印尼商事法庭解决品牌权纠纷:泗水法院判决研究

I. G. M. Yogiswara, L. L. Lombok, Asrul Ibrahim Nur, I. G. B. I. Kumara, Ni Nyoman Sri Purnama Sutianti
{"title":"印尼商事法庭解决品牌权纠纷:泗水法院判决研究","authors":"I. G. M. Yogiswara, L. L. Lombok, Asrul Ibrahim Nur, I. G. B. I. Kumara, Ni Nyoman Sri Purnama Sutianti","doi":"10.22219/ilrej.v2i3.23754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Brands play a significant role in economic development because they help consumers identify the origin of a product or service. Brand ownership is acknowledged at the time of brand registration with the Directorate General of Intellectual Property. The first prerequisite for registering a brand is ensuring that it possesses all of its attributes. Therefore, some characteristics distinguish it from other brands. Despite these regulations, brand infringements still occur. One of them is the disagreement between PT. Gudang Garan and PT. Gudang Baru, whose brands are comparable. Therefore, a study on Indonesian law enforcement in resolving brand issues is required. The current study employed normative legal research and normative juridical methodologies. Using descriptive qualitative data analysis, the study focused on laws and regulations. The Surabaya Commercial Court determined, based on a dispute between PT. Gudang Garan and PT Gudang Baru, that PT. Gudang Baru breached Article 21 Paragraph 1 of Law No. 20 of 2016, declaring the Gudang Baru brand comparable to the well-known Gudang Garan brand. As a result, the Gudang Baru brand was revoked, and to ensure a deterrent effect, DGKI ordered any application for registration of a brand that resembles PT. Gudang Garan be denied.","PeriodicalId":404317,"journal":{"name":"Indonesia Law Reform Journal","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Settlement of Brand Rights Disputes Through the Commercial Court in Indonesia: Study of Surabaya Court Decision\",\"authors\":\"I. G. M. Yogiswara, L. L. Lombok, Asrul Ibrahim Nur, I. G. B. I. Kumara, Ni Nyoman Sri Purnama Sutianti\",\"doi\":\"10.22219/ilrej.v2i3.23754\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Brands play a significant role in economic development because they help consumers identify the origin of a product or service. Brand ownership is acknowledged at the time of brand registration with the Directorate General of Intellectual Property. The first prerequisite for registering a brand is ensuring that it possesses all of its attributes. Therefore, some characteristics distinguish it from other brands. Despite these regulations, brand infringements still occur. One of them is the disagreement between PT. Gudang Garan and PT. Gudang Baru, whose brands are comparable. Therefore, a study on Indonesian law enforcement in resolving brand issues is required. The current study employed normative legal research and normative juridical methodologies. Using descriptive qualitative data analysis, the study focused on laws and regulations. The Surabaya Commercial Court determined, based on a dispute between PT. Gudang Garan and PT Gudang Baru, that PT. Gudang Baru breached Article 21 Paragraph 1 of Law No. 20 of 2016, declaring the Gudang Baru brand comparable to the well-known Gudang Garan brand. As a result, the Gudang Baru brand was revoked, and to ensure a deterrent effect, DGKI ordered any application for registration of a brand that resembles PT. Gudang Garan be denied.\",\"PeriodicalId\":404317,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indonesia Law Reform Journal\",\"volume\":\"35 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indonesia Law Reform Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22219/ilrej.v2i3.23754\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indonesia Law Reform Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22219/ilrej.v2i3.23754","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

品牌在经济发展中发挥着重要作用,因为它们帮助消费者识别产品或服务的来源。品牌所有权在向知识产权总局进行品牌注册时得到确认。注册一个品牌的第一个先决条件是确保它拥有品牌的所有属性。因此,它的一些特点区别于其他品牌。尽管有这些规定,但品牌侵权仍时有发生。其中之一就是PT. Gudang Garan和PT. Gudang Baru之间的分歧,这两个品牌具有可比性。因此,有必要对印尼解决品牌问题的执法进行研究。目前的研究采用了规范的法律研究和规范的司法方法。采用描述性定性数据分析,研究重点是法律法规。泗水商事法庭根据古当嘉兰与古当巴鲁之间的纠纷认定,古当巴鲁违反了2016年第20号法律第二十一条第一款的规定,宣称古当巴鲁品牌与知名的古当嘉兰品牌具有可比性。结果,鼓当巴鲁品牌被撤销,为了确保威慑作用,DGKI下令拒绝任何类似于PT.鼓当加兰的品牌注册申请。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Settlement of Brand Rights Disputes Through the Commercial Court in Indonesia: Study of Surabaya Court Decision
Brands play a significant role in economic development because they help consumers identify the origin of a product or service. Brand ownership is acknowledged at the time of brand registration with the Directorate General of Intellectual Property. The first prerequisite for registering a brand is ensuring that it possesses all of its attributes. Therefore, some characteristics distinguish it from other brands. Despite these regulations, brand infringements still occur. One of them is the disagreement between PT. Gudang Garan and PT. Gudang Baru, whose brands are comparable. Therefore, a study on Indonesian law enforcement in resolving brand issues is required. The current study employed normative legal research and normative juridical methodologies. Using descriptive qualitative data analysis, the study focused on laws and regulations. The Surabaya Commercial Court determined, based on a dispute between PT. Gudang Garan and PT Gudang Baru, that PT. Gudang Baru breached Article 21 Paragraph 1 of Law No. 20 of 2016, declaring the Gudang Baru brand comparable to the well-known Gudang Garan brand. As a result, the Gudang Baru brand was revoked, and to ensure a deterrent effect, DGKI ordered any application for registration of a brand that resembles PT. Gudang Garan be denied.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信