求翻译：本案涉及商标权的归属问题，其争议最早可溯及到改革开放之前，跨度时间之长，更相关法律制度的变迁，这些无疑都给司法裁判带来困难。但现代法律体系有所谓“法官不能以法律不明或不备而拒绝裁判”的铁则，且应符合公平正义。该案二审法院以“事实上的商标权财产信托法律关系”，开创了法官创造性司法之先河，但细究之，该案在法理与实务中不乏有值得讨论之处。有人称其不啻“以判例的形式完善了立法”，实为“法官造法”。是什么意思？

null

The case concerns the problem of ownership of the trademark right, their dispute as soon as back as far as the reform and opening up, span of time before long, more relevant legal system changes, and these are undoubtedly to justice. But the modern legal system has the so-called "judge cannot in law

This case involves the trademark rights the ownership question, its dispute may trace back to go back to most early to the reform and open policy before, length of the span time, the related legal regime vicissitude, these all give the judicial referee to bring the difficulty without doubt.But the m

正在翻译，请等待...

正在翻译，请等待...