{"title":"雅加达商业法院判决02/牌子/2002/PN. JKT.PST的民事诉讼中列出了关于取消商标的指控","authors":"Desak Made Dwipayani, Nurul Fazriyah","doi":"10.23887/glr.v3i2.445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n \n \n \nccording to Article 1 paragraph (1) of Law no. 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and Geographical Indications which determine that a brand is a sign that can be displayed graphically in the form of images, logos, names, words, letters, numbers, color arrangements, in two dimensions and / or three dimensions, sound, hologram, or a combination. of the two or more elements to distinguish goods and / or services produced by persons or legal entities in trading activities of goods and / or services. A registered mark that already has a reputation is often imitated in bad faith by other parties and registered as a trademark. The purpose of this article is to analyze the Decision on the Case for Rejection of the Cancellation of a Registered Mark in a Civil Lawsuit Analysis of the Decision of the Central Jakarta Commercial Court Number 02 / Mark / 2002 / PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst The method used in this article is normative legal research with reference to Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications, Books on Intellectual Property Rights, especially Brands. The result of this research is that the Defendant rejects the defendant's lawsuit because it is not proven that the defendant's good faith exists, and the Defendant's trademark registration is in accordance with and complies with the provisions of Articles 4, 5, and 6 of the Trademark Law and there is no substantive similarity between the plaintiff's and the defendant's marks. \n \n \n \n","PeriodicalId":399663,"journal":{"name":"Ganesha Law Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"PERKARA PENOLAKAN PEMBATALAN MEREK TERDAFTAR DALAM GUGATAN PERDATA ANALISIS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NIAGA JAKARTA PUSAT NOMOR 02/MEREK/2002/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST\",\"authors\":\"Desak Made Dwipayani, Nurul Fazriyah\",\"doi\":\"10.23887/glr.v3i2.445\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n \\n \\n \\nccording to Article 1 paragraph (1) of Law no. 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and Geographical Indications which determine that a brand is a sign that can be displayed graphically in the form of images, logos, names, words, letters, numbers, color arrangements, in two dimensions and / or three dimensions, sound, hologram, or a combination. of the two or more elements to distinguish goods and / or services produced by persons or legal entities in trading activities of goods and / or services. A registered mark that already has a reputation is often imitated in bad faith by other parties and registered as a trademark. The purpose of this article is to analyze the Decision on the Case for Rejection of the Cancellation of a Registered Mark in a Civil Lawsuit Analysis of the Decision of the Central Jakarta Commercial Court Number 02 / Mark / 2002 / PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst The method used in this article is normative legal research with reference to Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications, Books on Intellectual Property Rights, especially Brands. The result of this research is that the Defendant rejects the defendant's lawsuit because it is not proven that the defendant's good faith exists, and the Defendant's trademark registration is in accordance with and complies with the provisions of Articles 4, 5, and 6 of the Trademark Law and there is no substantive similarity between the plaintiff's and the defendant's marks. \\n \\n \\n \\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":399663,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ganesha Law Review\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ganesha Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23887/glr.v3i2.445\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ganesha Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23887/glr.v3i2.445","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
根据《中华人民共和国刑法》第1条第1款的规定。2016年第20号关于商标和地理标志的法规,该法规确定品牌是一种可以以图像、徽标、名称、文字、字母、数字、颜色排列、二维和/或三维、声音、全息图或组合的形式图形显示的标志。在货物和/或服务的贸易活动中,由个人或法人实体生产的区分货物和/或服务的两个或两个以上要素之一。一个已经享有声誉的注册商标,往往会被他人恶意模仿,并被注册为商标。本文的目的是分析雅加达中央商事法院第02 / Mark / 2002 / PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst号判决对民事诉讼中驳回注销注册商标案件的判决分析。本文使用的方法是参照2016年第20号法律第21条关于商标和地理标志,知识产权书籍,特别是品牌的规范法律研究。本研究的结果是,被告驳回被告的诉讼,理由是不能证明被告的诚信存在,被告的商标注册符合并符合《商标法》第4、5、6条的规定,原告与被告的商标之间不存在实质性相似。
PERKARA PENOLAKAN PEMBATALAN MEREK TERDAFTAR DALAM GUGATAN PERDATA ANALISIS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NIAGA JAKARTA PUSAT NOMOR 02/MEREK/2002/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST
ccording to Article 1 paragraph (1) of Law no. 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and Geographical Indications which determine that a brand is a sign that can be displayed graphically in the form of images, logos, names, words, letters, numbers, color arrangements, in two dimensions and / or three dimensions, sound, hologram, or a combination. of the two or more elements to distinguish goods and / or services produced by persons or legal entities in trading activities of goods and / or services. A registered mark that already has a reputation is often imitated in bad faith by other parties and registered as a trademark. The purpose of this article is to analyze the Decision on the Case for Rejection of the Cancellation of a Registered Mark in a Civil Lawsuit Analysis of the Decision of the Central Jakarta Commercial Court Number 02 / Mark / 2002 / PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst The method used in this article is normative legal research with reference to Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications, Books on Intellectual Property Rights, especially Brands. The result of this research is that the Defendant rejects the defendant's lawsuit because it is not proven that the defendant's good faith exists, and the Defendant's trademark registration is in accordance with and complies with the provisions of Articles 4, 5, and 6 of the Trademark Law and there is no substantive similarity between the plaintiff's and the defendant's marks.