᦆࡉࢀࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࢀࡤࡑࢀࡔࡅ࡛ッゴཎᅉ࡜࡞ࡾ࠺ࡿ࡜ࡢุ᩿ࢆࠊࡲࡍࡲ

࡞ࡾࡍࡂ࡚ࠊᙜヱ〇ရ࡟కࡗ࡚࠸ࡓྡኌ࡜ᆅ఩ࡀࡶࡣࡸ௜㝶ࡋ࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺

ࡍୗࡍࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ ࠋఏ⤫ⓗ࡞ၟᶆ⌮ㄽ࡜ࡣ཯ᑐ࡟ࠊ⿢ุᡤࡣࡇࡇ

⌮⏤࡛ࠊᮏ≀ࢆ㈙࠺ពḧࢆࡑࡀࢀࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡾࠖࠊ〇㐀⪅ࡢ኎ୖࡆ࡟ᝏᙳ

࡛ࡣࠕΰྠࡢྍ⬟ᛶࡢࢸࢫࢺ࡛ࡣࠊ₯ᅾⓗ㉎ධ⪅ࡢࡳ࡞ࡽࡎ୍⯡බ⾗ࠖ㡪ࢆཬࡰࡍྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆᣦ᦬ࡋࡓࠋࡉࡽ࡟༳㇟ⓗ࡞ࡢࡣࠊ㻲㼑㼞㼞㼍㼞㼕㻌࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ௚࡛ࡶ࡞࠸ࠕほᐹ⪅ࡓࡿබ⾗ࢆࡶ⪃៖ࡍࡿࠖ࡜୺ᙇࡍࡿࠋ

㻿㻚㻼㻚㻭㻚㻌㻱㼟㼑㼞㼏㼕㼦㼕㼛㻌㼢㻚㻌㻾㼛㼎㼑㼞㼠㼟࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤࡀࠊᕼᑡ ⿢ุᡤࡢࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞஦᱌࡟࠾ࡅࡿ⌮⏤࡙ࡅࡣ࠿࡞ࡾព࿡῝࠸ࡶࡢ࡛࠶

࡛࠶ࡿ࡜⪃࠼ࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡍ࡭࡚ࡢ⮬ື㌴ࡢࠊᕼᑡᛶ࡟ᑐࡍࡿホุࢆಖᣢࡍ

ࡿࠋ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊᕼᑡᛶཬࡧ㆑ูᛶࡣࠊࡑࡢ♫఍ⓗᙺ๭࡟↷ࡽࡋࠊಁ㐍ࡉࢀࡿᚲせᛶ࡟ࡘ࠸୍࡚⯡ⓗ࡟㏙࡭ࡓࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊࠕ㻲㼑㼞㼞㼍㼞㼕 ࡣ᤼௚ಖᣢࡉࢀࡿ࡭ࡁ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺⌮⏤ࡢࡶ࡜ࠊࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢ⚗Ṇࢆṇᙜ໬ࡍࡿࠋ

ⓗ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࢆ๰ࡾฟࡍࡓࡵ࡟⮬ᕫࡢၟရࡢ〇㐀ࢆពᅗⓗ࡟ไ㝈ࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠖ

౛࠼ࡤ 㻸㼛㼕㼟㻌㻿㼜㼛㼞㼠㼟㼣㼑㼍㼞㻘㻌㼁㻚㻿㻚㻭㻚㻘㻌㻵㼚㼏㻚㻌㼢㻚㻌㻸㼑㼢㼕㻌㻿㼠㼞㼍㼡㼟㼟㻌㻒㻌㻯㼛㻚 ࡛ࡣࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠ࠿ࡘࠕ㧗ရ㉁࡛ᕼᑡ࡞ࠊ⊂≉ࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡢ⮬ື㌴ࢆ〇㐀ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊ┦ᛂ

ᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤ࡛ࡣࠊ☜ㄆッゴࡢཎ࿌ࡀ 㻸㼑㼢㼕䇻㼟 ࡢᚋࢁ࣏ࢣࢵࢺࡢᘪᆺ่ࡋ

ࠕࡇࡢᅜࡀࠊ
ࡢ㧗࠸ホุࢆᚓࡓࠖ࡜ᣦ᦬ࡋࡓࠋ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊࡼࡾ୍⯡ⓗ࡟ࠊࡹ࠺ࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࢆࢥࣆ࣮ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ⚗ࡌࡓࠋࡑࡢ⌮⏤ࡣࠊ㉎ධ⪅ࡀ᭱⤊ⓗ࡟ࠊᕼᑡ࡛⊂≉࡛ࣘࢽ࣮ࢡ࡞ࣅࣥࢸ࣮ࢪࡶࡢࡢ⮬ື㌴ࡢఱ༓࡜ࡲ࡛ࡣ࠸࠿࡞

ᙜヱࣃࢱ࣮ࣥࡀࡶࡣࡸ᤼௚ⓗ࡞ࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸࡜ㄆ㆑ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊ㻸㼑㼢㼕䇻㼟 ࡢ࠸࡟ࡋ࡚ࡶఱⓒࡶࡢࣞࣉ࡛ࣜ࢝༨ࡵࡽࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࡽࠊࡑࢀࡽࡣࡶࡣࡸࣘࢽ࣮

኎ୖࡆࡀῶᑡࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ㻳㼡㼏㼏㼕㻌㻭㼙㼑㼞㼕㼏㼍㻘㻌㻵㼚㼏㻚㻌㼢㻚㻌㻰㼍㼞㼠㻘㻌㻵㼚㼏㻚ࢡ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࠖ࡜㏙࡭ࡓࠋ㸦཯ᑐពぢࡣࠊ஦௳ࡢᙜ᫬ࠊཎ࿌ࡀ୺ᙇྍ⬟࡞

ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢッゴཎᅉࡣ࡞࠿ࡗࡓ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ཬࡧከᩘពぢࡀ୙㐺ษ࡟࠿

INTA BULL., Dec. 15, 2008, at 9.ࡘࠕ᫂☜࡟ࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ッゴཎᅉࡀ㐃㑥ἲ࡟つᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ゎ㔘See, e.g., 4 J. THOMAS MCCARTHY, MCCARTHY ON TRADEMARKS AND UNFAIR COMPE-ࡋࡓࠖ࡜࠸࠺Ⅼࢆᣦ᦬ࡋࡓࠋ㸧ࠕࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ሙྜ࡟࠾ࡅࡿඛ౑⏝⪅ࡢᦆᐖࡣࠊ
TITION § 23:7, at 23-39 (4th ed. 2009)㸦
ᾘ㈝⪅ࡀᶍೌ⪅ࡢᏳ࠸ᶍೌရࢆ㉎ධࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊඛ౑⏝⪅ࡢ〇ရࡢྡኌ࡜࠸࠺౯್



ࢆྲྀᚓࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺Ⅼ࡟࠶ࡿࠋࡓ࡜࠼⪽᫂࡞㉎ධ⪅ࡀࠊ⮬ࡽࡀྲྀᚓࡍࡿࡢࡣᶍೌရ࡛

876); cf. Levi Strauss & Co. v. Kimbyr Invs. Ltd., [1994] Fleet Street Reports [FSR] 335,࠶ࡿ࡜▱ࡗ࡚࠸ࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊほᐹ⪅ࡣΰྠࡍࡿࡔࢁ࠺㹿㺁 , cited in I.P. Lund Trading

378-83 (H.C.) (N.Z.) ㈍኎ᚋࡢΰྠࡢᴫᛕࢆ㐺⏝ࡋ࡚ࠊ⿕࿌ࡀཎ࿌〇㐀ࡢࢪ࣮ࣥࢬ

ApS v. Kohler Co., 163 F.3d 27, 44 (1st Cir. 1998); Adidas Am., Inc. v. Payless Shoesource,ࡢᚋࢁ࣏ࢣࢵࢺࡑࡢ௚ࡢ⾰㢮࡟௜ࡉࢀࡓࢱࣈ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢᶒ฼ࢆ౵ᐖࡋࡓ࡜ㄆᐃࡋ

Inc., 529 F. Supp. 2d 1215, 1240 (D. Or. 2007); Beacon Mut. Ins. Co. v. OneBeacon Ins.

ࡓ .Group, 290 F. Supp. 2d 241, 246 (D.R.I. 2003); Sara Lee Corp. v. Am. Leather Prods., Inc.,

715 F. Supp. 566 (S.D.N.Y. 1989).

No. 97 C 4158, 1998 WL 433764, at *17 (N.D. Ill. July 29, 1998).Ḣᕞࡢ࣏ࢫࢺࢭ࣮ࣝ



Id. at 567; see also Cartier, Inc. v. Deziner Wholesale, L.L.C., No. 98 Civ. 4947 (RLC),

ࢫࢻࢡࢺࣜࣥࡢ㆟ㄽ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡣࠊsee McAleese, supra note 216,࢖ࢱࣜ࢔࡛ࡢ㈍኎ᚋ

2000 WL 347171, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 3, 2000)㸦ࠕ⪽᫂࡞ࠊࣈࣛࣥࢻព㆑ࡢ㧗࠸ᾘ㈝⪅ࡢΰྠࡢ⌮ㄽ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿ; O’Byrne & Allgrove, supra note 216; and Noamࡀࠊᕷሙ࡟࠾࠸࡚ Cartier ࡢྡࢆ௜ࡋࡓࠊࡼࡾຎࡗࡓ〇ရࡢᩘࡀቑຍࡍࡿࡢࢆぢ࡚

Shemtov, “Trade Mark Use” in Europe: Revisiting Arsenal in the Light of Opel and Picasso,

Cartier ࡢྡ࡟⯆࿡ࢆኻ࠺ྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 .

2 J. INTELL. PROP. L. & PRAC. 557 (2007).

944 F.2d 1235 (6th Cir. 1991).

Landscape Forms, Inc. v. Columbia Cascade Co., 113 F.3d 373, 382 (2d Cir. 1997).

Id. at 1237.

Hermès Int’l v. Lederer de Paris Fifth Ave., Inc., 219 F.3d 104, 109 (2d Cir. 2000).

Id. at 1245 (quoting Ferrari S.P.A. v. McBurnie Coachcraft Inc., 11 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA)799 F.2d 867 (2d Cir. 1986).

1843, 1848 (S.D. Cal. 1989)).



Id. at 875-76 (emphasis omitted); see also Frank Brunckhorst Co. v. G. HeilemanId. (quoting McBurnie, 11 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) at 1848).

Brewing Co., 875 F. Supp. 966, 985 (E.D.N.Y. 1994) (citing Lois Sportswear, 799 F.2d atId. at 1251 (Kennedy, J., dissenting). ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ௚ࡢ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊࠕ೉⏝ࡢ⶝ᘏࠖ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡶࡓࡽࡉࢀࡿࠊ┦ᑐⓗၟရࡢᾘࣥࣃࣥࡢࠕ୍✀ࡢࣃࣟࢹ࢕࣮ࠖ࡜ࡋ࡚㛤Ⓨࡋࡓࠋ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ㻰㼛㼙㻌㻼㼑㼞㼕㼓㼚㼛㼚㈝⪅࡬ࡢᐖᝏࢆཱྀ࡟ࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋ౛࠼ࡤࠊ㻴㼑㼞㼙㼑㼟㻌㻵㼚㼠㼑㼞㼚㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼘㻌㼢㻚㻌㻸㼑㼐㼑㼞㼑㼞㻌㼐㼑㻌ࠕ⡿ᅜࡢࢩࣕࣥࣃࣥࡣࠊ
ࠕᕼᑡᛶ࡜ᐩࡢ཮᪉ࠖࢆ㐃᝿ࡉࡏࡿ〇ရ࡛࠶ࡾࠊ

㻼㼍㼞㼕㼟㻌㻲㼕㼒㼠㼔㻌㻭㼢㼑㼚㼡㼑㻘㻌㻵㼚㼏㻚 ࡛ࡣࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ
ࠕᮏ≀ࡢ㸦㧗

࡟࠾࠸࡚ᗈࡃὶ㏻ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊᕼᑡ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡢ࢖࣓࣮ࢪࢆ௜

⣭ရࡢ㸧㉎㈙⪅ࡣࠊᶍೌရࡀᗈࡃᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ᐖࡉࢀࡿࠋ࡞ࡐ࡞ࡽࠊᮏ

୚ࡉࢀ⥆ࡅ࡚࠸ࡿࠖ࡜ᣦ᦬ࡋࡓ㹿ࡲࡓࠊ㺀㻯㼍㼘㼐㼑㼞㼍㼕㼛䛿㻌㻮㼛㼏㼍㻌 㻾㼍㼠㼛㼚㻌 㻴㼛㼠㼑㼘㻌 㻒㻌≀ࡢ౯್ࡀ㧗࠸ࡢࡣࠊࡑࡢᩘࡀᑡ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࡀ୍ᅉ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊࡑࡢ౯್ࡀప

㻯㼘㼡㼎 ࡢ㥔㌴ࢧ࣮ࣅࢫಀဨ࡜ࡋ࡚㞠⏝ࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡓࡀࠊࡑࡇ࡛ᙼࡣࡑࡢ࣍ࢸࣝ

ୗࡍࡿ࠿ࡽ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࠖ࡜⌮⏤࡙ࡅࡓ ࠋྠᵝ࡟ࠊ㻳㼑㼚㼑㼞㼍㼘㻌 㻹㼛㼠㼛㼞㼟㻌 㻯㼛㼞㼜㻚㻌 㼢㻚㻌ࡢ⿱⚟࡞㢳ᐈࡢࠊேࢆぢୗࡋࡓែᗘ࡟᎘ᝏឤࢆᢪࡃࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗࡓࡼ࠺࡛࠶

㻷㼑㼥㼟㼠㼛㼚㼑㻌㻭㼡㼠㼛㼙㼛㼠㼕㼢㼑㻌㻵㼚㼐㼡㼟㼠㼞㼕㼑㼟࡛ࡣࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤࡣ 㻳㻹㻯ࡿ㺁࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࡶࠊ㛵㐃ࡍࡿ஦᝟࡜ࡋ࡚ᣦ᦬ࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡗࡓ࡜⿢ุᡤࡣ

ࡢࢺࣛࢵࢡࡢࣇࣟࣥࢺࢢࣜࣝࡢ஺᥮㒊ရࢆチㅙ࡞ࡃ〇㐀ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ⚗ࡌࠊ⪃࠼ࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ㻯㼍㼘㼐㼑㼞㼍㼕㼛 ࡣࠊ㻰㼛㼙㻌㻼㼛㼜㼕㼚㼓㼚㼛㼚 ࣏ࢵࣉࢥ࣮ࣥࢆ⪃࠼ฟࡋࡑࡢ⌮⏤ࡢ୍㒊࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊࠕᶍೌရࡀᗈࡃᏑᅾࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ࠊ௨๓ࡣᑡ࡞࠿ࡗ

ࡓࡢࡣࠊࠕ㻰㼛㼙㻌㻼㼑㼞㼕㼓㼚㼛㼚 ㉎㈙⪅ࡢዲࡳࡸ࠺ࡠࡰࢀࢆ࠶ࡊࡅࡿࡓࡵ࡛࠶ࡿࠖ

ࡓࡶࡢࡀ࠶ࡾࡩࢀࡓࡶࡢ࡜ࡉࢀࠊࡇࢀ࡟ࡼࡾᮏ≀ࡢ౯್ࡀపୗࡍࢀࡤࠊᮏ

࡜㏙࡭ࡓࡀࠊࡇࡢࢩࣕࣥࢶ࢓࢖ᢠᘚࡣኻᩋ࡟⤊ࢃࡗࡓࠋ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊᾘ㈝≀ࡢ㉎㈙⪅ࡣᐖࡉࢀࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠖ࡜࠸࠺Ⅼࢆ࠶ࡆࡓࠋὀ┠ࡍ࡭ࡁࡇ⪅࡟ฟᡤ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢΰྠࡀ⏕ࡌࡓ࡜ࡋࠊࡑࡢ᰿ᣐ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡣࠊᾘ㈝⪅ࡀࠊཎ࡜࡟ࠊ㻷㼑㼥㼟㼠㼛㼚㼑஦௳࡛ࡣࠊୖ㏙ࡢ 㻸㼛㼕㼟㻌 㻿㼜㼛㼞㼠㼟㼣㼑㼍㼞 ஦௳࡟࠾ࡅࡿ࡜ྠᵝ࡟ࠊ࿌ࡀ⿕࿌ࡢࣃࣟࢹ࢕࣮ࢆࠕ㔠㖹ⓗ࡟ᛂ᥼ࡋࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣ௚ࡢఱࡽ࠿ࡢᙧ࡛ᢎ

ᕼᑡ࡛࠶ࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡿホ౯ࢆಖᣢࡉࢀࡓࣈࣛࣥࢻࡣࠊఏ⤫ⓗ࡞㧗⣭ࣈࣛࣥㄆࡋࡓࠖ࡜ಙࡌࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ㻿㼏㼔㼕㼑㼒㼒㼑㼘㼕㼚 ஦௳ࡢࢻ࡞࠸ࡋࢫࢸ࣮ࢱࢫࡢ㧗࠸ࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡛ࡣ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋ㏫࡟ࠊ㻷㼑㼥㼟㼠㼛㼚㼑 ࣈࣛࣥ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊࡰࡸ࠿ࡋ࡟ࡼࡿᕼ㔘໬ࡀ⏕ࡌࡓ࡜ࡢཎ࿌ࡢ୺ᙇࡶ᳨ウࡋࡓࡀࠊࢻࡢ㍍ࢺࣛࢵࢡ࡜ 㻸㼛㼕㼟㻌 㻿㼜㼛㼞㼠㼟㼣㼑㼍㼞 ࣈࣛࣥࢻࡢࢹࢽ࣒ࢪ࣮ࣥࢬࡣࠊ࡜ࡶ࡟ࠊ

᳨⣴ࢥࢫࢺࡢ⌮ㄽ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡢッゴཎᅉࡀ࡝ࢀ࡯࡝ᙺ࡟❧ࡓ࡞ࡑࡢฟᡤཬࡧ⚄⛎ⓗ㞺ᅖẼࡢ※ࢆࠊ࡯࠿࡛ࡶ࡞ࡃປാ⪅㝵⣭࡜ࡋࠊࡑࡢࡇ

࠸ࡶࡢ࡜࡞ࡗࡓࡢ࠿ࢆ඾ᆺⓗ࡟♧ࡍࡼ࠺࡞ᙧ࡛ࠊࠕၟᶆࡢ〇ရ≉ᐃᶵ⬟ࠖ࡜ࡣṇᙜ࡟ホ౯ࡉࢀ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࡢከ࠸ὶ⾜ࡢࣉࣟࢭࢫࡢᐇ᝟࡟ㄪ࿴ࡍࡿࡶ



ࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ



Id. at 237.



Id. at 236.

ࢆ᥇⏝ࡋࠊၟᶆࡢᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆ㜵Ṇࡋࡼ࠺࡜ࡋࡓࠋ౛

Id. at 237. ࠼ࡤ 㻿㼏㼔㼕㼑㼒㼒㼑㼘㼕㼚㻌㻒㻌㻯㼛㻚㻌㼢㻚㻌㻶㼍㼏㼗㻌㻯㼛㻚㻌㼛㼒㻌㻮㼛㼏㼍࡛ࡣࠊ⿕࿌࡛࠶ࡿ 㻶㼛㼔㼚㻌㻯㼍㼘㼐㼑㼞㼍㼕㼛

Id.



ࡣࠕ㻰㼛㼙㻌㻼㼛㼜㼕㼚㼓㼚㼛㼚ࠖ࡜࠸࠺⎼ワࡵࡢ࣏ࢵࣉࢥ࣮ࣥࢆ 㻰㼛㼙㻌㻼㼑㼞㼕㼓㼚㼛㼚 ࡢࢩࣕ

Id.



See Adam Smith, Chinese Sham Glam: Innocuous Innovation or Mark-Owner Menace?,

WORLD TRADEMARK REV. DAILY, Feb. 24, 2009 ࢩࣕࣥࢶ࢓࢖ࡣࠕὶ⾜ࡸࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡜

ၟᶆ஦௳ࢆᢸᙜࡋࡓ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊࠕࢫ࣏ࣥࢧ࣮ࢩࢵࣉࡢΰྠࠖ࡜࠸࠺⌮ㄽHerman Miller, Inc. v. A. Studio S.R.L., No. 1:04-CV-781, 2006 WL 2456218, at *3┿ࡗྥ࠿ࡽᑐ❧ࡍࡿࠖࣃࣟࢹ࢕࣮〇ရ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠕேࡀᨻᗓࡸ▱㈈ᶒ⪅ࢆ㰯࡛࠶ࡋࡽ(W.D. Mich. Aug. 22, 2006) (quoting AutoZone, Inc. v. Tandy Corp., 373 F.3d 786, 801࠺ࡓࡵࡢࡶࡢ࡛ࠖ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ Rouse & Co.ࡢ▱㈈ࢥࣥࢧࣝࢱࣥࢺ࡛࠶ࡿ George Chan

(6th Cir. 2004)); see also Ill. High Sch. Ass’n v. GTE Vantage Inc., 99 F.3d 244, 247 (7thࡢⓎゝࢆᘬ⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ཬࡧࠕࣂ࢜ࣜ㸦␗ᅜࡢ୙ṇ࡞฼┈㸧ࡀ࠶ࡿ࡜ࡇࢁ࡟ࢩࣕࣥ

Cir. 1996)㸦ࠕ೉⏝ࡢ⶝ᘏࠖࡣࠕၟᶆ࠿ࡽࡑࡢ㆑ูᛶཬࡧྡኌࢆዣ࠺࡯࡝࡟ᣑ኱ࡍࡿ

ࢶ࢓࢖ࡀ࠶ࡿࠖ Nokia ࡢࢢ࣮ࣟࣂࣝࣈࣛࣥࢻಖㆤᢸᙜࢹ࢕ࣞࢡࢱ࣮ࡢ Lucy Nicholsྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠖࡇ࡜ࢆᣦ᦬ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

ࡢⓎゝࢆᘬ⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆㄝ᫂ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

219 F.3d 104 (2d Cir. 2000).





Id. at 108.

Cinema, Ltd., 604 F.2d 200, 204-05 (2d Cir. 1979)). Schieffelin ஦௳ࡢ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ࢔ࣥࢣ



453 F.3d 351 (6th Cir. 2006).࣮ࢺࡢᑐ㇟⪅ࡢ㸣ࡀࠊཎ࿌ࡀ Dom Popingnon ࣏ࢵࣉࢥ࣮ࣥࡢฟᡤ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ಙࡌࠊ



Id. at 358.

㸣ࡀࠊ⿕࿌ࡀ⮬ᕫ〇ရࢆᕷሙ࡟ฟࡍ࡟ࡣཎ࿌࠿ࡽࠕᢎㄆࢆᚓࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡗࡓࠖ࡜



850 F. Supp. 232 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).⪃࠼࡚࠸ࡓ࡜࠸࠺࢔ࣥࢣ࣮ࢺ⤖ᯝࢆドᣐ࡜ࡋ࡚㧗ࡃホ౯ࡋࡓࠋId. at 247.

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  

Schieffelin, 850 F. Supp. at 242 (quoting Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡀῶᑡࡋࡓ஦ᐇࡣ࡞࠸࡜┤ࡕ࡟ุ᩿ࡋࡓࠋྠࡌࡼ࠺࡞㧗⣭ရࡢࣃࣟࢹ࢕

࡛಑≀୺⩏ⓗ࡞ḧồཬࡧ↓▱࡟ࡼࡗ࡚⏕ࡌࡿࡑࡢḧồࡢ‶㊊ࠖࡢᘚㆤㄽ

࣮࡟ࡘ࠸᳨࡚ウࡋࡓ௚ࡢ⿢ุᡤ࡛ࡶࠊྠᵝ࡟ࢫ࣏ࣥࢧ࣮ࢩࢵࣉࡢΰྠࡢ࢔

⪅࡜ࡣ฿ᗏ࠸࠼࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋ࡟ࡶ࠿࠿ࢃࡽࡎࠊุ஦ࡣ௨ୗࡢ࡜࠾ࡾᶍೌࢆ⚗ࣉ࣮ࣟࢳࢆ᥇⏝ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ

Ṇࡋࡓࠋ


ၟᶆ஦௳ࢆᢸᙜࡍࡿ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ㈍኎ᚋࡢΰྠ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࢫ࣏ࣥࢧ࣮ࢩࢵࣉ

㢳ᐈࡢ୰࡟ࡣࠊ⮬Ꮿ࡟᮶ࡓᐈேࡀ୍ὶࡢၟရ࡜⪃࠼ࡿࡼ࠺࡞ࡶࡢࢆ⮬Ꮿ࡟ᒎ♧ࡢΰྠࢆ㜵Ṇࡍࡿ⌮ㄽⓗ᰿ᣐ࡟౫ᣐࡍࡿࡔࡅ࡛࡞ࡃࠊᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍࡃࡼ࠺࡞

ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡛ྡኌࢆᚓࡿࡓࡵࠊࡼࡾᏳ࠸ཎ࿌ࡢ᫬ィࢆ㉎ධࡍࡿ⪅ࡶ࠸ࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺

⿕࿌ࡢࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࢆࠊ࠶࠸ࡲ࠸࡞᰿ᣐ࡟ᇶ࡙ࡃࢥ࣮ࣔࣥࣟୖࡢ┐⏝⌮ㄽࡸࠊ͐ࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ㻭㼠㼙㼛㼟 ᫬ィࡢホุࢆ┐ࡴࡇ࡜࡛⤒῭ⓗ฼┈ࢆᡭ࡟ධࢀࡼ࠺࡜ࡍ

Ḣᕞ࡛ࡣࠕ୙ṇ࡞฼⏝ࠖࡢ⌮ㄽ࡟ᇶ࡙࠸࡚ࡶ⚗Ṇࡍࡿࠋࡇࢀࡽࡢ⌮ㄽࡣࠊࡿཎ࿌ࡢពᅗࡇࡑࡀ᭱ࡶ㔜せ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

᳨⣴ࢥࢫࢺࡢ⪃࠼᪉ࢆᇶ♏࡜ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࡯࡜ࢇ࡝࡞࠸࡜࠸࠺Ⅼ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ

⿢ุᡤࡀࠊዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ࢆ┘どࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺ᮏ㉁ⓗ࡟つ⠊ⓗ࡞㈐௵ࢆ㈇࠺࡜

⡿ᅜࡢ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ௨᮶ࠊ㦫ࡃ࡯࡝Ọ⥆ⓗ࡞୍㐃ࡢ஦௳㸦ࡍ࡭࡚㧗⣭ရ࡟㛵࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆ᭱ࡶ᫂☜࡟⾲ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋࡇࡢⅬ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ⡿ᅜࡢึᮇࡢᴟࡵ࡚௦

ࢃࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ㸧࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊ㻭㼠㼙㼛㼟 ᫬ィࡢ஦௳ࡢ⌮⏤࡙ࡅ࡟ᚑ࠸ࠊேࡀၟ

⾲ⓗ࡞஦௳ࡣࠊ㻭㼠㼙㼛㼟 ᫬ィࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕẼᅽࡢኚ໬ࡔࡅ࡛ࢮ࣐ࣥ࢖ࡀࡲ࠿ࢀ

ရ࡟௜㝶ࡍࡿྡኌࢆ⋓ᚓࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࠊ౛࠼ࡤࠕᮏ≀࡜ྠࡌᙧ࡛ྠࡌ㡢ࡢࠖ

ࡿ༟ୖ᫬ィ࡟㛵ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓ ࠋ㻭㼠㼙㼛㼟 ᫬ィࡢ〇㐀ᴗ⪅ࡀࡑࡢ᫬ィࡢ㟁Ẽᘧࡢ㢮ఝရࢆ〇㐀ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓ➇ᴗ⪅ࢆッ࠼ࡓ ࠋ㻶㼑㼞㼛㼙㼑㻌 㻲㼞㼍㼚㼗 ุ஦ࡣࠊ〇ရࢆࠊᮏ≀ࡢ㏻ᖖࡢ౯᱁ࢆᨭᡶࢃࡎ࡟౑࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣࠊ➃ⓗ࡟࠸ࡗ࡚୙බᖹ
࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ุ᩿ࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋ

ၟᶆἲ ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣࠕ㸦㼂㼑㼎㼘㼑㼚 ࡀศᯒࡢᑐ㇟࡜ࡋࡓ㢮ࡢ㸧ᾘ㈝⪅ࡢ㠀⤒῭ⓗḢᕞࡢ⿢ุᡤ࡛ࡶࠊྠࡌࡼ࠺࡞ุ᩿ࢆୗࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊ୰࡛ࡶ᭱㏆ࡢ⏬ᮇ



್࡟ࡘ࠸࡚␲ၥࢆ࿊ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

Id. at 251 (citing Sally Gee, Inc., v. Myra Hogan, Inc., 699 F.2d 621, 625 (2d Cir.

1983)).See, e.g., Bd. of Supervisors of La. State Univ. v. Smack Apparel Co., 438 F. Supp. 2dring); see also id.㸦ࠕ಑≀୺⩏ࡸ↓▱࡬ࡢ㏄ྜ࡜࠸ࡗࡓࡶࡢࡀࠊᨻᗓࡀᨭ᥼ࡍࡿ࡟ࡩ

653, 660 (E.D. La. 2006) ⿕࿌ࡢࣀ࣋ࣝࢸ࢕࣮ၟရ࡛࠶ࡿ⾰㢮ࡀ౵ᐖရ࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ุ᩿

ࡉࢃࡋ࠸࡯࡝࡟㔜せ࡞♫఍ⓗ฼┈࡛࠶ࡿࡢ࠿ྰ࠿ࢆၥ࠺ࡇ࡜ࡣࠊ࠾ࡑࡽࡃ୙㐺ษ࡛ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Grey v. Campbell Soup Co., 650 F. Supp. 1166, 1174-75 (C.D. Cal. 1986)

ࡣ࡞࠸࡛࠶ࢁ࠺㹿㺁 .

Standard Brands, Inc. v. Smidler, 151 F.2d 34, 41 n.13 (2d Cir. 1945) (Frank, J., concur-

Godiva ࡢࢳࣙࢥ࣮ࣞࢺࡢࣃࣟࢹ࢕࣮࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢࠕDogivaࠖ࡜ࠕCativaࠖ࡜࠸࠺࣌ࢵࢺ



Mastercrafters, 221 F.2d at 466.

⏝㣗ရࡀ౵ᐖࢆᵓᡂࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ุ᩿ࡋࠊࡑࡢ⌮⏤ࡢ୍㒊࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ⿕࿌ࡀࡑࢀࡽࡢྡ



A.T. Cross Co. v. Jonathan Bradley Pens, Inc., 355 F. Supp. 365, 370 (S.D.N.Y. 1972).⛠ࢆ౑⏝ࡍࡿࡢ࡟ Godiva ࡢチྍࢆᚓࡓ࠿ྰ࠿࡟ࡘ࠸࡚බ⾗ࡀㄗㄆΰྠࡍࡿྍ⬟ᛶSee, e.g., Cartier v. Symbolix, Inc., 454 F. Supp. 2d 175, 182 (S.D.N.Y. 2006); Jackࡀ㧗࠿ࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࢆ࠶ࡆ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Gucci Shops, Inc. v. R.H. Macy & Co., 446 F. Supp. 838

Schwartz Shoes, Inc. v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc., 233 F. Supp. 2d 512, 514-15 (S.D.N.Y.

(S.D.N.Y. 1977)㸦
ࠕGucchi Gooࠖ࡜࠸࠺ၟရྡࡢ࠾ࡴࡘࣂࢵࢢࢆ౵ᐖရ࡜ㄆᐃࡋ࡚࠸

2002); Spectrum Vision Sys., Inc. v. Spectera, Inc., 35 F. Supp. 2d 797, 807 (D. Kan. 1998);

ࡿ . But see, e.g., Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252,

A.T. Cross Co., 355 F. Supp. At 370; cf. Gucci Am., Inc. v. Daffy’s Inc., 354 F.3d 228, 235

268-69 (4th Cir. 2007)㸦
ࠕChewy Vuittonࠖ࡜࠸࠺ၟရྡࡢ≟⏝࠾ࡶࡕࡷࡣ౵ᐖࢆᵓᡂ

(3d Cir. 2003)㸦ࠕGucci ࡢ㈍኎ᚋࡢΰྠࡢ୺ᙇࢆᐇドࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊDaffy’s ࡢ㢳ᐈࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡶ࡞ࡃࠊᕼ㔘໬ࢆ⏕ࡌࡉࡏ࡚ࡶ࠸࡞࠸࡜ุ᩿ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

ࡀᮏ≀ࡢ Gucci ࡢ╔⏝⪅࡛࠶ࡿࡩࡾࢆࡋ࡚࠾ࡾࠊDaffy’s ࡢ౯᱁࡛ Gucci ࡢ᤼௚ᛶ࡟



Trade Marks Directive, supra note 205, art. 5(2), at 29.ࣇ࣮ࣜࣛ࢖ࢻࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ࠶ࡆࡽࢀࡿࠋ
ࠖ(quoting Gucci Am., Inc. v. Daffy’s Inc., No.

Mastercrafters Clock & Radio Co. v. Vacheron & Constantin-Le Coultre Watches, Inc.,00-4463, slip op. at 11 (D.N.J. Nov. 16, 2001)) .

221 F.2d 464, 465 (2d Cir. 1955).





Id.

Paris, 4eme ch., June 14, 2006, PIBD No. 837, III, 619 Raymond Weil ࡀࠊCartier ࡢ᭷ྡSee, e.g., SA Cartier v. SA Raymond Weil, Cour d’appel [CA] >ᆅ᪉ࡢୖッ⿢ุᡤ@See, e.g., E. Wine Corp. v. Winslow-Warren, Ltd., 137 F.2d 955, 957 (2d Cir. 1943)

࡞⭎᫬ィ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ᪤࡟ࡑࡢࢹࢨ࢖ࣥࡀࣃࣈࣜࢵࢡࢻ࣓࢖ࣥ࡟ᖐࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࡶࡢࢆࠊ

(Frank, J.) ၟᶆἲ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚సࡾฟࡉࢀࡿࠕྜἲⓗ࡞⊂༨ࠖཬࡧࠕ➇தࡢච㝖ࠖࡢ౯ࡑࡢ᫬ィࡢྡኌࢆ┐⏝ࡍࡿ┠ⓗ࡛ࠊࡑࡗࡃࡾ┿ఝࡋࡓ࡜ุ᩿ࡋࡓ ; International ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ⓗ࡞஦௳࡛࠶ࡿḢᕞྖἲ⿢ุᡤ 㻱㻯㻶 ࡢ 㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌㻿㻭㻌㼢㻚㻌㻮㼑㼘㼘㼡㼞㼑㻌㻺㼂㻌࡟࠾࠸

ࡇ࡜ࢆ┤᥋ࡢ┠ⓗ࡜ࡣࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡶࡢࡢࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞≉ᚩࢆࡶࡘၟᶆࢆ๰

࡚ࡑࡢࡇ࡜ࡀ᭱ࡶ᫂☜࡟⾲ࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋᮏ௳࡛ࡣࠊ⿕࿌ࡀᩘ✀㢮ࡢ 㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘 ࡢࡾฟࡍ 㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌ࡢ࢖ࣥࢭࣥࢸ࢕ࣦࢆᏲࢁ࠺࡜ࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ

㤶Ỉࡢࠕ኱⾗ྥࡅࡢᶍ㐀ရࠖࢆ 㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌ࡢࡶࡢ࡜ྠᵝࡢࣃࢵࢣ࣮ࢪ࡛〇㻱㻯㻶 ࡣࠊࡑࡢ  ᖺ๓࡟ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࡀၥ㢟࡜࡞ࡗࡓ஦௳࡛࠶ࡿ 㻵㼚㼠㼑㼘㻌 㼢㻚㻌

㐀㈍኎ࡋࡓࠋⱥᅜࡢ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊཎ࿌ࡀ⮬ᕫࡢ㤶Ỉࡢᐇ㝿ࡢ㤶ࡾ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚᤼

㻯㻼㻹࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊࡰࡸ࠿ࡋࡀ⏕ࡌࡓࡇ࡜ࢆ❧ドࡍࡿ᪉ἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ࡯ࡰᐇ⌧௚ⓗᶒ฼ࢆఱࡽ୺ᙇࡋ࡚࠸࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࢆⓗ☜࡟ᙉㄪࡋࡓࠋࡋࡓࡀࡗ࡚ࠊ⿢ุ

୙ྍ⬟࡞ドᣐせ௳ࢆ☜❧ࡋࡓࡇ࡜࡛ዣࡗ࡚ࡋࡲࡗࡓࡶࡢࢆࠊ㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌 㼢㻚㻌ᐁࡀドேࡢドゝࢆゝ࠸᥮࠼࡚㏙࡭ࡓࡼ࠺࡟ࠊࠕὶ⾜ࢆ㏣࠺↓ᩍ⫱ࡢⱝ⪅ࡀ㻮㼑㼘㼘㼡㼞㼑㻌࡟࠾ࡅࡿ୙ṇ࡞฼⏝⌮ㄽࡢୗ࡛ࠊ㏉㑏ࡋࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

Ⰻ㉁࡞㤶ࡾࢆࡉࡏ࡞ࡀࡽ 㻹㼏㻰㼛㼚㼍㼘㼐㼟 ࡛ࡓࡴࢁࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠖྍ⬟ᛶࡣࠊᑡ࡞

ᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢၟᶆἲࡢ⓶⫗࡞஦ែࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕᡃࠎࡀࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞ࡃ࡜ࡶⱥᅜࡢ⿢ุᡤ࡟࡜ࡗ࡚ࡣࠊၥ㢟࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿッゴཎᅉ࡜ࡢ㛵ಀ࡛ࡣࡀࡶ࡜ࡶ࡜ㄝ᫂ࡋ࡚࠸ࡓ┠ⓗࢆࠊᙼࡀᣄ⤯ࡍࡿ࡜ࡣ࠸࠿࡞࠸ࡲ࡛ࡶࠊணᮇ

㛵㐃ᛶࡀ࡞࠿ࡗࡓࠋ௦ࢃࡾ࡟ࠊ஦௳ࡣ᭱⤊ⓗ࡟ࡣࠊ⿕࿌ࡢఝࡓࣃࢵࢣ࣮ࢪ

ࡋ࡞࠸᪉ἲ࡟ࡼࡾ㐩ᡂࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜࠸࠺஦ែࡣࠊูࡢⅬ࡛⥆࠸࡚࠾ࡾࠊࡇࢀ

ࡀࠊࠕၟᶆࡢ㆑ูᛶࡢ࠶ࡿ≉ᚩཪࡣྡኌ ࢆ୙ṇ࡟฼⏝ࠖࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ⚗ࡎ

ࢆ᭱ᚋ࡟㏙࡭ࡿࠋࡰࡸ࠿ࡋ࡟ࡼࡿᕼ㔘໬࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄒࡿ୰࡛ࠊ⚾ࡣࡇࢀࡲ࡛ࠊ

ࡿḢᕞඹྠయࡢၟᶆᣦ௧ ࡢ  ᮲  ࡢᩥゝ࡟㐪཯ࡍࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࡢၥ㢟࡟ᖐ⌧ᅾࡢၟᶆ⌮ㄽࡢ୰࡛ఏ⤫ⓗ࡟ㄆ㆑ࡉࢀ࡚ࡁࡓ஧ࡘࡢၟᶆࡢᕼ㔘໬ࡢែ╔ࡋࡓࠋ㻱㻯㻶 ࡣࠊࡓ࡜࠼⿕࿌ࡢࣃࢵࢣ࣮ࢪࡀ 㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌ࡢၟᶆ࡜ࡢΰྠ࡞࠸

ᵝࡢ࠺ࡕࡢ୍ࡘ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡋ࠿㏙࡭࡚࠸࡞࠸ࠋࡶ࠺୍ࡘ࡜࠸࠺ࡢࡣࠊ
ࠕởᰁࠖࡋࡑࡢᕼ㔘໬ࢆᣍ࠿࡞࠿ࡗࡓ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡶࠊ⿕࿌ࡣࡸࡣࡾࣃࢵࢣ࣮ࢪࢆ㏻ࡌ࡚ࠊ

࡟ࡼࡿᕼ㔘໬࡛࠶ࡾࠊཎ࿌ࡀ⮬ᕫࡢၟᶆࢆࠕᏳ≀ࡢရ㉁ࡢ〇ရࠖ࡜⤖ࡧࡘ⤒῭ⓗ࡞௦ൾࢆᨭᡶ࠺ࡇ࡜࡞ࡃࠕ㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌ࡢၟᶆࡢ㢳ᐈ྾ᘬຊࠊホุཬࡧࡅࡿࡼ࠺࡞⾜Ⅽࡸࠊ⮬ᕫࡢၟᶆ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠕዲពⓗ࡛࡞࠸⪃࠼ࢆ࿧ࡧ㉳ࡇᆅ఩࡟ࡼࡗ࡚฼┈ࢆᚓࡼ࠺࡜ࡋࡓࠖࡇ࡜࡛୙ṇ࡞฼⏝ࢆ⾜ࡗࡓ࡜ุ᩿ࡋࡓࠋ

ࡍྍ⬟ᛶࡢ࠶ࡿ୙೺඲࡞ཪࡣ୙ᛌ࡞ᩥ⬦࡛ࠖ⮬ᕫࡢၟᶆࢆ⾲⌧ࡍࡿ⾜Ⅽ࡟㻱㻯㻶 ࡣࠊΰྠࡶᕼ㔘໬ࡶㄆࡵࡽࢀ࡞࠸࡜ࡢ஦ᐇㄆᐃ࡟ᣊ᮰ࡉࢀࡿࡇ࡜࡜ࡢ

ᑐฎࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ッ࠼࡚ࡁࡓᕼ㔘໬ࡢែᵝ࡛࠶ࡿࠋởᰁࡢែᵝࡢ࠺ࡕࠊᚋ⪅ᩚྜᛶࢆㄝ᫂ࡍࡿࡢ࡟኱࠸࡟ⱞ៖ࡋࡓࡶࡢࡢ ࠊ୙ṇ࡞฼⏝ࢆ⌮⏤࡜ࡍࡿྠ⿢ุᡤࡢุ♧ࡣࠊᮏ㉁ⓗ࡟ࡣࠊᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࢆ⌮⏤࡜ࡍࡿุ♧ࢆูࡢ᪉ἲ
࡛ᐇ⌧ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡗࡓࠋ㻱㻯㻶 ࡣࠊ㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌ࡢၟᶆࡢࠕྡኌࠖࢆಖㆤࡍࡿ


ࡢᶆ‽ⓗ࡞౛࡟ࡣࠊ⿕࿌ࡀၟᶆࢆᛶⓗ࡞ᩥ⬦ࠊୗရ࡞ᩥ⬦ࠊཪࡣ୙ἲ

Case C-252/07, Intel Corp. v. CPM United Kingdom Ltd. (Nov. 27, 2008), http://curia.

europa.eu/jcms/jcms/j_6 㸦ࠕCase noࠖࡢ㡯┠࡟ࠕC-252/07ࠖ࡜ධຊࡋࠊ
ࠕSearchࠖࢆ㑅

Annual Review, 98 TRADEMARK REP. 309, 575-79 (2008) ࢖ࢱࣜ࢔ࡢุ౛ἲ࡛ࠊ㧗⣭ၟᢥ .

ရࡢᶍೌရࢆ౵ᐖရ࡜ࡋ࡚⚗ࡌࡓࡶࡢ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚㆟ㄽࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .





Case C-487/07, 2009 ECJ EUR-Lex LEXIS 532 (June 18, 2009).ࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆド᫂ࡍࡿ࡟ࡣࠊඛ⾜ၟᶆࡢᣦᐃၟရཪࡣᣦᐃᙺົࡢᖹᆒⓗᾘId. ¶ 46.㈝⪅ࡢ⤒῭ⓗάືࡀࠊᚋ⥆ၟᶆࡢ౑⏝࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ኚ໬ࡋࡓ࡜࠸࠺ドᣐࠊཪࡣࡑࡢࡼ࠺



L’Oreal SA v. Bellure NV, [2006] EWHC (Ch) 2355, [62] (Eng.); see also L’Oreal SA v.

࡞ኚ໬ࡀᑗ᮶㉳ࡇࡿ࡜࠸࠺㧗ᗘࡢ⵹↛ᛶࢆ♧ࡍドᣐࡀᚲせ࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 .ࡇࡢุ᩿ࡼ

Bellure NV, [2007] EWCA (Civ) 968, [86] (Eng.)㸦ࠕ㸦௦⌮ேࡣࠊ㸧ᮏ௳ࢆࠊⴭྡ࡞㧗⣭ࡾ๓ࡢ㒊ศ࡛ 㻱㻯㻶㻌ࡣࠕඛ⾜ၟᶆࡢ㆑ูᛶࡢ࠶ࡿ≉ᚩ࡬ࡢᐖࠖࡣࠕᕼ㔘໬ࠖࠊࠕ๐ࡂྲྀ

Id. ¶ 77㸦ࠕᚋ⥆ၟᶆࡢ౑⏝ࡀඛ⾜ၟᶆࡢ㆑ูᛶࡢ࠶ࡿ≉ᚩࢆᐖࡋࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣᐖࡍ

〇ရࡀ୙೺඲࡞⎔ቃ࡛ぢࡽࢀࡿࡼ࠺࡞஦௳࡜㢮ఝࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ࡋ࡚⪃࠼ࡿࡼ࠺ᡃࠎ

ࡾࠖཪࡣࠕࡰࡸ࠿ࡋࠖ࡜ࡶ࠸ࢃࢀࡿ࡜㏙࡭࡚࠸ࡿࠋId. ¶ 29.࡟ಁࡋࡓ Burberry ࡢࣈࣛࣥࢻ࡜ὶ⾜ࢆ㏣࠺↓ᩍ⫱ࡢⱝ⪅࡜ࡀ⤖ࡧࡘࡅࡽࢀࡿ࡜࠸

࠺ࡢࡀᙼࡢලయ౛࡛࠶ࡗࡓ ࠋࡑࢀࡣᮏ௳࡜ࡣ࡯࡝㐲࠸ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 .

Gemini Rising, Inc., 346 F. Supp. 1183, 1183 (E.D.N.Y. 1972)).

Id. art. 5(2), at 29.





See Trade Marks Directive, supra note 205.

at *1 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 9, 1996) ࢖ࣥࢱ࣮ࢿࢵࢺୖࡢ࣏ࣝࣀࢢࣛࣇ࢕ࡢ࢙࢘ࣈࢧ࢖ࢺ

Case C-487/07 ¶ 50.ࡢࢻ࣓࢖ࣥྡ࡛࠶ࡿ candyland.com ࡀᏊ౪⏝ࡢ࣮࣎ࢻࢤ࣮࣒ࡢၟᶆ࡛࠶ࡿ Candy-Id. ¶ 33.land ࢆởᰁࡋࡓ࡜ㄆᐃࡋࡓ ; Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders, Inc. v. Pussycat Cinema,

Deere & Co. v. MTD Prods., Inc., 41 F.3d 39, 43 (2d Cir. 1994) (citing Coca-Cola Co. v.
See, e.g., Hasbro, Inc. v. Internet Entm’t Group, Ltd., No. C96-130WD, 1996 WL 84853,

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ࡜ዝౘ⚗Ṇつ⠊ 㻮㼑㼑㼎㼑 ࡞ᩥ⬦࡟࠾࠸࡚౑⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀྵࡲࢀࡿࠋࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞⾜Ⅽࡀࠊᑐ㇟࡜࡞ᶆࡢホุࢆᦆࡡࡿࡶࡢࠖ࡜ᗈࡃᐃ⩏ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿࠋḢᕞ㐃ྜࡢၟᶆᣦ௧ࡣࠊ

ࡿၟᶆࡢእᙧୖࡢ⊂⮬ᛶ࡟ᝏᙳ㡪ࢆཬࡰࡍࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞࠸ࡓࡵ࡟ࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞ᖺࡢⓎ㊊᫬࠿ࡽࠊࡑࡢᕼ㔘໬㜵Ṇࢆᐃࡵࡿ᮲ᩥ࡛ࠊởᰁ⾜Ⅽࢆࠕၟᶆ⮬㌟ࡣởᰁࢆᕼ㔘໬ࡢᙧែ࡜ࡋ࡚ㄽࡌࡓࡇ࡜ࡣ࡞࠸ࡋࠊᵝࠎ࡞ၟᶆᏛ⪅ࡢホุࢆᐖࡍࡿࠖ⾜Ⅽ࡜ࡋ࡚ᐃ⩏ࡋ࡚ࡁ࡚࠸ࡿࡀࠊୖグᨵṇࡣࠊࣛࣥࣁ

ࡀࠊ⚾⮬㌟ࡶྵࡵࠊởᰁࡀᕼ㔘໬ࡢ୍ᙧែ࡛࠶ࡿࡢ࠿࡜࠸࠺Ⅼ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࠊ

࣒ἲࢆḢᕞ㐃ྜࡢၟᶆᣦ௧࡜⫪ࢆ୪࡭ࡿࡶࡢ࡟ࡍࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ

ྠᵝࡢ⌮⏤࡟ࡼࡾ␲ၥࢆ࿊ࡋ࡚ࡁࡓࠋᖺࡢၟᶆᕼ㔘໬ᨵṇἲ࡟ࡼࡾࠊ
ởᰁࡢᴫᛕ࡟ࡣࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ἲᚊୖࡢᐃ⩏࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡶࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡗࡓࡼ࠺

ࣛࣥࣁ࣒ἲࡣྠἲࡀࠕởᰁ࡟ࡼࡿᕼ㔘໬ ࠖ࡜⛠ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡟ᑐࡋ࡚᫂☜࡟࡟ࠊၟᶆࡢࠕホุࠖࡸࠕྡኌࠖ࡟ᑐࡍࡿᐖ࡜࠸࠺ࠊ࡜࡚ࡘࡶ࡞ࡃᗈ࠸ᴫᛕᩆ῭つᐃࢆ⨨࠸࡚࠸ࡿࠋྠἲࡣࠊࠕởᰁ࡟ࡼࡿᕼ㔘໬ࠖࢆࠕၟᶆཪࡣၟྕ

ࡀ₯ࢇ࡛࠸ࡓࠋࡑࢀࡣ௒ࠊ㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡀ㏣ồࡋࡓ᭱⤊ⓗ࡞┠ⓗࢆᐇ⌧ࡍࡿ࡜ࠊⴭྡ࡞ၟᶆ࡜ࡀ㢮ఝࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟⏕ࡎࡿ㛵㐃ᛶ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊᙜヱⴭྡ࡞ၟࡓࡵࡢ᭱ࡶຠᯝⓗ࡞ᡭẁ࡜ࡋ࡚ᙧࢆ࡜ࡿࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗ࡚ࡁ࡚࠸ࡿࡶࡢ࡛࠶
ࡾࠊࡇࡢࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡾ 㻿㼏㼔㼑㼏㼔㼠㼑㼞 ࡀ↓どࡋࡓ▼ࡇࢁࡣࠊᙼࡀᛮ࠸ᥥ࠸࡚࠸ࡓ



ッゴཎᅉࡢ୺ࡓࡿ♏▼࡜࡞ࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡿࠋ౛࠼ࡤࠊ㻸䇻㻻㼞㽴㼍㼘㻌㼢㻚㻌㻮㼑㼘㼘㼡㼞㼑 ࡛

Ltd., 467 F. Supp. 366, 377 (S.D.N.Y. 1979) ᡂேྥࡅᣦᐃࡢ࠶ࡿᫎ⏬࡟࠾࠸࡚ࠊDallas㻱㻯㻶 ࡣࠊởᰁ࡜࠸࠺ࡶࡢࢆࠊ⿕࿌ࡀཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆཪࡣཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆ࡜㢮ఝࡍࡿ

Cowboys ࡢࢳ࢔࣮ࣜࢲ࣮ࡀ╔࡚࠸ࡿไ᭹࡜ྠᵝࡢไ᭹ࢆ⿕࿌ࡀ౑⏝ࡋࡓࡇ࡜ࡣࠊࢳ
࢔࣮ࣜࢲ࣮ࡢ㆑ูᛶࡢ࠶ࡿไ᭹ࢆởᰁࡋࡓ࡜ㄆᐃࡋࡓ , aff’d 604 F.2d 200, 204-05(2d Cir. 1979).
See, e.g., Eastman Kodak Co. v. Rakow, 739 F. Supp. 116, 118 (W.D.N.Y. 1989) ࢥ࣓ၟᶆࢆࠕᙜヱၟᶆࡢ㢳ᐈ྾ᘬຊࢆῶࡌࡿࠖࡼ࠺࡞ែᵝ࡛౑⏝ࡍࡿ࡜ࡁ࡟Ⓨ⏕ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡜ᐃ⩏ࡋࡓࠋ࢝ࢼࢲࡢ᭱㧗⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ㼂㼑㼡㼢㼑㻌㻯㼘㼕㼏㼝㼡㼛㼠㻌㻼㼛㼚㼟㼍㼞㼐㼕㼚㻌㼢㻚㻌㻮㼛㼡㼠㼕㼝㼡㼑㼟㻌㻯㼘㼕㼝㼡㼛㼠㻌㻸㼠㽴㼑 ࡢᖺࡢពぢ࡟࠾࠸࡚ྠ✀ࡢᇶ‽ࢆ᫂☜࡟㏙࡭

ࢹ࢕࢔ࣥࡀࠊ⢒㔝࡞ゝⴥࢆ౑⏝ࡍࡿ࠾➗࠸ࢩ࣮࡛ࣙࡢⱁྡ࡜ࡋ࡚ Kodak ࡢྡ⛠ࢆ౑ࡓࠋྠ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ࢝ࢼࢲࡢἲᚊ࡛つᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠊၟᶆࡢࠕ౯್ࡢୗⴠࠖ

⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀࠊཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆࡢởᰁ࡜࡞ࡿ᪨ㄆᐃࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .

࡜࠸࠺ッゴཎᅉ࡛࠶ࡗ࡚ࠊ୍᪉ᙜ஦⪅ࡀ࠶ࡿၟᶆࢆࠊ௚᪉ᙜ஦⪅ࡢၟᶆ࡟

See, e.g., PepsiCo, Inc. v. #1 Wholesale, LLC., No. 07-CV-367, 2007 WL 2142294, atࠕ௜㝶ࡍࡿࢢࢵࢻ࢘࢕ࣝࡢ౯್ࢆୗⴠࡉࡏࡿຠᯝࢆ⏕ࡎࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡢ࠶ࡿែ

*4 (N.D. Ga. July 20, 2007) ⿕࿌ࡀ PepsiCo ࡢ⎼ࠊ⨁ࠊཬࡧ㣗ရ⏝ࡢ⨁ࢆᨵ㐀ࡋ࡚ࠊᵝ࡟࡚ࠖ౑⏝ࡍࡿ⾜Ⅽࢆ⚗ࡌ࡚࠸ࡿࡶࡢ࡟↔Ⅼࢆ࠶࡚ࡓࠋྠ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ

㠀ྜἲࢻࣛࢵࢢ࡞࡝ࡢࡶࡢࢆࡇࡗࡑࡾಖ⟶ࡋ࡚࠾ࡅࡿࡼ࠺࡟ࡋࡓࡇ࡜ࡀࠊPepsiCoࡢၟᶆࢆởᰁࡋࡓࡶࡢ࡜ㄆᐃࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ ; Coca-Cola Co. v. Alma-Leo U.S.A., Inc., 719
F. Supp. 725, 728 (N.D. Ill. 1989) ⿕࿌ࡀ Coca-Cola ࡢ⎼࡟ࡼࡃఝࡓ⎼࡛ࠊ୰࡟ࢥ࢝࢖
ࣥ࡟ఝࡓࢳ࣮ࣗ࢖࣒ࣥ࢞ࡢⓑ࠸⢊ࢆධࢀ࡚࠶ࡿࡶࡢࢆ㈍኎ࡋࡓࡇ࡜࡛ཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆ
ࢆởᰁࡋࡓ࡜ㄆᐃࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ .
See, e.g., Darling, supra note 203, at 63㸦ࠕᕼ㔘໬ࡣࠊSchechter ࡀ⮬ᕫࡢᖺࡢㄽ

ᩥ࡛グ㏙ࡋࡓᐖᝏ࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊởᰁࡣၟᶆࡢಶูࡢ㒊ศ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ࡢㄗゎࡸゝⴥࡢ౑࠸ἲᩥୖࡢᩥゝࢆᣑᙇゎ㔘ࡍࡿ࡟࠶ࡓࡾࠊၟᶆࡢࠕ౯್ࡣ㸦ホุࢆᝏࡃࡍࡿ
௨እࡢ㸧ูࡢ᪉ἲ࡛పୗࡍࡿྍ⬟ᛶࡀ࠶ࡾࠊ౛࠼ࡤ␗࡞ࡿ౑⏝⪅࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ᶆ❶ࡀࡲࡁᩓࡽࡉࢀࡓࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚㆑ูᛶࡀῶᑡࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡞ሙྜࡀ࠶ࡆ
ࡽࢀࡿࠖ࡜ពぢࢆ㏙࡭ࡓࠋ௚᪉ࠊ㐃㑥➨  ᕠᅇ༊᥍ッ⿢ุᡤࡣࠊ᭱㏆࡟࡞ࡗ࡚ࠊởᰁࢆド᫂ࡍࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࡣࠊཎ࿌ࡀ༢࡟ࠊ
ࠕࡰࡸ࠿ࡋ࡟௦ࢃࡾࠊ
㸦⿕

᪉ࡀୗᡭ࡛࠶ࡿࡓࡵ࡟ᕼ㔘໬ࡢ⌮ㄽ࡟⣮ࢀ㎸ࢇ࡛ࡋࡲࡗࡓᐖᝏ࡛࠶ࡿ㹿㺁 ; Robert N.



Id.

Klieger, Student Article, Trademark Dilution: The Whittling Away of the Rational Basis forSee Trade Marks Directive, supra note 205, art. 5(2), at 29.

Trademark Protection, 58 U. PITT. L. REV. 789, 831 (1997) 㺀ởᰁࡣࠊ⌮ㄽⓗ࡟ၟᶆࡢᕼ



See J.M. Balkin, Deconstructive Practice and Legal Theory, 96 YALE L.J. 743, 759

㔘໬࡟ࡣศ㢮ࡋ࠼࡞࠸㹿㺁 .

(1987) 㺀༴㝤࡞⿵㊊ࠖࡢᴫᛕ࡟ࡘ࠸࡚ㄽࡌ࡚࠸ࡿ .

See Barton Beebe, The Semiotic Analysis of Trademark Law, 51 UCLA L. REV. 621,

Case C-487/07, L’Oreal SA v. Bellure NV, 2009 ECJ EUR-Lex LEXIS 532 ¶ 40 (June695-98 (2004).

18, 2009).





[2006] 1 S.C.R. 824 (Can.).

ࡿ .



Canada Trade-marks Code, R.S.C., ch. T 13, § 22(1) (1985).





Veuve Clicquot Ponsardin, [2006] 1 S.C.R. at 858 ¶ 63.

Pub. L. No. 109-312, 120 Stat. 1730 15 U.S.C. ࡢྛᡤ࡟ࣂࣛࣂࣛ࡟つᐃࡉࢀ࡚࠸
15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(2)(C) (2006) (internal quotation marks omitted).

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO   ㄽ  ㄝ࿌ࡀࡑࡢၟᶆࢆ౑⏝ࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀ㸧ࠊ ཎ࿌ࡢ ၟᶆࡢホุࢆᐖࡍࡿ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜ࢆド᫂ࡋ࡞ࡅࢀࡤ࡞ࡽ࡞࠸ࠖ࡜㏙࡭ࡓࠋࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞ពぢ࡟ᇶ࡙ࡅࡤࠊ௚ࡢၟᶆࡢࠕ㈍኎ຊࠖࢆῶࡌࠊᙜヱ௚ࡢၟᶆࡢࢢࢵࢻ࢘࢕ࣝࡢ౯್ࢆపୗࡉࡏࠊཪࡣࡑࡢホุࢆᐖࡍࡿࡼ࠺࡞ၟᶆࡢ
౑⏝ࡣࠊࡍ࡭࡚ࠊ₯ᅾⓗ࡟ởᰁࢆ⏕ࡌࡉࡏࡿ౑⏝࡛࠶ࡿ࡜ࡋ࡚ッ࠼ࡿࡇ࡜ࡀྍ⬟࡜࡞ࡿࠋࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞౑⏝࡟ࡣࠊࡶࡕࢁࢇࠊၟᶆࡀࣘࢽ࣮ࢡ࡞ࡶࡢ࡛
࠶ࡿࡇ࡜࡟ᑐࡍࡿホุࢆởᰁࡋ࡚ᕼ㔘໬ࢆ⏕ࡌࡉࡏࡿࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡀྵࡲࢀࠊࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜ⅭࡀࠕᏳ≀ࡢࠖࢥࣆ࣮࡜࠸࠺ᙧែࢆ࡜ࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࠊ
ཬࡧࡑࡢࡼ࠺࡞ࢥࣆ࣮⾜Ⅽࡢᑐ㇟࡜ࡉࢀࡓၟᶆࢆࠕ୙೺඲࡞࠸ࡋ୙⾨⏕࡞ᩥ⬦ࠖ࡟࠾ࡃࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿ࠿ྰ࠿ࡣၥࢃ࡞࠸ࠋ⿕࿌ࡢၟᶆࡀཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆ࡜ࡑ
ࡢฟᡤ࡜ࡢ㛫ࡢࡘ࡞ࡀࡾࢆࡰࡸ࠿ࡋࡓ࡜࠸࠺ࡇ࡜࡟ࡘࡁࠊཎ࿌ࡀド᫂ຊࡢᙉ࠸ドᣐࢆ᭷ࡋ࡞࠸ሙྜ㸦࡯࡜ࢇ࡝ᖖ࡟ࡑ࠺࡛࠶ࡿࡼ࠺࡟ᛮࢃࢀࡿࡀ㸧ࠊཎ࿌ࡣࠊࡑࢀ࡛ࡶ⿕࿌ࡢၟᶆࡀࠊཎ࿌ࡢၟᶆࡢホุࠊࡍ࡞ࢃࡕࡑࡢၟᶆࡀ
୍ࡘཪࡣࡈࡃᑡᩘࡢฟᡤ࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࡢࡳ౑ࢃࢀࠊࡑࢀ௨እ࡛ࡣ౑ࢃࢀ࡚࠸࡞࠸࡜ࡢホุࢆởᰁࡋࡓ࡜୺ᙇࡍࡿ࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࠋ⓶⫗࡞ࡇ࡜࡟ࠊࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞⌮ㄽ࡟ࡼࢀࡤࠊởᰁ⾜Ⅽ㸦౛࠼ࡤၟᶆࢆࠕ୙೺඲࡞ᩥ⬦ࠖ࡟࠾ࡃࡇ࡜㸧ࡣࠊᚲࡎࡋࡶᙜヱၟᶆࡢ⊂⮬ᛶࢆᕼ㔘໬ࡍࡿࡶࡢ࡛ࡣ࡞ࡃࠊၟᶆࡢ⊂⮬ᛶࡢᕼ㔘໬࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊᙜヱၟᶆࡀởᰁࡉࢀࡿࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋởᰁ࡜࠸࠺ࡶࡢࡀ⡿ᅜࡢἲᚊ࡟࠾࠸࡚௚ᅜ࡜ྠᵝ࡟᫂☜࡟ゝཬࡉࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࡓࡵ࡟ࠊ6FKHFKWHUࡀࡶ
࡜ࡶ࡜ᛮ࠸ᥥ࠸࡚࠸ࡓಖㆤࡢᙧែࡣࠊㄒࡿࡶ୙ᛮ㆟࡛࠶ࡿࡀࠊ㐃㑥ἲࡢࣞ࣋ࣝ࡟࠾࠸࡚ࡣࠊ⌧ᅾ฼⏝ྍ⬟࡞ࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ⌧௦ࡢ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲ୍⯡ࡢ୰࡛ࡣ࠶࡚ࡣࡲࡽ࡞࠸࡛࠶ࢁ࠺ࡀࠊ⌧௦ࡢၟᶆἲ࡜ྠᵝ࡟ࠊởᰁࡢ⌮ㄽࡣࠊ
ᐇ㉁࠿ࡽᙧᘧ࡬࡜⛣ࡾࡘࡘ࠶ࡾࠊၟᶆࡢᐇ㉁ⓗ࡞ព࿡ࢆࡑࡢᏑᅾࡍࡿ㝈ࡾ࡟࠾࠸࡚ಖㆤࡋಁ㐍ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࠿ࡽࠊࡼࡾᢳ㇟ⓗ࡟ࠊᙜヱၟᶆࡢᙧᘧⓗ࡞ࠕᕪูⓗ㆑ูᛶࠖࢆಖㆤࡋಁ㐍ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡬࡜⛣ࡾࡘࡘ࠶ࡿࠋၟᶆἲࡢ⌧௦ᆺዝౘ⚗Ṇἲ࡜ࡋ࡚ࡢᙺ๭ࡀᣑ኱ࡍࡿࡇ࡜࡟ࡼࡗ࡚ࠊ࠾ࡑࡽࡃࡇࡢࡼ࠺࡞⛣ࡾኚࢃࡾࡀᘬࡁ㉳ࡇࡉࢀࡓࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ



Louis Vuitton Malletier S.A. v. Haute Diggity Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252, 268 (4th Cir.

2007).
See Beebe, supra note 267, at 675-76.

 ▱ⓗ㈈⏘ἲᨻ⟇Ꮫ◊✲ 9RO  