| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 MB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O ato de paródia recorre a um ou vários elementos (como uma obra, um desenho ou modelo ou uma marca) pré-existentes, como fundamento ao comentário social ou político que pretende transmitir, prosseguindo finalidades essencialmente humorísticas, e criando, desta forma, uma nova realidade, com autonomia face à primeira, visando, precisamente, este distanciamento entre ambas para se considerar uma paródia de sucesso. É à data presente muito manifesta uma forte luta pela salvaguarda da liberdade de expressão, qualquer que seja a perspetiva de que parte (política, religiosa, artística, moral), em detrimento de outros campos da vida em comunidade. Por este motivo, parece conferir-se ao parodiante uma maior margem para a criação e divulgação da sua paródia, enfatizada pelos meios de comunicação social que hoje facilitam este trabalho. O reverso da moeda atinge, principalmente, os titulares dos direitos que poderão ser objeto-enfoque deste comentário sarcástico ou humorístico, que receiam vê-los diminuídos e, em certos casos, prejudicados, pelo que possa resultar da partilha incondicionada desta liberdade de expressão. Em particular, os titulares das marcas de prestígio, enquanto alvos principais de críticas ou apreciações – negativas e positivas – pela sua notoriedade junto do público, pretendem ver acautelada a diluição e eventual degradação do caráter de prestígio do respetivo sinal distintivo. A amplitude da tutela concedida a estes titulares varia ao longo do globo: os Estados Unidos da América são bastante permissivos da paródia face aos direitos de propriedade industrial, já na Europa, esta afirmação não se poderá fazer com a mesma certeza. Em Portugal não está ainda prevista uma exceção aos direitos dos titulares das marcas de prestígio, condicionando a sua reação a violações dos respetivos sinais decorrentes da paródia, colocando-se a questão de saber se, esta previsão necessitará de ser expressa ou se, por outro lado, resulta de uma interpretação extensiva da legislação vigente. Concluímos, fundamentando-o devidamente ao longo da presente dissertação, pela aplicabilidade (condicional) da exceção de paródia aos direitos de marca (i.e. de prestígio), embora encaremos com pouca urgência uma consagração expressa e detalhada desta realidade, por resultar da interpretação normativa combinada dos diplomas-chave neste plano: CRP, RMUE e CPI.
The act of parody uses a pre-existing work as a basis for the social or political commentary it intends to convey, pursuing essentially humorous purposes, and thus creating a new reality, with autonomy from the first, aiming precisely at this distance between the two in order to be considered a successful parody. To this day, there is a strong struggle to safeguard freedom of expression, from whatever perspective (political, religious, artistic, moral), to the detriment of other areas of community life. For this reason, the parodiant seems to be given greater scope to create and disseminate his parody, emphasized by the media that facilitate this work today. The other side of the coin is that the owners of the rights that may be the focus of this sarcastic or humorous commentary fear that they will be diminished and, in some cases, harmed by what may result from the unconditional sharing of this freedom of expression. In particular, the owners of prestigious trademarks, as the main targets of criticism or appreciation - both negative and positive - for their notoriety in the eyes of the public, wish to be protected from the dilution and possible degradation of the prestigious nature of their distinctive sign. The extent of the protection granted to these owners varies across the globe: the United States of America is quite permissive of parody in relation to industrial property rights, but in Europe this cannot be said with the same certainty. In Portugal, there is still no provision for an exception to the rights of owners of prestigious trademarks, conditioning their reaction to infringements of their signs resulting from parody, and the question arises as to whether this provision needs to be express or whether, on the other hand, it is the result of an extensive interpretation of current legislation. We conclude, duly substantiating it throughout this dissertation, that the parody exception is applicable to trademark rights (i.e. prestige rights), although we do not see an express and detailed consecration of this reality as urgent, as it results from the combined normative interpretation of the key diplomas in this area: CRP, RMUE and CPI.
The act of parody uses a pre-existing work as a basis for the social or political commentary it intends to convey, pursuing essentially humorous purposes, and thus creating a new reality, with autonomy from the first, aiming precisely at this distance between the two in order to be considered a successful parody. To this day, there is a strong struggle to safeguard freedom of expression, from whatever perspective (political, religious, artistic, moral), to the detriment of other areas of community life. For this reason, the parodiant seems to be given greater scope to create and disseminate his parody, emphasized by the media that facilitate this work today. The other side of the coin is that the owners of the rights that may be the focus of this sarcastic or humorous commentary fear that they will be diminished and, in some cases, harmed by what may result from the unconditional sharing of this freedom of expression. In particular, the owners of prestigious trademarks, as the main targets of criticism or appreciation - both negative and positive - for their notoriety in the eyes of the public, wish to be protected from the dilution and possible degradation of the prestigious nature of their distinctive sign. The extent of the protection granted to these owners varies across the globe: the United States of America is quite permissive of parody in relation to industrial property rights, but in Europe this cannot be said with the same certainty. In Portugal, there is still no provision for an exception to the rights of owners of prestigious trademarks, conditioning their reaction to infringements of their signs resulting from parody, and the question arises as to whether this provision needs to be express or whether, on the other hand, it is the result of an extensive interpretation of current legislation. We conclude, duly substantiating it throughout this dissertation, that the parody exception is applicable to trademark rights (i.e. prestige rights), although we do not see an express and detailed consecration of this reality as urgent, as it results from the combined normative interpretation of the key diplomas in this area: CRP, RMUE and CPI.
Description
Keywords
Paródia Direito de marcas Exceção Parody Trademark law Exception