Henky Solihin MZ
Program Studi Hukum, Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Sali Al-Aitaam

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

International Brand Chanel's Opposition to the Dacosta + DC Painting Brand Henky Solihin MZ
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 2 (2026): May
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i2.1490

Abstract

General Background: Trademark protection under Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications constitutes a central pillar of intellectual property law in Indonesia, ensuring legal certainty, fair competition, and consumer protection within the international registration framework, including the Madrid Protocol. Specific Background: This study examines the opposition filed by CHANEL SARL against the registration of the DACOSTA + DC Painting trademark before the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP), based on alleged substantial similarity and claims related to well-known mark protection. Knowledge Gap: Although opposition mechanisms are formally available to international trademark owners, limited doctrinal analysis addresses how Indonesian authorities assess formal and substantive requirements in determining similarity and bad faith. Aims: This research aims to analyze the legal basis of the opposition, the rebuttal submitted by the DACOSTA applicant, and the juridical considerations underlying the DGIP decision to accept the application. Results: The findings demonstrate that the objection did not satisfy the formal and material requirements stipulated under Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016, as no dominant similarity or evidence of bad faith was proven; consequently, the DGIP lawfully registered DACOSTA + DC Painting in Class 18. Novelty: This article provides a focused normative legal examination of an international trademark opposition resolved in favor of a domestic applicant within Indonesia’s constitutive registration system. Implications: The decision confirms that opposition by a global brand does not automatically preclude national registration absent substantiated similarity and reputational proof, reinforcing legal certainty in Indonesian trademark law. Highlights: The objection failed to establish dominant resemblance under Article 21 of Law Number 20 of 2016. No proof of bad faith or reputational appropriation was demonstrated in the proceedings. The authority confirmed lawful acceptance of the Class 18 application under the constitutive registration regime. Keywords: Chanel, Dacosta, Objection, Intellectual Property, Brand
Analisis Usulan Penolakan Merek pada Tahap Pemeriksaan Substantif serta Tanggung Jawab Konsultan Kekayaan Intelektual sebagai Kuasa Pemohon Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis Henky Solihin MZ
SEIKAT: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Hukum Vol. 5 No. 4 (2026): SEIKAT: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Hukum, Agustus 2026
Publisher : LPPM Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Ekonomi 45 Mataram

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55681/seikat.v5i4.3071

Abstract

Pendaftaran merek di Indonesia menganut asas first to file, yaitu hak eksklusif atas merek diberikan kepada pihak yang pertama kali mengajukan permohonan pendaftaran dengan itikad baik. Meskipun demikian, dalam tahap pemeriksaan substantif, suatu permohonan dapat diusulkan untuk ditolak apabila memenuhi alasan penolakan sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 20 dan Pasal 21 Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan kasus, dan pendekatan analitis. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penilaian terhadap usulan penolakan tidak dapat didasarkan semata-mata pada persamaan satu unsur kata, tetapi harus mempertimbangkan keseluruhan aspek visual, fonetik, konseptual, dan kesan keseluruhan (overall impression) dari merek yang dibandingkan. Penelitian ini juga membuktikan bahwa kata "BLESSING" telah digunakan secara luas dalam berbagai merek terdaftar pada Kelas 25 sehingga tingkat eksklusivitasnya menjadi terbatas dan tidak dapat dimonopoli oleh satu pihak. Diterimanya hearing dan diterbitkannya sertifikat merek membuktikan bahwa argumentasi hukum yang disusun secara profesional berdasarkan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan, doktrin, dan fakta hukum mampu memberikan perlindungan hukum yang efektif bagi pemohon serta memperkuat kepastian hukum dalam sistem pendaftaran merek di Indonesia.