Trademark cross-class protection is highly disputed, both theoretically and judicially. It can be rationalized, to some extent, by doctrines of uniqueness, quality feedback, market preemption, and free-riding, etc.; but these doctrines have inherent drawbacks. The trademark injury doctrine is the most convincing among them, but it does not give a sufifcient analysis of the injury. Instead, the interdisciplinary approaches of semiotics, psychology and brand science can help to analyze the injury of cross-class use of trademarks; and provide reasonable explanations for cross-class protection. From the semiotic perspective, a trademark is essentially a unity of mark and information of the commodity, while cross-use gives multiple meanings for a trademark. From the psychological perspective, a trademark is essentially the knot in a consumer’s memory, while cross-use enables consumers to develop multiple cognitive networks of a trademark. From the perspective of brand science, the essence of a trademark is its independent symbol value or brand value, while cross-use means tremendous commercial value by brand extension strategy. On the whole, the semiotic and the psychological analysis stress the real injury caused by the cross-use of trademarks; and brand science proves that the cross-class protection is the inevitable result of commercial practice and trademark evolution. From the point of both real injury and future commercial interest, the interdisciplinary approaches provide solid theoretical foundation for future research on trademark cross-class protection.%商标跨类保护一直饱受理论争议和司法质疑。独特性说、质量反馈说、市场先占说和搭便车说等均可为其提供一定的解释，但却都存在缺陷。商标受损害说虽然有力，但却对损害分析不足，而符号学、心理学和品牌学等方法则有助于分析商标跨类使用的损害，从而为商标跨类保护提供合理解释。在符号学看来，商标本质上是商标标志与商品信息的统一体，跨类使用将导致商标多义化；在心理学看来，商标本质上是消费者记忆中的核心节点，跨类使用将导致消费者对同一商标形成多套认知网络；在品牌学看来，商标的本质在于其所承载的独立的符号价值或品牌价值，跨类使用意味着实质性的品牌延伸利益。总体而言，符号学和心理学分析突显了商标跨类使用的现实损害，品牌学则证明了商标跨类保护是商业实践发展和商标演变的必然结果。无论是现实的损害还是未来的商业利益，这些跨学科方法共同为商标跨类保护提供了扎实的理论解释。
展开▼
