File(s) under permanent embargo
The recognition and protection of well-known trade marks in Indonesia
journal contribution
posted on 2008-01-01, 00:00 authored by Christoph AntonsLegal context The recognition and protection of well-known marks in Indonesia has improved over the last few years for a variety of reasons.
Key points First, the Asian Crisis resulted in the creation of a Commercial Court, which is a clear improvement over the previously responsible District Courts. Secondly, the increasingly frequent publication of court decisions has improved transparency and consistency of those decisions. Well-known marks are now clearly protected against use for similar goods/services. Protection is extended to dissimilar goods/services by applying Article 16(3) TRIPS directly or by arguing that registration occurred in bad faith. Nevertheless, decisions thus far concern almost exclusively revocation and invalidity of registrations. Civil remedies such as damages and interim injunctions are hardly used, because the outdated civil procedural law has not familiarised judges with such legal instruments. Clearing the register of infringing registrations is another matter of concern. Cancellation for non-use for three consecutive years can be difficult, because the plaintiff is required to provide evidence of the last use in the production of the goods/services rather than in the course of trade more generally.
Practical significance While it has become much easier to protect well-known marks in Indonesia, much work remains to be done regarding the procedural framework of civil infringement proceedings and regarding the clearing of the register.
Key points First, the Asian Crisis resulted in the creation of a Commercial Court, which is a clear improvement over the previously responsible District Courts. Secondly, the increasingly frequent publication of court decisions has improved transparency and consistency of those decisions. Well-known marks are now clearly protected against use for similar goods/services. Protection is extended to dissimilar goods/services by applying Article 16(3) TRIPS directly or by arguing that registration occurred in bad faith. Nevertheless, decisions thus far concern almost exclusively revocation and invalidity of registrations. Civil remedies such as damages and interim injunctions are hardly used, because the outdated civil procedural law has not familiarised judges with such legal instruments. Clearing the register of infringing registrations is another matter of concern. Cancellation for non-use for three consecutive years can be difficult, because the plaintiff is required to provide evidence of the last use in the production of the goods/services rather than in the course of trade more generally.
Practical significance While it has become much easier to protect well-known marks in Indonesia, much work remains to be done regarding the procedural framework of civil infringement proceedings and regarding the clearing of the register.
