PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEMILIK HAK ATAS MEREK YANG DIBATALKAN DALAM PENDAFTARAN MEREK DITINJAU DARI UNDANGUNDANG NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG MEREK DAN INDIKASI GEOGRAFIS

Abstract

Prior to filing a lawsuit for trademark cancellation, the plaintiff had also filed a request for registration of the Coffeeberry brand, namely in class 30, 32, 35, 43 based on the provisions of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and Geographical Indications. That the Defendant's Coffeeberry brand was registered in bad faith and should not have been registered with the Defendant for the following reasons:

a.There are similarities in essence between the brands of the plaintiff and the defendant

b.The plaintiff's trademark had been registered and used since at least 2005 in the United States, long before the date of receipt of the request for registration of the defendant's mark in Indonesia. The defendant also rejected the defendant's request for registration of the Coffeeberry brand in classes 29, 30 and 32 on the grounds that the request for trademark registration was filed in bad faith because it imitated the plaintiff's Coffeeberry brand on registration number IDM000352239. Based on this, the plaintiff, namely VDF Future Ceuticals, filed a trademark cancellation lawsuit at the Central Jakarta Commercial Court, remaining in the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court Number 37/Pdt.SusBrand/2018/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst, the panel of judges at the Central Jakarta Court rejected the lawsuit from the plaintiff, namely VDF Future Ceuticals, and received the objection from the defendant, namely Haryadi Tjokro Djanto, the reason for the judge's consideration at the Central Jakarta District Court was to accept the exception from the defendant, namely that the lawsuit had exceeded the time limit, namely five years since it was first registered. On that basis, VDF Future Ceuticals submitted a cassation request on this case and based on the cassation decision number 769 K/Pdt.Sus.Hki/2019 the panel of judges overturned the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court number 37/Pdt.Sus-Merek/2018/PN.Niaga. Jkt. Pst. The judge at the cassation level stated in his consideration that the brand of Coffeeberry owned by the plaintiff was a well-known brand and the Coffeeberry brand owned by the defendant had similarities in principle to that of the plaintiff and was registered in bad faith, therefore our group would like to discuss how DITJEN KI's responsibility is towards lawsuits submitted by the plaintiff whether there was indeed an error from the registration stage until the mark must be canceled by the Supreme Court.

Keywords : Coffeeberry, VDF Future Ceuticals, Geographical Indications