Radityo, Joshua Bakti
(2019)
Tinjauan yuridis terhadap perlindungan merek dan penerapan eksepsi gugatan prematur dalam putusan nomor 491 k/pdt.Sus-hki/2015 =.
Bachelor thesis, Universitas Pelita Harapan.
Full text not available from this repository.
Abstract
Article 6 paragraph (1) letter b of Law Number 15 Year 2001 regarding Marks provides legal protection for well-known marks which has not yet been registered in Indonesia. However, the implementation within the Ditjen HKI proves to be difficult in terms of providing guarantee of the implementation of the said article which often causes disputes between well-known marks and marks registered in Indonesia. This occurs in the case between the Monster Energy Company and Andrias Thamrun, the Monster Energy Company is a company originated from the United States which owns the mark of “MONSTER” for energy drink products since 1992 which has been globally known, while Andrias Thamrun is the owner of the mark of “MONSTER” which has been registered in Indonesia since January 13, 2010. The existence of the “MONSTER” mark of Andrias Thamrun causes the registration application of the variety of “MONSTER” mark by Monster Energy Company to be rejected by Ditjen HKI. Following this matter, Monster Energy Company submits a claim to nullify the mark owned by Andrias Thamrun based on Article 61 of Law Number 15 Year 2001 on the grounds that the mark owned by Andrias Thamrun has not been used since three years starting from the date of its registration. Further, the panel of judges of the first stage and cassation stated that the claim submitted by the Monster Energy Company cannot be accepted since the claim was still considered to be premature. The purpose of the research is to enlighten the concept of protection on well-known marks which is accommodated by Law Number 15 Year 2001 regarding Marks as well as to judge whether the considerations of the judges relating to the exception of the premature claim has provided a sense of justice and legal certainty for the parties. This research is conducted in a juridical normative way with statute and conceptual approaches. Based on the result of research, it can be concluded that a lack of information owned by Ditjen HKI regarding the existence of well-known marks causes difficulties to protect wellknown marks which has not yet been registered in Indonesia. Other than that, the exception of the premature claim shall not be accepted by the Judges since the Court possesses different tasks and functions compared to that of the Commission of Marks Appeal so the nature of the decision shall not influence one another.
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
