Studi Kasus Atas Disparitas Antara Putusan Mahkamah Agung Dengan Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Mengenai Kriteria Merek Terkenal Yang Terjadi Antara Biostime Hong Kong Limited Melawan PT Bogamulia Nagadi Ditinjau Dari UU No 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Merek Dan Ind
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51903/jaksa.v1i4.1411Keywords:
Famous Marks, Marks Cancellation, DJAbstract
The urgency of the fame of a marks that is currently important makes people more aware to protect well-known marks. In the case of the "Biostime" marks dispute that occurred between H&H Hong Kong Limited and PT Bogamulia Nagadi, there were legal problems regarding the cancellation of the mark which had similarities in essence with the well-known marks. The study was to determine the disparity between the judges considerations in the Supreme Court Decision No. 781/K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2022 and the Commercial Court Decision No. 48/Pdt.Sus-Merek/2021/PN. Niaga.Jkt.Pst is in accordance with Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning MIG; and assess the accountability of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights based on Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning MIG. This research uses research methods with a normative juridical. This research stage focuses on literature studies using secondary data in the form of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. In addition, field studies were conducted by conducting interviews. Based on the results of the study, 2 (two) things can be concluded. First, the disparity between the consideration of Supreme Court Justices and Commercial Court Judges is in the criteria for famous marks. Second, DJKI's responsibility is to comply with and carry out the results of court decisions and provide legal protection for marks that have been officially registered.
References
Locke, Two Treatises of Government, dalam Syafrinaldi. (2003). Sejarah dan Teori Perlindungan KI: Jurnal Universitas Riau. 14(2).
M. Yahya Harahap. (1996). Tinjauan Merek Secara Umum dan Hukum Merek di Indonesia Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 1992. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.
Neni Sri Imaniyati. (2010). Perlindungan Hak Kekayaan Intelektual Sebagai Upaya Pemenuhan Hak Atas Iptek, Budaya dan Seni, Jakarta: Jurnal Media Hukum. 17(1).
Niru Anita Sinaga. (2020). Pentingnya perlindungan Hukum Kekayaan Intelektual bagi Pembangunan Ekonomi Indonesia, Jurnal Hukum Sasana. 6(2)
S. Sembiring. Prosedur dan Tata Cara Memperoleh Kekayaan Intelektual di Bidang Hak Cipta, Paten dan Merek. Bandung: Yrama Widya.
Usman Rachmadi. (2002). Hukum Hak atas Kekayaan Intelektual : Perlindungan dan Dimensi Hukumnya di Indonesia. Bandung: Penerbit Alumni
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis.
Peraturan Menteri Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor 41 Tahun 2021 tentang Organisasi dan Tata Kerja Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia.
Peraturan Menteri Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia Nomor 67 Tahun 2016 tentang Pendaftaran Merek.
Putusan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 781/K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2022.
Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Nomor 48/Pdt.Sus-Merek/2021.
