Kesesuaian Penggunaan Merek di Indonesia

Di Indonesia, merek harus “digunakan” dengan cara yang sesuai dengan format, warna, font, desain, dan barang/jasa dalam sertifikat pendaftaran merek. Jika merek dagang digunakan dengan cara yang tidak sesuai dengan sertifikat pendaftaran mereknya, maka pendaftaran merek tersebut terancam dibatalkan dengan alasan “tidak sesuai”, bahkan jika pemilik trademark Indonesia memiliki alasan yang sah untuk tidak menggunakan mereknya dengan cara yang sesuai dengan sertifikat pendaftaran merek (walaupun ada pengecualian tertentu).

Karena konsekuensinya berpotensi menjadi malapetaka bagi pemilik merek yang pendaftaran mereknya dibatalkan dengan alasan tidak digunakan, dalam artikel ini, kami akan membahas kesesuaian penggunaan merek di Indonesia dan perubahan yang akan datang pada Undang-Undang Merek di negara tersebut.

Dasar Hukum dan Definisi

Undang-undang Merek Indonesia yang berlaku saat ini memberikan kewenangan kepada Direktorat Jenderal Kantor Hak Kekayaan Intelektual untuk membatalkan pendaftaran merek baik atas inisiatif sendiri, atas permintaan pemilik merek, atau sebagai akibat dari pengajuan pihak ketiga dalam bentuk gugatan di Pengadilan Niaga.

Merek dagang terdaftar dapat dibatalkan dengan alasan berikut:

  •     karena tidak sesuai dengan persyaratan yang diperlukan;
  •     digunakan untuk barang atau jasa yang berbeda dengan yang diberikan pendaftarannya; atau
  •     jika penggunaan merek tidak sesuai dengan merek terdaftar.

“Sesuai” juga berarti bahwa penggunaan merek yang sebenarnya harus untuk barang atau jasa yang tercantum dalam sertifikat pendaftaran. Jika penggunaan sebenarnya dari merek tersebut untuk barang atau jasa yang berbeda, pendaftaran merek untuk semua atau sebagian dari barang atau jasa yang diterapkan dapat dibatalkan.

Mengingat hal ini, di Indonesia, disarankan untuk menggunakan merek dengan gaya, format, warna, dll. yang persis sama dalam sertifikat pendaftaran merek. Dan saat mengajukan aplikasi merek dagang, pemohon harus mengajukannya dengan cara yang sama persis seperti yang direncanakan untuk menggunakan merek dagang di pasar.

Baca juga : Sistem Satu Pintu Pengumpulan Royalti Musik di Indonesia

A Case of “Trademark Squatter” in Indonesia


A driving Italian design organization is occupied with the retail dress and attire business. The Italian organization’s tasks are broad, and it has various stores all through the Southeast Asian locale. The Italian organization possesses a few enlisted exchange denotes that ensure its brands, including the trademark ‘AAA’, which is enrolled in numerous nations around the world. Indonesia is among these nations, where the imprint is enrolled under the products and enterprises classification in Classes 18, 25, and 35.

trademark indonesia under Class 25 was made in 2008. Given the correct enlistment, the Italian organization was sure that no indistinguishable or misleadingly confounding comparable imprints would be permitted to be enrolled in similar classifications of products or potentially services.

It appears, nonetheless, that the trademark inspector in Indonesia has less stringent assessment criteria when looking at similitudes between applied-for marks and earlier enlisted imprints. An imprint indistinguishable from ‘AAA’ concerning the classification of merchandise in Class 25 was applied for by a nearby individual in Indonesia in 2010. This was then distributed in the Trademark Gazette to consider any restriction by outsiders around then, inside the cutoff time to oppose.

Fortunately, the Italian organization was utilizing a ‘Watch Service,’ which cautions and cautions organizations with enrolled exchange checks about conceivable indistinguishable or confusingly comparable imprints being distributed in the Trademark Indonesia around the world. The Italian organization, in this way, was made mindful of the production in the Trademark Gazette by the exchange mark squatter well before the cutoff time to contradict had expired.

The exchange mark inspector in control educated the Italian organization that the distributed exchange mark application secured the merchandise of, in addition to other things, ‘sarong and other Muslim clothing’, which are an alternate sort of apparel from the Italian organization’s enrolled products—despite the fact that the application was to be enlisted in Class 25 too. Along these lines, the exchange mark analyst had endorsed the enrollment, regardless of the way that the general appearance and vocal part of the imprints were both indistinguishable from the Italian organization’s earlier enlisted marks.

Hence, the Italian organization’s direction prompted that a restriction ought to be documented inside the cutoff time to keep the distributed application from arriving at the enlistment stage.

In request to record an effective restriction, the Italian organization needed to demonstrate the following:

  1. The applied-for imprint was indistinguishable or confusingly like their own earlier enrolled imprint, and the utilization of such an imprint—even with the order ‘Sarong and other Muslim clothing’— would cause disarray among general customers with regards to the starting point of the goods.
  2. The candidate didn’t have any rights or genuine interests in the applied-for mark. The candidate petitioned for enlistment of the applied-for mark in ‘dishonesty’, trying to ride on the notoriety of the Italian organization’s earlier enrolled mark.
  3. Fortunately, in light of the fact that the imprint ‘AAA’ had been enlisted in various nations worldwide by the Italian organization, the exchange mark analyst was persuaded that the Italian organization had a superior right to the imprint ‘AAA.’ thus, the trademark indonesia squatter’s application was recorded in dishonesty, and the distributed application was dismissed for enrollment. The candidate didn’t request the case, which carried it to a close.
  • Register your exchange mark any potential future markets in Southeast Asia, to cover satisfactory classes of merchandise and enterprises of your exisiting and future item lines.
  • The trademark inspector’s assessment criteria changes in every nation and is emotional. In this way, it is judicious to lead an overall watch administration for your trademark, so as to remain educated regarding any potential trademark squatters in every ward. Restricting a distributed application is unmistakably more cost-and time-viable than case dependent on a nullification of an enrolled exchange mark (even one dependent on dishonesty). The case to nullify the enlisted imprint every now and again should be brought to a court, and can cost roughly EUR 5,000–30,000, contingent upon the unpredictability of the case.
  • Trademark proprietors ought to be always exceptional on the proof of utilization in every nation, either through licensees or neighborhood merchants, with the goal that such proof can be effectively accumulated when needed.
  • With the up and coming coordination of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), it is profoundly suggested that an enrollment is looked for in all part conditions of ASEAN, because of a free progression of merchandise and ventures in the area.

Baca juga : The Importance of trademark registration in Indonesia