Sidarta, Roy Sutrisno (2018) Analisis putusan Mahkamah Agung no.162/PK/PDT.SUS/2010 tentang sengketa merek. Bachelor thesis, Universitas Pelita Harapan.
![Title.pdf [thumbnail of Title.pdf]](http://repository.uph.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png)
SAMPUL.pdf
Restricted to Repository staff only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (1MB)
Preview
ABSTRACT.pdf
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (28kB) | Preview
Preview
Bab-1.pdf
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (134kB) | Preview
![Chapter2.pdf [thumbnail of Chapter2.pdf]](http://repository.uph.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png)
Bab-2.pdf
Restricted to Registered users only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (308kB)
![Chapter3.pdf [thumbnail of Chapter3.pdf]](http://repository.uph.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png)
Bab-3.pdf
Restricted to Registered users only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (209kB)
![Chapter4.pdf [thumbnail of Chapter4.pdf]](http://repository.uph.edu/style/images/fileicons/text.png)
Bab-4.pdf
Restricted to Registered users only
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (39kB)
Preview
PUSTAKA.pdf
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike.
Download (21kB) | Preview
Abstract
Putusan Peninjauan Kembali Nomor 162 PK/PDT.SUS/2010 menimbulkan
ketidakpastian hukum karena aturan yang terdapat dalam Undang-Undang Merek
Pasal 3 memberikan hak eksklusif bagi merek yang melakukan pendafatran.
Tetapi sangat bertolak belakang dengan kenyataan yang timbul, bahwa PT.
Manggala Putra Perkasa pemilik merek Polo Ralph Laurent tidak dilindungi
merek yang dimilikinya. Sehingga harus dikalahkan oleh PT. Primajaya Pantes
Garment adalah perusahaan yang memiliki merek Polo. Gambar logo yang
dimiliki kedua merek tersebut sangatlah sama yaitu Logo Orang Menunggang
Kuda Bermain Polo. Putusan Mahkamah Agung dalam Peninjauan Kembali
sangatlah bertentangan dengan prinsip-prinsip dalam TRIPs maupun ketentuan
dalam Konvensi Paris yang telah diratifikasi di Indonesia. / The Judicial Review Verdict Number 162 PK / PDT.SUS / 2010 raises legal
uncertainty because the rules contained in the Trademark of Article 3 provide
exclusive rights to the registered trademark. But very contrary to the fact that PT.
Manggala Putra Perkasa, the brand owner of Polo Ralph Laurent is not protected by
the brand. This leads to their defeat to PT PrimaJaya Pantes Garment for the rights
of using the brand and logo. The logo images that are owned by both brands are
very similar which is, a horseman playing polo. The Supreme Court's Ruling in
Review is very much against the principles of TRIPs and the provisions of the
ratified Paris Convention in Indonesia.
Item Type: | Thesis (Bachelor) |
---|---|
Creators: | Creators NIM Email ORCID Sidarta, Roy Sutrisno NIM05120140013 UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED |
Contributors: | Contribution Contributors NIDN/NIDK Email Thesis advisor Setyabudi, Jusup Jacobus UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED Thesis advisor Paula, Paula UNSPECIFIED UNSPECIFIED |
Uncontrolled Keywords: | merek; trips; konvensi paris; undang-undang merek |
Subjects: | K Law > K Law (General) |
Divisions: | University Subject > Current > Faculty/School - UPH Surabaya > Faculty of Law > 74201 - Department of Law Current > Faculty/School - UPH Surabaya > Faculty of Law > 74201 - Department of Law |
Depositing User: | Rafael Rudy |
Date Deposited: | 15 Jan 2024 07:31 |
Last Modified: | 15 Jan 2024 07:31 |
URI: | http://repository.uph.edu/id/eprint/60055 |