Perlindungan hukum pemegang hak prioritas atas merek berdasarkan uu no. 20 tahun 2016 ( studi putusan no. 1065 k/pdt.sus-hki/2019 )

Jacqueline, Jacqueline (2021) Perlindungan hukum pemegang hak prioritas atas merek berdasarkan uu no. 20 tahun 2016 ( studi putusan no. 1065 k/pdt.sus-hki/2019 ). Bachelor thesis, Universitas Pelita Harapan.

	Text (Title) Title.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (407kB)
Preview	Text (Abstract) Abstract.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (309kB) | Preview
	Text (ToC) ToC.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (737kB)
Preview	Text (Chapter1) Chapter1.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (930kB) | Preview
	Text (Chapter2) Chapter2.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (2MB)
	Text (Chapter3) Chapter3.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (575kB)
	Text (Chapter4) Chapter4.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (5MB)
	Text (Chapter5) Chapter5.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (283kB)
Preview	Text (Bibliography) Bibliography.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (374kB) | Preview
	Text (Appendices) Appendices.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (61MB)

Abstract

Tujuan Penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui pelaksanaan Hak Prioritas atas merek berdasarkan UU Merek pada Putusan 1065 K/Pdt.-Sus-HKI/2019 dan untuk mengetahui interpretasi hakim dalam pertimbangan hukum pada kasus merek Putusan Nomor 1065k/Pdt.Sus-Hki/2019 telah sesuai dengan UU Merek. Metode yang digunakan oleh penulis adalah penelitian hukum normatif dan penelitian kepustakaan yaitu penelitian yang mengkaji studi dokumen, yakni menggunakan berbagai data sekunder seperti peraturan perundang-undangan, pendapat para sarjana dan juga penelusuran literatur kepustakaan. Pendekatan penelitian yang digunakan oleh penulis adalah Judical Case Study, yaitu pendekatan studi kasus hukum dikarenakan adanya konflik sehingga akan melibatkan campur tangan pengadilan untuk dapat memberikan keputusan penyelesaian. Hasil Penelitian pelaksanaan Hak Prioritas telah sesuai dengan UU Merek, karena sistem pendaftaran merek di Indonesia menganut sistem first to file dimana yang mendaftar terlebih dahulu adalah pemilik merek yang sah. Hal ini diperkuat dengan aturan hukum yang terdapat pada pasal 3 UU Merek dan pasal tersebut berkaitan dengan Pasal 1 angka 17 UU Merek. Permohonan pendafttaran merek magal milik Tergugat sama dengan tanggal pendaftaran di Vietnam sebagai negara anggota dari Konvensi Paris yaitu tanggal 8 Agustus 2016 dan terdaftar secara resmi di Vietnam tanggal 22 Agustus 2016. Pada faktanya PT. DEIN FOOD juga mengajukan permohonan pendaftaran merek dengan kelas yang sama dengan DIDIM INC yaitu KELAS 43 (Jasa Restoran, Rumah makan Restoran, Restoran swalayan, Rumah Makan, Tempat makan yang menghidangkan kudapan, Jas Bar, Kafe, Kantin, Ketering Makanan dan minuman dll). Maka permohonan pendaftaran merek yang diajukan oleh Penggugat tertanggal 28 Oktober 2016 tidak dapat diterima oleh Direktorat Jendral Hak Kekayaan Intelektual karena pendaftar yang pertama adalah merek magal milik Tergugat. Mahkamah Agung sependapat dengan putusan Hakim pada Putusan Nomor 43/PDT.Sus-HKI/2018/PN.Niaga Jkt. Pst dalam menolak permohonan kasasi dari Pemohon Kasasi karena alasan kasasi tidak dapat dibenarkan berdasarkan Judex Facti sehingga permohonan kasasi harus ditolak dengan pertimbangan Merek dagang Magal + Logo yang didaftarkan oleh Pemohon Kasasi memiliki persamaan secara keseluruhan dengan merek dagang Magal yang telah terdaftar atas nama Tergugat berdasarkan hak prioritas Maka putusan Pengadilan Niaga pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta tidak bertentangan dengan hukum dan/atau Undang- Undang, sehingga permohonan kasasi yang diajukan oleh Pemohon Kasasi tersebut harus ditolak./The Purpose of this research is to find out the implementation of Priority Rights of trademarks based on Trademark Law number. 20 of 2016 concerning Decision Number 1065 K/Pdt.-Sus-HKI/2019 and to find out the judge's interpretation in legal considerations in the Trademark case Decision Number 1065k/Pdt.Sus-Hki/2019 is in accordance with the Trademark Law Number. 20 of 2016 concerning Trademark The method used by the author is normative legal research and library research, namely research that examines document studies, namely using various secondary data such as laws and regulations, opinion of scholars and also literature searching. The research approach used by the author is Judical Case Study, namely the legal case study approach due to conflict so that it will involve court intervention to be able to provide a resolution decision. The results of the research on the implementation of priority rights are in accordance with Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications, because the trademark registration system in Indonesia adheres to a first to file system where the first to register is the legal trademark owner. It is reinforced by the legal rules in Article 3 of Trademarks Law and the article is related to Article 1 number 17 of Law. The application for registration of the Defendant's magal trademark is the same as the date of registration in Vietnam as a member country of the Paris Convention, namely August 8, 2016 and officially registered in Vietnam on 22 August 2016. In fact PT. DEIN FOOD also applied for a trademark registration with the same class as DIDIM INC, namely CLASS 43 (Restaurant Services, Restaurant Restaurants, Self-Service Restaurants, Restaurants, Restaurants that serve snacks, Bar Suits, Cafes, Canteens, Food and Beverage catering, etc.). Therefore, the application for registration of the trademark submitted by the Plaintiff on October 28, 2016 cannot be accepted by the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights because the first registrant was the Defendant's magal trademark. The Supreme Court agrees with the Judge's decision on Decision Number 43/PDT.Sus-HKI/2018/PN.Niaga Jkt. Pst in rejecting the cassation application from the Cassation Petitioner because the reason for the cassation cannot be justified based on the Judex Facti so that the cassation application must be rejected with the consideration that the Magal trademark + Logo registered by the Cassation Applicant has overall similarities with the Magal trademark which has been registered in the name of the Defendant based on rights priority Then the decision of the Commercial Court at the Jakarta District Court does not conflict with the law and/or the Act, so that the appeal filed by the Cassation Petitioner must be rejected.

Actions (login required)

View Item