Disparitas Putusan Mengenai Persamaan Pada Pokoknya Pada Merek Predator (Studi Putusan Nomor 1146 K/Pdt.Sus-Hki/2020)

The cases of trademark infringement on substantial similarity still relatively common in Indonesia. This article aims to analyze the basis for the judge's consideration in the decision Number 1146 K / Pdt.Sus-HKI / 2020. This is based on the disparity of Decision Number 69 / Pdt.Sus / Mark / 2019 / PN with Decision Number 1146 K / Pdt.Sus-HKI / 2020. This research uses doctrinal research using statute, case, and conceptual approaches. The results showed that the judges' basic considerations were not in accordance with regulations and several legal concepts. First, that the trademark protection system based on territorial territory and the first to file system principle should not be used as a basis for consideration. Second, that the two brands are basically similar because of the similarities in the dominant element and the similarity in sound or speech with the addition of the same class of goods. Third, the word "predator" cannot be categorized as a generic word, because the word predator has been added with a logo as a condition for a research, excluding generic brands. As a recommendation in deciding this matter, regarding the existence of bad faith, due to bad faith, a cancellation of a registered mark can be submitted indefinitely.

THE COMPARISON OF LEGAL DAMAGES FOR COPYRIGHT & BRAND INFRINGEMENT AMONG INDONESIA-CHINA LAWS

Intellectual Property Rights or what is often abbreviated as HAKI is a legal protection given by a certain country to a person or group of individuals who express their ideas in the form of works. This law is a state territory. This means that a work will only be protected by rights in the country where the work originated to obtain IPR. As stated in the Copyright Laws, Intellectual Property Rights are exclusive rights granted by a regulation to a person or group of people for their copyrighted works. This protected work is in the form of intangible objects such as copyrights, patents, and trademarks and tangible objects in the form of information, technology, literature, art, skills, science, and so on. The idea of compensation law for copyright and trademark infringement in Indonesia, of course, can imitate the copyright law and trademark law of the People's Republic of China in regulating more clearly the calculation of the value of losses for copyright and trademark infringement in order to be able to provide legal certainty for the owner / rights holders whose rights have been violated. The research use normative juridical approach. The purpose of writing is to analyze and explain the calculation of compensation by looking at the criteria, evidence, basis, form and formulation of calculating compensation for copyright and trademark infringement. The results of the study stated that the law for compensation that arises as a result of copyright and trademark infringement according to positive law in Indonesia still does not regulate in detail the calculation of the value of the loss of both copyrights and trademarks. Copyright Act No.28 of 2014 and Trademark Act No.20 of 2016 only gives rights to the right owner/right holder to file a claim for compensation, but the law does not regulate how to determine the value of the loss for a copyright infringement as well as brands.

USKLAĐIVANjE PRAVA ŽIGA REPUBLIKE SRBIJE SA PRAVOM ŽIGA EVROPSKE UNIJE – IZMENE ODREDABA O NAKNADI ŠTETE U NOVOM ZAKONU O ŽIGOVIMA

In the middle of the coronavirus crisis in 2020 Serbian Parliament has enacted the new Trademark Law (“Official Gazette of Republic of Serbia” No. 6/2020). With this law, many changes came along in trademark protection, especially in the infringement domain. Namely, the greatest changes that have occurred are the introduction of non-material damages recuperation for trademark infringement, and appropriation of the profits. Also, the treble damages reimbursement is now excluded from the Serbian Trademark Law. These changes are conducted to harmonize Serbian law with the Directive 2004/48/EC. However, it is still necessary to examine if there was a possibility that these new institutes lead us again to the penalty damages, even after treble damages exclusion. For this reason, the author of this paper will try to trace the origin of these changes trough examining the legal history and conducting comparative research, then he will examine the essence and the nature of these new institutes using analysis and dogmatic method.

Punitive damages in trademark infringement disputes in China: challenges and prospects

Punitive damages were introduced into the intellectual property field in China by legislation permitting their imposition for malicious and serious infringements. This paper offers a comprehensive legal framework of punitive damages regarding trademark infringement and a critical analysis of the application of punitive damages in trademark infringement disputes in Chinese judicial practice. My research reveals that punitive damages have rarely been imposed since the punitive damages provision, Article 63 of the Trademark Law, took effect in 2014, whereas statutory damages have been applied extensively. The reason for this is that there are few guidelines for the application of this provision. The challenges to the application include undefined statutory requirements, difficulties in not only assessing compensation but also providing evidence and determining the multiple of compensation, and an unclear relationship between statutory damages and punitive damages. The 2019 Amendment of the Trademark Law retains these problems. Fortunately, the recently released Judicial Interpretation and typical cases concerning punitive damages contribute to resolving them. Moreover, those cases in which punitive damages have been applied have gradually revealed some basic principles for their application. Reform suggestions are offered in order to stimulate the development of a more thorough and uniform application of the punitive damages provision.

Trademark infringement recognition assistance system based on human visual Gestalt psychology and trademark design

Trademarks are common graphic signs in human society. People used this kind of graphic sign to distinguish the signs of representative significance such as individuals, organizations, countries, and groups. Under effective use, these graphic signs can bring maintenance and development resources and profits to the owner. In addition to maintenance and development, organizations that have obtained resources can further promote national and social progress. However, the benefits of these resources have also attracted the attention of unfair competitors. By imitating counterfeit trademarks that appear, unfair competitors can steal the resources of the original trademark. In order to prevent such acts of unfair competitors, the state has formulated laws to protect trademarks. In the past, there have also been researches on similar trademark searches to assist in trademark protection. Although the original trademark is protected by national laws, unfair competitors have recently used psychological methods to counterfeit the original trademark and steal its resources. Trademarks counterfeited through psychology have the characteristics of confuse consumers and do not constitute infringement under the law. Under the influence of such counterfeit trademarks, the original trademark is still not well protected. In order to effectively prevent such trademark counterfeiting through psychology, this article proposes new features based on trademark design and Gestalt psychology to assist legal judgments. These features correspond to a part of the process that is not fully understood in the human visual system and quantify them. In the experimental results, we used past cases to analyze the proposed assistance system. Discussions based on past judgments proved that the quantitative results of the proposed system are similar to the plaintiff or the judgment to determine the reasons for plagiarism. This result shows that the assistance system proposed in this article can provide visually effective quantitative data, assist the law to prevent malicious plagiarism on images by unfair competitors, and reduce the plagiarism caused by the similar design concepts of late trademark designers.

Perlindungan Merek sebagai Hak Kekayaan Intelektual: Studi di Kota Semarang, Indonesia

The products produced by the creative economy will never be separated from the intellectual property in it, especially brands. However, the problem is that there are still many creative economy actors who do not register their product brands. This study uses a socio-legal research method with a statutory approach and a sociological approach. The results of this study indicate that a new brand will occur after the brand has been registered. Legal protection for creative economy product brands can be in the form of preventive protection and repressive protection. Preventive protection is provided by preventing the occurrence of trademark infringement to encourage trademark owners to register their trademarks to be legally protected. Meanwhile, repressive protection is carried out to deal with violations of trademark rights under applicable laws and regulations through judicial institutions and other law enforcement officers such as the police, Civil Servant Investigators, and the prosecutor's office to take action against violations of trademark rights. In the case of a request for violation of trademark rights, it is filed through the Ministry of Law and Human Rights.

The Place of Forensic Linguistics in the Resolution of Trademark Conflicts: Case of DOUBLEMINT & DOUBIEMLNT

Forensic linguistics focusing on word choice and spelling, it can be useful while resolving language crime, trademark infringement, and so forth. In our days, trademarks are one of the most infringed intellectual properties in the world in terms of values. Trademark could be a single word, a combination of words and symbols, design, or logo that distinguishes a company or products from others in the industry. When someone acquires a registered trademark, he is granted an exclusive right to its usage and it strongly prohibits other organizations from using it. This paper shows the way an expert in Forensic Linguistics should use his skill and knowledge to handle the conflict among similar trademarks. From brand name (how it is written, upper-cases or lower-cases, how many letters make this brand name, how it sounds, how it looks like, and so forth) to logo (design, usage of colors, sharp and so forth). The expert in Forensic Linguistics will try to find out scientific evidence that may help judges in decision-making. The present study scrutinized the place of forensic linguistics in the resolution of trademark conflicts, the scientific techniques, and methodologies utilized to analyze the similarities and differences between the trademarks in conflict. This research showed the importance of associating an expert in Forensic Linguistics in the Community Trademark conflicts in order to come up with a conclusion based on scientific evidence; the place of forensic linguistics and other related disciplines in revolving the issues of trademark infringement.

Intellectual Property Law and Extra-Contractual Liability

This chapter discusses intellectual property (IP) and extra-contractual liability by highlighting general comparative analysis issues within civil and common law systems, with some consideration given also to major theoretical clusters that might influence the different legal regimes. The chapter focuses on emerging issues of extra-contractual liability for intellectual property infringement in the platform economy, with special emphasis on copyright and trademark infringement, seeking to co-ordinate miscellaneous approaches from the United States (US), the European Union (EU), and selected European countries’ experiences. In doing so, this chapter highlights research and methodological issues related to limited harmonization at a regional level in secondary and extra-contractual liability doctrines when applied to IP. Finally, this chapter describes the World Intermediary Liability Maps (WILMap) as an attempt to provide consistency within a fragmented research framework while also presenting other miscellaneous endeavours seeking the same goal.