摘要： 作为一种侵权抗辩事由，“商标合理使用”并非指基于特定利益考量，第三人即使未经许可使用了他人商标也不构成侵权，而是为了强调某些情形不构成商标意义上的使用，因而不可能侵犯商标权，即以反向列举的方式重申“商标使用”概念。是否为“商标意义上的使用”是判定侵犯商标权的前提与门槛，虽仍由原告负举证责任，但相比“混淆可能规则”有更为明确客观的识别依据，可以降低诉讼成本，避免寒蝉效应，在公众言论表达与商标权人保护范围之间划定一条较为清晰的边界。

关键词: 商标合理使用, 商誉, 混淆可能, 举证责任

Abstract: As an affirmative defense of infringement, the concept of trademark fair use doesn't mean that based on  some special interest consideration，a party doesn't commit an infringement while using the trademark without the authorization from the trademark owner. On the contrary, it only aims to stress some behaviors which don't constitute trademark use or commit infringement possibly by reaffirming the concept of trademark use  through reverse exemplification. Trademark use is a premise and threshold of judging trademark infringement or not, and its burden of persuasion lies still in the plaintiff. Comparing with the likelihood of confusion, it can be distinguished from some more objective and explicit evidence. So it can cut down the cost of lawsuit and avoid the chilling effect through delimiting a clearer boundary between public expression and trademark  domain. By comparing and analyzing the evolution of related provisions and cases of America, this article  clarifies the meaning and function of the rule of trademark fair use and criticizes the opinions of some commentators in China.

Key words: Trademark Fair Use, Goodwill, Likelihood of Confusion, Burden of Persuasion