Publication Search

This study explores the importance of protecting the Geographical Indication (GI) of Lamsi Tobacco from Temanggung to safeguard its authenticity and maintain product quality, in accordance with Law Number 20 of 2016 on Marks and Geographical Indications. Lamsi Tobacco is known for its distinctive taste, aroma, and quality, which are influenced by the geographical conditions of Temanggung as well as traditional cultivation practices passed down through generations. However, without legal protection, the authenticity and reputation of this product risk being diminished due to counterfeiting or unauthorized use of its name. The research method employed is normative juridical, which focuses on library research or secondary data by viewing law as a set of written norms enacted by authorized institutions. To strengthen the analysis, this study is also supported by a socio-legal approach that combines legal studies with social sciences so that law is understood not only as written norms but also as a practice that lives within society. The findings indicate that Lamsi Tobacco meets the criteria for Geographical Indication as stipulated in Law No. 20 of 2016 Protection through Geographical Indications not only plays a role in preserving the authenticity and quality of the product but also generates positive economic and social impacts for the community, particularly farmers. Nevertheless, several obstacles remain, such as low legal awareness, administrative difficulties, and the absence of a strong managing institution. Therefore, coordination between the central government, local government, farmer associations, and the community is necessary to realize effective legal protection. Through the registration and protection of Geographical Indications, Lamsi Tobacco is expected to maintain its reputation, increase competitiveness in the market, and make a tangible contribution to the welfare of the Temanggung community as well as the preservation of local culture.

Businesses build trademarks to promote products or services while maintaining their reputation and competitiveness. However, the practice of using well-known brands without the license owner's permission is still found. The case of counterfeiting the Arc'teryx brand by PT ATX Asia Sport Products demonstrates a violation of the exclusive rights of the brand owner. This study aims to analyze law enforcement against the circulation of counterfeit Arc'teryx products in Bali based on Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications and review the role of the TRIPs Agreement in protecting brands in Indonesia. The method used is normative with a literature review of laws, books, journals, and literature related to unauthorized trademark infringement. The results show that the use of the Arc'teryx brand without official permission confirms the weak supervision and law enforcement of foreign brands that have not been registered in Indonesia. Although the first-to-file system applies, Indonesia still provides legal protection for foreign brands through its membership in the Paris Convention and the TRIPs Agreement. This study emphasizes the need to strengthen the role of the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights (DJKI), the Commercial Court, and increase public legal awareness to prevent trademark infringement and create legal certainty for rights owners and consumers.

The practice of naming rights through trademark licensing agreements on public facilities has become a common commercialisation strategy in Indonesia. However, when the object of naming rights is a public facility with cultural heritage status, legal uncertainty arises due to the absence of specific regulations governing the intersection between Law No. 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications and Law No. 11 of 2010 concerning Cultural Heritage. The objective of this study is to analyse the regulation of naming rights on public facilities with cultural heritage status and to identify any differences in the application of trademark law in the cases of Semarang Tawang Station and Cirebon Kejaksan Station. The study employs a normative juridical method, utilising secondary data collection techniques and is supported by tertiary legal materials, employing a legislative, analytical and comparative approach. The results of the study indicate a discrepancy in the regulatory framework for naming rights concerning cultural heritage, leading to legal ambiguity due to inconsistent implementation. This is exemplified by the contrasting outcomes at Semarang Tawang Station, where the naming rights agreement with Bank Jateng was successfully executed, and at Cirebon Kejaksan Station, where the agreement was terminated despite both stations possessing cultural heritage status. The study recommends the introduction of comprehensive special regulations to harmonise the protection of exclusive trademark rights with the preservation of the identity and historical value of cultural heritage sites.  

The government’s efforts to provide protection for trademark rights holders have been implemented by enacting and updating laws on trademarks. However, in reality, crimes against trademark rights continue to occur, including in the jurisdiction of the Tanjung Karang District Court. This research addresses the following issues: What are the judges' considerations in cases of unauthorized use of registered trademarks, and how is the criminal analysis of such offenses reflected in Decision Number: 381/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.Tjk? This study uses normative and empirical legal research methods, with statutory and conceptual approaches. The data type used is secondary data obtained through literature study. Data processing involved selection, classification, and organization. The data were analyzed using a descriptive qualitative method. The findings of this research indicate that the judge's legal basis in sentencing the defendant for the unauthorized use of a registered trademark in Decision Number: 381/Pid.Sus/2023/PN.Tjk includes juridical considerations—specifically that the defendant was legally and convincingly proven to have committed a criminal offense as regulated under Article 100 paragraph (1) of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications. Philosophically, the judge considered the imposed sentence as a means of rehabilitation and deterrence. Sociologically, the judge weighed both aggravating and mitigating factors in the sentencing. Criminal liability for the offender was based on the fulfillment of criminal responsibility elements, namely that the defendant was an adult and legally capable of committing the act. The element of fault was fulfilled, as the defendant knowingly and intentionally used a registered trademark without authorization, fully aware that such an act constitutes a criminal offense. The element of the absence of justification or excuse was also met, as the defendant committed the offense in a conscious and sound state of mind, without coercion.

This study aims to analyze the legal protection of Geographical Indications (GI) for Kain Tenun Bima under Law No. 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications, with a focus on the registration mechanism. Kain Tenun Bima, or Tenun Mbojo, is a cultural heritage of the Bima community, possessing high cultural and economic value. However, as of June 2024, this fabric has not yet been registered as a GI, leaving it vulnerable to counterfeiting and misuse by unauthorized parties. The research employs a normative method with a descriptive-analytical approach, examining primary data such as UU No. 20 Tahun 2016 and secondary data from journals, books, and government documents. The findings reveal that Kain Tenun Bima meets all GI criteria, including geographical origin, natural and human factors, and unique characteristics. GI registration offers legal, economic, and cultural benefits, such as protection against counterfeiting, increased market value, and preservation of cultural heritage. The GI registration process involves administrative and substantive stages by the Direktorat Jenderal Kekayaan Intelektual (DJKI),, requiring comprehensive documentation of the product's uniqueness. Challenges in registration include a lack of legal understanding and coordination among stakeholders. Therefore, collaboration between the government, weaving communities, and academics is essential to accelerate the GI registration for Kain Tenun Bima, ensuring legal protection and sustainability as a regional cultural and economic asset.

One of the special aspects of Intellectual Property (IP) is Economic Rights, namely the right to obtain economic benefits from intellectual property. The creation of economic value shows that IP is one of the objects of trade that plays an important role in the development of a nation. As part of Intellectual Property, Geographical Indications are a trading tool that can provide benefits for producers, consumers, and the community in identifying products and providing quality assurance, avoiding fraudulent practices, helping the development of local producers, and supporting the preservation of nature and traditional knowledge. To carry out optimal IPR protection, a comparison needs to be made with practices that have been running so far, in this case a comparison will be made with practices in Malaysia. This research method uses a descriptive qualitative approach by collecting data from various sources. This research will use a conceptual/theoretical approach and a comparative approach. This research will determine the country's strategy to protect intellectual property in Indonesia and Malaysia and determine an effective model in protecting Geographical Indications. Thus, this research produces a deep understanding of the protection of Geographical Indications, highlighting the successes and challenges in increasing success related to intellectual property.

In the development of information and technology, there are motion marks circulating in Indonesia in the trade of goods or services. In fact, the moving brand has not received legal protection because moving brands are not regulated as one of the signs regulated in Law Number 20 Year 2016 on Trademarks and Geographical Indications (Trademark Act) so that there is a legal vacuum and a motion marks can not be applied for registration which results in the absence of legal certainty for the community, but other Southeast Asian countries such as Singapore have protected motion marks. It is important to be considered by Indonesia, given the existence of free trade in the Southeast Asian region, namely the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA). This research uses normative juridical research method that analyses the legislation with literature study using comparative and conceptual approaches and analysed with descriptive analytical legal materials. The results of this study found that the regulation of the registration of motion marks in Indonesia is not regulated in the Trademark Act and the trademark registration application does not accommodate the registration of motion marks so that the registration of moving trademarks can not be filed in Indonesia and motion marks also do not get legal protection in Indonesia which results in legal uncertainty. If the motion marks in Indonesia get a legal protection and can be applied for registration, then the Trademark Act should be made changes related to the concept of the definition of trademark, the scope of the protected trademark, and trademark labels in the application for registration of trademarks so that the public get legal certainty related to the registration of motion marks.

The advancement of information technology has driven the growth of the creative industry, which heavily relies on intellectual works, one of which is trademarks as part of the Intellectual Property Rights regime. A trademark not only serves as a product identity but also as a marketing tool and a determinant of reputation. However, in practice, legal issues often arise, particularly related to the registration of trademarks by parties acting in bad faith and having substantial similarities with previously registered trademarks. This research analyzes the Application of the Principle of Bad Faith in the trademark registration process in the trademark dispute "C+Logo" between Gunawan and PT Bagava Alam Semesta. Through descriptive analysis research with a normative juridical approach, the results of this study indicate a violation of the principle of bad faith in the trademark registration conducted by PT Bagava Alam Semesta because it meets the principle of bad faith violation as examined in accordance with the Trademark and Geographical Indications Law.

 A brand is one of the most valuable intellectual assets in the business sector, serving not only as a product identity but also as a reflection of reputation and quality. However, the increasing phenomenon of brand infringement indicates the urgent need for stronger and more effective legal protection. Brand infringement brings various negative consequences, including loss of consumer trust, unfair competition, and significant financial losses for brand owners. This study aims to analyze brand infringement from a criminological perspective, identify causal factors, and evaluate the role of law in addressing such violations. The research employs normative legal methods through analysis of statutory regulations, legal and criminological theories, and a literature-based approach using secondary data obtained from books, journals, and legal documents. The findings reveal that criminology provides relevant insights through theories such as Rational Choice Theory, which explains that perpetrators calculate the risks and benefits before committing the violation, and Anomie Strain Theory, which highlights how the inability to achieve economic or social goals legally can drive individuals or groups to commit brand infringement. The classification of violations includes imitation, counterfeiting, misuse, and unlawful exploitation of brand rights. Several causal factors were identified, including weak legal supervision, limited enforcement, and the high consumer demand for cheaper counterfeit products. Furthermore, the study underlines the essential role of the criminal justice system in addressing brand infringement through the enforcement of criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions as regulated under Law Number 20 of 2016 on Trademarks and Geographical Indications. In conclusion, brand infringement is not merely a legal issue but also a criminological problem that requires comprehensive handling through effective law enforcement, stronger supervision, and increased public awareness to protect intellectual property and ensure fair business practices.