嬌蕉包將國際知名精品愛馬仕柏金包以攝影後的的圖樣拓印到帆布袋上於市場上販賣圖利，這樣的利用方式，是否侵害愛馬仕柏金包的著作權？首先應自柏金包是否為受著作權法保護之「著作」著手，只有柏金包的外觀設計為著作，才有被侵權的可能。而所謂「侵權」，究竟將圖樣拓印在帆布包的利用行為是重製、改作或是實施，是主張著作權侵權必須主張的第二個爭點。而此利用行為應只是一件搭便車的抄襲模仿作品或是極具創意的合理使用仿作（parody）作品，乃本文另一討論之核心所在。 本文除了首先將糾紛之爭議提點外，就著作權侵權與否之爭議部分，認為愛馬仕柏金包之外觀屬於應用美術著作，在「分離測試原則」之「概念上可分」各說主張之下，柏金包應屬於著作；而轉印圖樣的行為，本文亦認為其屬於將平面圖形於立體上重現平面的利用型態，故為侵犯著作權之重製；嬌蕉包欲主張合理使用抗辯，應先判定嬌蕉包對於著作的利用方式是否屬於仿作，仿作的判斷在我國並無先例可循，因此本文自美國法院之判決所建立之轉化利用測試標準出發，逐項檢驗著作權合理使用的四大要素，以判別嬌蕉包上所貼附之柏金包圖案是否為一合理使用。 綜合言之，本文認為嬌蕉包在著作權爭議上，因具有構成仿作之特性，不僅在對比之下產生批判性、新的意義及新的目的，不至於產生市場替代效果，因此建議其利用應有合理使用之空間為宜。

The well-known French luxury goods brand “Hermes” recently filed a lawsuit against a Taiwanese handbag company, Banana International, for infringing its trademark and copyright. This article only focuses on its copyright issues. Since Taiwanese Banana International imprinted photographs of what appears to be a genuine Hermes Birkin bag to its canvas tote bag, Hermes argues that Banana International’s canvas bag is simply riding on the reputation and recognition of Hermes Birkin bag. However, according to some U.S. court opinions, it is possible that Banana’s bag could constitute a creative fair use parody. This article first analyzes the theories of conceptual separability and confirms that the design of Birkin Handbag is a work protected by copyright law. Secondly, this article argues that imprinting photographs of Birkin bag onto a canvas tote bag constitutes copyright reproduction. For fair use defense, this article asserts that even though there has been no precedent dealing with copyright parody issue in Taiwan, the “transformative use test” presented by the U.S. Supreme Court is entitled to set a standard for deciding whether Banana International’s canvas bag is a parody and whether it is a copyright fair use. This article finally argues that Banana’s bag can pass the test of copyright parody. Consumers are able to sense the criticism, new meanings and new purposes generated from the Banana’s bags by comparing with Hermes bag. Moreover, the sale of Banana bags will not supersede the market of Birkin bags. Therefore, this article concludes that Banana’s bags is a fair use of copyright law.