Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pelanggaran merek dapat terjadi meskipun merek tersebut sudah terkenal sehingga menimbulkan kebingungan karena memiliki Persamaan pada Keseluruhan atau memiliki Persamaan pada Pokoknya. Sengketa merek semacam ini terjadi bahkan di seluruh dunia di mana penelitian ini mengambil contoh kasus Peripera yang terjadi di Indonesia, dibandingkan dengan kasus Nutrilogie yang terjadi di Prancis serta kasus Bugatti yang terjadi di Kanada. Merek Terkenal tidak memiliki definisi jelas dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis, namun penjelasan Pasal 21 menyebutkannya secara singkat, kemudian dilengkapi dengan Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor 67 Tahun 2016 tentang Pendaftaran Merek. Hal yang sama berlaku untuk Kesamaan Substantif tetapi hanya untuk definisi singkat dan tidak ada peraturan lain. Namun berdasarkan penelitian, Hukum Indonesia yang sebelumnya dianggap paling kurang oleh penulis dalam hal menentukan apakah suatu merek dapat dianggap sebagai Merek Terkenal, malah menjadi yang paling detail dari negara pembanding dalam hal Undang-Undang, tetapi kurang fleksibel dalam hal doktrin dalam hal yurisprudensi sehubungan dengan putusan Persamaan Substantif.

---

A trademark violation can occur even if a brand is already well known and confusing due to being Identical or having Substantive Similarities. This type of trademark dispute happens even across the world. This research takes the example of the Peripera case that happened in Indonesia, compared to the Nutrilogie that happened in France, as well as the Bugatti case that happened in Canada. There is no precise definition of a Well-Known Trademark under Indonesian Law No. 20 of 2016 on Trademarks and Geographical Indication. However, the elucidation of Article 21 mentions it briefly, then supplemented by the Regulation of Minister of Law and Human Rights Number 67 of 2016 concerning Trademark Registration. The same is applied to Substantive Similarity but only to the extent of a brief definition and no other regulation. Based on the research, however, Indonesian Law, which the writer has previously thought to be the most lacking in terms of determining if a trademark can be considered a Well-Known Trademark, instead becomes the most detailed from the compared country in terms of the Law, but less flexible in terms of doctrines in terms of jurisprudentially regarding the ruling of Substantive Similarities. "

"For well-known trademark regulation in Indonesia there is a gap in the legal framework, due to a poor legal system. Indonesia is attractive to some foreign companies in expanding their market, not only because it is a developing country, but also because of its geographical area and fast growing population which are beneficially appealing to foreign companies. Nevertheless, there are still problems regarding well-known trademark in Indonesia, whether it is an infringement, bad faith, or illegal logo replicas. Famous brands have often found themselves struggling with local companies in Indonesia to defend their well-known trademark. Even though the trademark policy has somewhat improved, the case of infringing and bad faith still exists. Therefore, by following the example of the European Union, Indonesia can improve its legal system."

"Skripsi ini membahas tentang perlindungan yang diberikan kepada pemegang merek terkenal tidak terdaftar dengan berlakunya Pasal 83 dalam Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis, serta untuk menentukan apakah ketentuan yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Merek Indonesia tersebut mengakomodir perlindungan melalui gugatan passing off dengan membandingkan pada ketentuan gugatan passing off di Inggris dan Republik Rakyat Cina. Penelitian hukum ini ialah penelitian normatif yuridis, dilakukan dengan pendekatan kualitatif dan menghasilkan suatu bentuk penelitian deskriptif. Hasil penelitian hukum dengan membandingkan ketentuan gugatan passing off di Inggris dan Republik Rakyat Cina ialah berlakunya Pasal 83 Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis tidak mengakomodir gugatan passing off dalam perlindungan merek di Indonesia. Sehingga, penulis menyarankan untuk mempertimbangkan perubahan pada ketentuan Undang-Undang Merek Indonesia agar dapat memberikan perlindungan terhadap merek terkenal tidak terdaftar.

---

This undergraduate thesis discussed about the measure of protection provided for the unregistered well known trademark holder by the recent enactment of Indonesia Trademark Law, in which contained in Article 83 of Law No. 20 Year 2016 concerning Trademark and Geographical Indication, and whether the provision provided within the law serve similar measure of protection that catered by passing off lawsuit, using comparison with passing off in United Kingdom and People rsquo s Republic of China. This legal research is juridical normative legal research, conducted by qualitative approach and resulted in a form of descriptive research. The result of this legal research is that by comparing with passing off lawsuit in the United Kingdom and People rsquo s Republic of China, the enactment of Article 83 does not accommodate passing off lawsuit within Indonesia trademark protection. Hence, the author suggests taking into consideration to revised the provision in Indonesia Trademark Law to provide extended protection towards unregistered well known trademark"

"Kepastian hukum sangatlah penting dalam iklim usaha, termasuk dalam perihal perlindungan terhadap hak merek. Praktik trademark piracy terjadi ketika terjadi pendaftaran merek oleh seorang individu atas merek yang bukan miliknya dengan itikad buruk. Terkait hal tersebut terdapat dua pokok permasalahan yang diteliti yaitu mengenai bagaimana pengaturan perlindungan hukum bagi Merek terkenal di Indonesia dan bagaimana perbandingan pengaturan dan penerapan perlindungan hukum bagi merek terkenal dari tindakan trademark piracy di Indonesia dan Republik Rakyat Cina. Penulis juga menganalisis sengketa merek terkenal di Indonesia dan Republik Rakyat Cina dan melakukan perbandingan mengenai penerapan peraturan merek terkenal dalam tindakan trademark piracy dengan metode penelitian yuridis-normatif dan dengan pendekatan kualitatif. Walaupun istilah trademark piracy belum diatur secara jelas dalam undang-undang nomor 20 tahun 2016 dan belum diatur secara jelas juga mengenai perlindungan bagi merek terkenal terutama terhadap praktik trademark piracy. Namun pada dasarnya suatu merek terkenal dapat memperoleh perlindungan dari praktik trademark piracy dengan adanya konsep merek terkenal dan itikad buruk. 

---

Legal certainty is very important in the business climate, including in terms of the protection of trademark rights. The practice of trademark piracy occurs when there is a trademark registration by an individual for a trademark that does not belong to him in bad faith. In this regard, there are two main issues studied, namely how to regulate legal protection for well-known marks in Indonesia and how to compare the regulation and application of legal protection for well-known marks from trademark piracy in Indonesia and the People's Republic of China. The author also analyzes well-known trademark disputes in Indonesia and the People's Republic of China and compares the application of well-known trademark regulations in trademark piracy with juridical-normative research methods and with a qualitative approach. Although the term trademark piracy has not been clearly regulated in law number 20 of 2016 and has not been clearly regulated regarding protection for well-known marks, especially against the practice of trademark piracy. But basically a well-known brand can get protection from the practice of trademark piracy with the concept of a well-known brand and bad faith."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai perlindungan hukum merek terkenal atas tindakan dilusi merek terhadap persaingan curang di Indonesia. Penulis mengajukan dua pokok permasalahan: Pertama, mengenai perlindungan merek terkenal atas tindakan dilusi merek terhadap persaingan curang berdasarkan perjanjian internasional dan hukum merek di Amerika Serikat, Uni Eropa, Singapura, dan Indonesia. Sedangkan kedua, mengenai penerapan teori dilusi oleh Hakim dalam pertimbangannya dalam memutus sengketa merek terkenal. Dengan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normative dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan metode perbandingan hukum. Perlindungan yang diberikan dalam Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis dan Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia No. 12 Tahun 2021 tentang Pendaftaran Merek belum secara eksplisit mengatur dan memberikan perlindungan merek terkenal atas suatu tindakan dilusi merek terhadap persaingan curang di Indonesia. Disisi lain, Singapore Trademark Act 1998 Chapter 332 as revised 2005 yang telah memberikan perlindungan hukum pada merek terkenal atas tindakan dilusi merek terhadap persaingan curang di Singapura. Namun, jika merujuk dalam pertimbangan Majelis Hakim Pengadilan Niaga pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat secara tidak langsung telah menerapkan dan memberikan perlindungan hukum merek terkenal atas tindakan dilusi merek terhadap persaingan curang secara benar. Penulis menyarankan agar perlindungan merek terkenal terhadap dilusi merek dapat dijadikan sebuah ketentuan hukum baru demi memberikan kepastian hukum bagi pemilik merek terkenal.

---

This thesis discusses the legal protection of well-known trademarks for trademark dilution against unfair competition in Indonesia. The author proposes two main issues: First, regarding the protection of well-known trademarks for trademark dilution against unfair competition based on International Treaties and Trademark Law in the United States, European Union, Singapore, and Indonesia. While the second is regarding the implementation of dilution theory by the Judge in his consideration in deciding the well-known trademark dispute. By using a normative juridical research method with a statutory approach and a comparative law method. The protection provided in Law No. 20 of 2016 regarding Trademarks and Geographical Indications and The Regulation of Minister of Law and Human Rights No. 12 of 2021 regarding Trademark Registration has not explicitly regulated and provided protection for well-known trademarks for an act of trademark dilution against unfair competition in Indonesia. On the other hand, the Singapore Trademark Act 1998 Chapter 332 as revised in 2005 has provided legal protection for well-known trademarks for trademark dilution against unfair competition in Singapore. However, if referring to the consideration of the Panel of Judges of the Commercial Court at the Central Jakarta District Court, it has indirectly implemented and provided legal protection of well-known trademarks for trademarks dilution against unfair competition correctly. The authors suggest that the protection of well-known trademarks for trademark dilution can be used as a new legal provision to provide legal certainty for the owner of a well-known trademark."