作者：李友根
作者介绍：南京大学法学院教授
出版日期：2015年8月9日
内容提要 《反不正当竞争法》第 5 条第 3 项关于擅自使用他人企业名称构成不正当 竞争的规定，在司法实践中逐渐扩大解释为企业字号。最高法院第 29 号指导案例将其进 一步扩大为适用于企业名称的简称。民法、商法对企业名称的保护各有其构成要件与限 制，对于简称的保护就需要引入反不正当竞争法，这是由竞争法的宗旨和利益的保护方式 所决定的。但是，司法对法条的扩张解释最终需要立法修订解决，而第 29 号指导案例在理 由的论证上尚有完善之处。
关键词 指导案例 企业名称 竞争法
Abstract: The stipulation of item 3 in article 5 of Anti-Unfair Competition Law about those who unauthorized use the name of other enterprise that leads to unfair competition is gradually expanded to the business brand． The No． 29 guiding case issued by the Supreme People’s Court has expanded the range from business name to its abbreviation． The protection of business name in Civil Law and Commercial Law has their own key component and limitation． To protect abbreviation，the Anti-Unfair Competition Law needs to be applied， which is decided by the purpose and interest protection mode of Competition Law． However， the final expanded judicial explanation of articles needs legislation amendment，but No． 29 guiding case is still incomplete in argumentation．