IMPLIKASI KASUS SENGKETA MEREK WD-40 DITINJAU DARI UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG MEREK DAN INDIKASI GEOGRAFIS (CONTOH KASUS NOMOR 39/PDT.SUS.MEREK /2018/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST

Muhammad Alkindi Soramoes, Christine S.T. Kansil

Abstract


The case of a trademark dispute between WD-40 and Get-All-40 proves that there is still a gap in trademark infringement by irresponsible parties, or parties who hitch a ride on well-known brands in bad faith. The problem faced is what is the implication of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications for famous trademark disputes related to the WD-40 COMPANY and WD-40 Manufacturing Company cases. The research method used is normative juridical legal research. The results of the study show that the implications of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications for famous trademark disputes related to the WD-40 COMPANY and WD-40 Manufacturing Company cases, where this trademark dispute was resolved / broken by the judge with the victory of the Plaintiff WD- 40 Company and WD-40 Manufacturing Company which in this case the judge canceled the registration of the Defendant's "GET ALL-40 and Painting" Mark: (1) "GET ALL-40 and Painting" Mark with No. Registration IDM000616481 in Class 2; and (2) “GET ALL-40 and Painting” Mark with No. Registration IDM000616482 in Class 2; from the General Register of Marks. Procedures for lawsuits at the commercial court for infringement of marks need to be implemented in accordance with the time limit stipulated in Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and those who do not accept the decision of the commercial court can file an appeal to the Supreme Court, because the commercial court does not regulate legal remedies. appeal.

Keywords


implication, brand dispute, WD-40.

Full Text:

PDF

References


A. Buku

Braunies, Robert. US Trademark Law, European Community and ASEAN

Intellectual Property Rights Co-operation Programme-ECAP II,

European Patent Office (EPO). (Jerman : Planck Institute, 2017).

C. Kusuma, R. Perlindungan Hak Cipta Terhadap Karya Seni (Studi

Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Lukisan), Naskah Publikasi Ilmiah.

Surakarta: (Surakarta: Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta,

.

D.I. Saebani dan B. A, Hukum Tata Negara Refleksi Kehidupan

Ketatanegaraan di Negara Republik Indonesia. (Bandung: Pustaka

Setia. 2018).

Nim, S. Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pengarang Terhadap Hak Ciptanya

Dan Sanksi Bagi Pelanggar Hak Cipta Menurut Undang-Undang

Nomor 28 Tahun 2014 tentang Hak Cipta. (Palembang: Universitas

Muhammadiyah Palembang, 2019).

Nurachmad, Much. Segala tentang HAKI Indonesia. (Yogyakarta:Buku

Biru, 2017).

B. Peraturan Perundang-Undangan

Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi

Geografis.

C. Internet

CNN Indonesia. “Pelanggaran Merek Paling Banyak di Adukan ke

Kemenkumham”. www.cnnindonesia.com, diakses 17 Mei 2021.

Direktorat Jenderal Kekayaan Intelektual-Kementerian Hukum dan HAM

RI, “Sejarah Perkembangan Perlindungan Kekayaan intelektual

(KI), www.en.dgip.go.id, diakses 9 Mei 2021.

Siregar, Boyke P. “Sidang Sengketa Hak Cipta Produk Pelumas Masih

Berjalan A lot”, www.wartaekonomi.co.id. diakses pada 10 April




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.24912/adigama.v4i2.13643

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Jurnal Hukum Adigama is indexed by:

   

 

-----

Alamat:

Fakultas Hukum - Universitas Tarumanagara

Ruang Jurnal, Gedung M, Lantai 2, Kampus 1

Jl. S. Parman No. 1, Jakarta Barat - 11440

[T] (+6221) 5671748, 5604477

[E] era.hukum.mahasiswa@fh.untar.ac.id

----- 

E-ISSN 2655-7347

P-ISSN 2747-0873

-----

Web Analytics Jurnal Hukum Adigama Stats

Flag Counter