{"title":"poscity和Poskotaco方程的管辖权审查(裁决第39 /Pdt个案研究)。品牌/2022/PN Jkt.Pst)","authors":"Arina Nafida Rahma, Siti Mahmudah","doi":"10.37680/almanhaj.v5i1.2494","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Brand infringement case between POSKOTA owned by PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya and POSKOTACO owned by PT. Millennial Voice Media is listed in Court Decision No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst, PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya (POSKOTA) as the aggrieved party sued for the cancellation of the PT. Media Suara Millenial (POSKOTACO). The object of the case in the decision is trademark infringement which is the same. The panel of judges granted the plaintiff's claim and ordered the defendant to cross out and cancel the registration of the POSKOTACO Mark. The purpose of this research is to find out the legal protection for trademarks that have been registered and the legal consequences of trademark equality disputes and to analyze the Decision of Court Decision No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst. The approach method in this journal research is normative juridical by studying the Trademark Law and relating it to practice in the field. The results of this journal writing research are that brand owners who feel aggrieved due to parties who commit equality violations can apply for trademark cancellation based on the reasons in Articles 20 and 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 Concerning Marks and Geographical Indications. The legal basis for the judge's consideration in deciding the trademark cancellation case is based on Article 76 jo. Article 20, Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and other relevant regulations.","PeriodicalId":31072,"journal":{"name":"Al Ihkam Jurnal Hukum Pranata Sosial","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tinjauan Yuridis Kasus Persamaan Merek Poskota dan Poskotaco (Studi Kasus Putusan No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst)\",\"authors\":\"Arina Nafida Rahma, Siti Mahmudah\",\"doi\":\"10.37680/almanhaj.v5i1.2494\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Brand infringement case between POSKOTA owned by PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya and POSKOTACO owned by PT. Millennial Voice Media is listed in Court Decision No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst, PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya (POSKOTA) as the aggrieved party sued for the cancellation of the PT. Media Suara Millenial (POSKOTACO). The object of the case in the decision is trademark infringement which is the same. The panel of judges granted the plaintiff's claim and ordered the defendant to cross out and cancel the registration of the POSKOTACO Mark. The purpose of this research is to find out the legal protection for trademarks that have been registered and the legal consequences of trademark equality disputes and to analyze the Decision of Court Decision No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst. The approach method in this journal research is normative juridical by studying the Trademark Law and relating it to practice in the field. The results of this journal writing research are that brand owners who feel aggrieved due to parties who commit equality violations can apply for trademark cancellation based on the reasons in Articles 20 and 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 Concerning Marks and Geographical Indications. The legal basis for the judge's consideration in deciding the trademark cancellation case is based on Article 76 jo. Article 20, Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and other relevant regulations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Al Ihkam Jurnal Hukum Pranata Sosial\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Al Ihkam Jurnal Hukum Pranata Sosial\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.37680/almanhaj.v5i1.2494\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Al Ihkam Jurnal Hukum Pranata Sosial","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37680/almanhaj.v5i1.2494","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya旗下POSKOTA与PT. Millennial Voice Media旗下POSKOTACO品牌侵权案见第39 /Pdt号法院判决。su - merek /2022/PN Niaga JktPst, PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya (POSKOTA)作为受害方起诉取消PT. Media Suara millennial (POSKOTACO)。本案的客体是商标侵权,这是相同的。法官小组同意了原告的要求,并命令被告划掉并取消POSKOTACO商标的注册。本研究的目的是找出已注册商标的法律保护和商标平等纠纷的法律后果,并分析法院第39 /Pdt号判决书。su - merek /2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst本期刊研究的途径是通过对商标法的研究,并将其与本领域的实践联系起来,采取规范司法的方法。本次期刊写作研究的结果是,品牌所有人因侵犯平等行为而感到受到侵害时,可以根据2016年第20号《商标与地理标志法》第20条和第21条的理由申请商标撤销。法官审理商标撤销案件的法律依据是《中华人民共和国商标法》第76条。2016年第20号商标法第20条第21条及其他相关规定。
Tinjauan Yuridis Kasus Persamaan Merek Poskota dan Poskotaco (Studi Kasus Putusan No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst)
Brand infringement case between POSKOTA owned by PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya and POSKOTACO owned by PT. Millennial Voice Media is listed in Court Decision No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst, PT. Media Anatarkota Jaya (POSKOTA) as the aggrieved party sued for the cancellation of the PT. Media Suara Millenial (POSKOTACO). The object of the case in the decision is trademark infringement which is the same. The panel of judges granted the plaintiff's claim and ordered the defendant to cross out and cancel the registration of the POSKOTACO Mark. The purpose of this research is to find out the legal protection for trademarks that have been registered and the legal consequences of trademark equality disputes and to analyze the Decision of Court Decision No. 39 /Pdt.Sus-Merek/2022/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst. The approach method in this journal research is normative juridical by studying the Trademark Law and relating it to practice in the field. The results of this journal writing research are that brand owners who feel aggrieved due to parties who commit equality violations can apply for trademark cancellation based on the reasons in Articles 20 and 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 Concerning Marks and Geographical Indications. The legal basis for the judge's consideration in deciding the trademark cancellation case is based on Article 76 jo. Article 20, Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and other relevant regulations.