平成 27 年 1 月 19 日発行
インドネシア知財ニュース第 023 号

本資料は、インドネシアで初めての日系知的財産コンサルタント会社であるハキンダ・インターナショナルが、インドネシア及びその近隣諸国の知財関連ニュースを英語で提供するものです。本文内容の無断での転載、再配信、掲示板への掲載等はお断りいたします。
情報の内容につきましては正確を期すように努めておりますが、正確性を保証するものではありません。本情報の利用の結果発生するいかなる不利益に対しましてもその責任を負いませんので予めご了承願います。

<Indonesia> Trademark Dispute between two
local entrepreneurs regarding “Dapur Sambal”
case

Unfortunately the first level court stated that they don’t
have the authority to prosecute this case.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 21 August 2014)

Wiwin Kartikasari, an entrepreneur form Yogyakarta who
founded ‘Dapur Sambal’ restaurant, filed a trademark
cancellation request against “Dapur Sambal” owned by
Kuwat Subarja with the reason that the mark was filedwith bad faith. Wiwin founded Dapur Sambal in 2008 andfiled her trademark application to DGIPR in 2009, but her
application was refused by DGIPR because there has
already been “Dapur Sambal” filed by Kuwat Subarja.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 20 August 2014)<Indonesia> Counterfeits Drug Factory was
Raided in Tangerang
PT. IPF in Tangerang which is suspected producing
counterfeit drug products was raided by the Police on 18
August 2014. This factory was caught producing illegal /counterfeit drugs of various brands such as: Tay Pin San,Cap Kupu-kupu, Laba-laba, Wan Tong, Pelangsing
Sulami, Xian Ling, and Bala Bali.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 22 August 2014)<Indonesia> Designers were Called to Attend
the Court as Expert Witnesses<Indonesia> Supreme Court won Multivision
for Their Cassation against Rachmawati

This is the continuation of news of 5 August 2014 aboutindustrial design dispute. The palintiff brought its own
expert witnesses to the court. Through its legal
representative, Elisa, the plaintiff brought the designers of
the tray, Mudakir and Badakir, and explained that both of
the witnesses created the tray in 1989. Unfortunately, said
Elisa, they both didn’t know anything about intellectual
property so they didn’t register the design to DGIPR.
Elisa also claimed that the defendant had conducted bad
faith in business activity by prohibiting other craftmens to
produce the tray.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 21 August 2014)

Supreme Court fulfilled cassation request of PT. Tripar
Multivision Plus, Ram Punjabi, and Hanung Bramantyo
regarding the copyright violation on Soekarno movie.
Cassation decision number 305 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2014
from the Supreme Court annulled the Central Jakarta
Commercial Court’s decision issued on 11 March 2014
that won Rachmawati on her lawsuit. Multivision said
they hope that this decision will encourage art workers tokeep on developing the creative industries ant to be afraidof being sued for similar reasons.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 25 August 2014)<Indonesia> Honda lost at the Supreme Court<Indonesia> Rachmawati Prepared a Judicial
Review against Supreme Court’s Decision

Through decision number 588/K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2013,
Supreme Court rejected Honda’s cassastion request
against PT. Antar Nusamakmur Perkasa and Cucu Cuniati.
The case began when PT. Antar Nusamakmur was sued tothe commercial court of Surabaya because of sellingcounterfeit products which were distributed to Papua.

Through her legal representative, Turman Panggabean,
Rachmawati Soekarnoputri is preparing a judicial review
against Supreme Court’s decision that won the cassation
request of Multivision Plus. Turman said that the judgesof Supreme Court don’t have the competency and do not1

平成 27 年 1 月 19 日発行
インドネシア知財ニュース第 023 号

understand the intellectual property rights matters by
issuing such decision. Turman informed that initially
Hanung Bramantyo (producer of Soekarno film, from
Multivision) asked Widyawati to introduce him to
Rachmawati (which is Soekarno’s daughter) to gain
detailed information about Soekarno’s private life.
Turman said that the status of rachmawati in this case is
as an informant that played important role for the sake oforiginality of the movie.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 26 August 2014)

Safecare” for their aromatherapy oil product has finally
failed after Supreme Court rejected their cassation request.
The case initially began when Surabaya Indah, a local
company, filed the trademark “Safe Care” to DGIPR but
was later rejected by the reason that such mark has
similarity in its essential part with the mark “Safecare”
owned by Softex. Surabaya Indah claimed that they havealready received legal distribution certificate from BPOMon 15 December 2011 and also spent lots of fund formarketing said product. They also claimed that the
product “Safecase” owned by Softex has not been in use
for 3 consecutive years since it was first filed and that it
hasn’t got any legal distribution certificate. Therefore
Surabaya Indah filed a trademark cancellation lawsuit
against “Safecare” owned by Softex which was won by
the Commercial Court of Central Jakarta. Softex then
filed a cassation request to the Supreme Court to cancel
said court decision.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 4 September 2014)<Indonesia> Local Government of Malang isplanning to register intellectual property
protectionforDampitcoffeeundergeographical indication
Local government of Malang city is planning to apply for
intellectual property protection for Dampit coffee under
the geographical indication category, claiming that thiscoffee has a distinctive characteristic. They’re planningthat further said coffee will be named Asmtirdam which isan acronym of Ampelgading, Sumbermanjing, Tirtoyudo
and Dampit. This coffee already has big fans comingfrom USA and Europe. By applying geographicalindication protection for this coffee, it is expected that in
the future there will be no area that sell or claim similarcoffee other than Malang.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 3 September 2014)<Indonesia> Bali Tribune Owner Lost
Commercial Court of Center Jakarta granted the defense
submitted by PT Indopersada Primamedia (defendant),
brand owners Tribun Bali and once annulled Hendrawan(plaintiff) lawsuit. The lawsuit should be filed by PT.
Media Nusantara Gemilang which is a legal entity of Bali
Tribune not individuals who do not have any legal
standing.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 10 September 2014)<Indonesia> Bina Darma University shallprotect the intellectual properties of products
and researches made by its Lecturers andStudents<Indonesia> Dapur Sambal Case
Wiwin Kartikasari (plaintiff) wins a lawsuit to cancel
Dapur Sambal trademark owned by Kuwat Subarja(defendant) because the trademark has not been used forthree years consecutively. The judge also asks to DGIPR
to delete trademark No. IDM000300331 class 43 ownedby the defendant.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 11 September 2014)

Palembang - Bina Darma University is establishingcooperation with the Ministry of Law and Human Rights
of South Sumatera area to protect the copyrights of works
created by its lecturers and students. The rector said that
there are hundreds of products and researches made bylecturers and students of this university every year,
therefore such condition requires intellectual protection toprotect those creations. This campus also collaborates
with JICA (Japan International Cooperation Agency) tostrengthen the intellectual properties of products or
researches made by this institution.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 3 September 2014)<Indonesia>Yamato Sewing Won Trademark
Cancelation Case
Trademark lawsuit filed by PT Yamato Sewing Machine
Mfg Co., LTd (plaintiff) against Yamada trademark
belongs to Ronny Wijaya (defendant) was granted by theCommercial Court of Jakarta. Judges said that plaintiff isa special holder of trademark rights in Indonesia and in
the world for trademark Yamato. The defendant filed thetrademark with having bad faith because the Yamada
mark has similarity in its essential part with the Yamato
mark.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 11 September 2014)<Indonesia> Softex Lost their Cassation
Request at the Supreme Court
The effort of PT. Softex Indonesia to maintain theirtrademark2

平成 27 年 1 月 19 日発行
インドネシア知財ニュース第 023 号<Indonesia> Merck Sued Phapros“Teayana” owned by Ahmed Mohamed Saleh Baeshen &Co. Teavana claimed that the mark “Teayana” has notbeen commercially used by the defendant for threeconsecutive years since registration date.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 16 September 2014)

Merck KGaA (a Germany Company, plaintiff) filed for
trademark cancellation lawsuit against PT. Phapros inregard to the “Bioneuron” trademark (IDM000138153)
because it is considered to have similar in principle withthe plaintiff trademark (Neurobion; No. IDM000121814).
Brand Neorobion + Logo filed on September 13, 2005
and have been registered in 13 countries of the world
since 1957 so it can be considered as a well-known brand.
Defendant assessed as having bad faith because the markwas similar to the plaintiff's product packaging.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 12 September 2014)<Indonesia> The House of Representatives
finally approved the revision of Copyright Law
The plenary of Indonesian House of Representatives
finally approved the draft law of the Copyright Law to
become a replacement Law against the old Law No
19/2002 to strengthen the legal protection of the creators
in respect to the economical aspect.
The Head of the special committee, Didi Irawadi, said
that the draft law has been legally approved in the plenary
court led by vice chairman of House of Representatives,
Priyo Budi Santoso. With this new law, the government is
expected to be able to protect the copyrights in any forms
such as arts, culture, novel science, technology, andcomputers. The new law also regulates about the rewards/ royalties for creators who created his / her works in his /her capacity as a worker / employee for a certain
company / institution. Other matter such as settelement of
copyright dispute is also included.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 17 September 2014)<Indonesia> King Point Enterprise Failed toCancel Patta Trademark
King Point Enterprise (plaintiff) failed to cancel Patta
Trademark belong to Wartono (No. IDM000363935 andIDM000200096) because the judges of the Commercial
Court stated that the registration of the plaintiff mark was
rejected by the DGIPR because the mark have similar inprinciple with the defendant trademark who already first
file to the DGIPR and already got the certificate ofregistration by 12 April 2010. Besides that, the plaintiff
only provides all evidence with copies not the originalone; so that, the judge cannot consider this evidence inexamine this case.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 15 September 2014)<Indonesia>
Revision
Copyright Law

of<Indonesia> Yuasa Corp filed a lawsuit again
against GS Garuda Sakti

IndonesianYuasa Corp once more filed a trademark cancellation
lawsuit against “GS Garuda Sakti” owned by Yudhi, local
entrepreneur, claiming that that mark has similarity withthe mark “GS” owned by Yuasa. Yuasa claimed that thetrademark GS has been internationally used since 1908,
which is an initial of Genzo Shimadzu, the founder. This
mark “GS” was first filed in 1958 and had been awarded
as top brand in 2012. This mark has also been registeredin many countries such as Japan and Indonesia.
According to Yuasa, Yudi produced batteries products
using packaging that looks similar to that of Yuasa’s todeceive consumer’s opinion as if the product is the samewith GS owned by Yuasa.
On the other hand, Yudi argued that there are differencies
between Yudi’s GS and Yuasa’s GS and that it had been
underwent a substantive examination process at DGIPR
and decided to be granted by DGIPR. These factors haveshown that GS mark owned by Yudi is different from GS
owned by Yuasa.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 18 September 2014)

The House of Representatives and the Government haveagreed to revise the Indonesian Copyright Law No. 19
year 2002. Among the most influential changes is the
addition of period of protection to become 70 years after
the creator passed away. Some new important aspects
have been added into the new Law, such as the ability of a
Minister to cancel / annul any creations which areconsidered to violate religious and moral norms, publicorder, state’s defense and security, and national
regulations.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 16 September 2014)<Indonesia> Teavana filed a trademark
cancellation lawsuit against “Teayana” owned
by local entrepreneur
Teavana, an American company specializing in selling tea
and its accessories by offering various tastes and herbal
touch since 1997 and has been widely spread in 35
countries having no less than 330 coffeeshops, filed a
trademark cancellation lawsuit against trademark3

平成 27 年 1 月 19 日発行
インドネシア知財ニュース第 023 号<Indonesia> US Company Cancel C&C
Trademarkgrant decision from the examiner.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 30 September 2014)

The Commercial Court of Central Jakarta cancels theregistration of C&C trademark and logo owned by
Febriyanto (No. IDM000365553 and IDM000276717)
because it has similarity in its essential part with the C&C
trademark owned by CRC Industries (plaintiff) and werefiled with having a bad faith. Judges said that plaintiff is a
special holder of trademark rights for trademark C&C.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 22 September 2014)<Indonesia>
ProtectionofCopyrights
creations shall trigger the creative industries
The new Copyrights Law which was just recently passedby the House of Representative replacing the old
Copyrights Law No. 19 Year 2002 is considered as aserious effort done by the Government to protect theeconomical and moral rights of creators and also owner ofrelated rights. Among the new crucial points in the new
Copyright Law are addition of protection duration for thecreator from 50 years to 70 years (20 years longer), better
protection for the economical rights of the creator andowner of related rights, including limitation of rights
transfer in the form of sold flat system.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 1 October 2014)<Indonesia> Court Cancel Insulation Patentof PT. Toilon
PT Toilon Indonesia (defendant) loses their patent right ofinsulation (ID P0029369B) after the court granted alawsuit filed by PT Citas Sentul Raya (plaintiff). Judges
assess the patent is considered having lack of novelty andlack of an inventive step, so that this patent is considered
to be rejected or cannot be registered.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 22 September 2014)<Indonesia> Japanese Sewing Company Lost
their Lawsuit Againsts Local Entrepreneur
PT. Yamato Sewing Machine Mfg Co., Ltd, a Japanesecompany, lost their trademark cancellation lawsuit against“Yamano” trademark owned by Fadhil Srinaga in the
court. The Head of Judges of the Commercial Court ofNorth Jakarta, Aswijon, stated that both trademarks haveno similarity in its essential parts neither in the aspects ofperformance, writing structure, nor the type of goods. The
Judges stated that the trademark “Yamano + logo” isconsidered not confusing the public because anyone cansimply distinguish both marks. However, the Judges
refused counterclaim asked by the defendant requesting
the plaintiff to clean the good reputation of Yamano infront of the public through advertisement announcement.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 2 October 2014)<Indonesia> Tray Design owned by Sindu
Handoyo to be cancelled by DGIPR upon the
court’s decision
Tray design owned by local entrepreneur, Sindu Handoyo,shall be cancelled by DGIPR upon the court’s decision
No. 40/Pdt.Sus-DI/2014/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst issued by theSouth Jakarta Commercial Court. The Judges led by
Bambang Koestopo said that the tray type oval décor andfoc décor have been made since 2008 meanwhile thedefendant had just registered the designs in 2011. Thisdecision also instructed DGIPR to cancel the registrationof Industrial Designs No. ID 0031478D and ID
0031479D owned by the defendant.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 24 September 2014)<Indonesia> Toilon
Cassation Request<Indonesia> GS Yuasa’s Lawsuit Rejected by
the Court

Indonesia

Filed

a

PT. Toilon Indonesia finally filed a cassation request after
the court decided that their Patent claim of ID P0029369
B (Heat Insulation) was considered do not contain novelty.
Toilon claimed that the method used in comparing theirclaims with those of PT. Cintas Sentul Raya is wrong
because their claims should be completely compared as
one entity which creates new invention that contains
novelty and inventive steps.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 2 October 2014)

The Judges at the Commercial Court of North Jakarta led
by Head Judge Robert Siahaan rejected the trademark
cancellation lawsuit filed by GS Yuasa against the mark“Garuda Sakti” owned by Yudhi Tanto, a local
entrepreneur. The Judges decided that the lawsuit aboutsimilarity in its essential part between GS Yuasa andGaruda Sakti is not proven in the court. By comparing
both trademarks and their packaging, the judges foundsignificant differents between both products. The judges
also claimed that Garuda Sakti had undergone thesubstantive examination stage at DGIPR and received4

平成 27 年 1 月 19 日発行
インドネシア知財ニュース第 023 号<Indonesia> Industrial Design dispute on Tray
DesignHandoko (owner of Moro Seneng Store) because all thedefendants had been produce, distribute and market ofNakamichi trademark without the permission of theplaintiff as the owner. Nakamichi was a registeredtrademark No. IDM000068148 class 24 (textile product)in the name of Andy Najanurdin.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 7 November 2014)

The Judges at the Commercial Court of North Jakarta
won the cancellation lawsuit filed by entrepreneurs from
Cirebon against the tray design owned by Korean citizen,
Kim Soo Chang. Head Judge, Heru Prakosa, claimed thatsaid design in the type of oval décor has long been apublic domain of the craftsman of Cirebon. Cirebon
people has been producing said tray long before the tray
designs were registered.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 3 October 2014)<Indonesia> Management of the Mall Prepare
to Judicial Review
Indonesia Shopping Center Management Association
planned to take judicial review relating to article 10 of
Copyright Law No. 28/2014 which said that the
management of a place of trade prohibited let sales and/or
the multiplication of violation copyright products and/or aright related in their place. The Association planned tofile a lawsuit to the Constitutional Court to
re-examination again the Copyright Law 2014. In
response to this matter, DGIPR said that that this law still
can be revision by doing amendment and this was
something natural in any new rules there was input andcriticisms from the other party.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 10 November 2014)<Indonesia> The New Copyrights Law
Obligates Copyrights Dispute to be settled
thorugh Mediation
In article 95 verse 4 inside the new Copyright Law, theparties who are in the middle of copyrights dispute are
obligated to first settle their dispute through mediation
prior to submitting any lawsuit to the court, this isdifferent with the old Law which does not obligate
mediation before proceeding the case to the court. This
new rule is made because so far in most copyrights
violation cases, the lawsuits filed by the plaintiff were not
too excessive and not realistic with the material damages
experienced by the plaintiff. Not only mediation, the new
Copyrights Law also replaced the crime report procedurefrom criminal offenses to legal complaint.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 10 October 2014)<Indonesia> Malaysian
Appeal Commision

Company<Indonesia> Sunstar Inc. asked to Delete
Local Trademark
Sunstar Inc. (a Japanese company, plaintiff) submits alawsuit of deletion of trademark “Sunstar” No.
IDM000200812 (class 03); IDM000200813 (class 16);
IDM000200814 (class 30) IDM000200815 (class 34) inthe name of Hermanto Chandra (defendant) because it has
similarity in its essential part with trademark owned by
the plaintiff and it was filed with having bad faith.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 13 November 2014)

Sued

Excel Rim Sdn Bhd (a Malaysian Company, plaintiff) filea lawsuit against to the Trademark Appeal Commision(defendant) regarding the verdict of refusal to the requestof filling application of their trademark in Indonesia. The
Trademark Directorate sends a notification of refusal
letter of the application request because the plaintiff’s
mark have the similarities with trademark “Excelasiam”
No. IDM000054333 belonging to another party which
already file first to the DGIPR with similar goods. The
plaintiff claimed that this is a well-known Malaysiancompany which produces velg for motorcycle.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 5 November 2014)<Indonesia> Multicon Lawsuit is Considered
Not Relevant
Multicon (plaintiff) as a trademark holder of "I Box" asks
to the Commercial Court to cancel Ibox trademark belong
to PT Padang Digital and asks to close the entire iBox
store that located in each malls. The mall managements of
Senayan City and Central Park (two of defendant from 13
malls) said that the plaintiff lawsuit do not have relevancewith the trademark cancellation, they argue that thislawsuit should be only between the plaintiff and theowner of the iBox store not to the mall managements.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 24 November 2014)<Indonesia> Counterfeiters Brand were Asked
to Compensation
Andy Najanurdin (plaintiff) file a compensation lawsuit
to Harry Sucipto, Janwar T. Sucipto, PT. Sipatek Putri
Lestari, Dhanny S. Suwaji (owner of CV Pan Surya), and5平成 27 年 1 月 19 日発行
インドネシア知財ニュース第 023 号<Indonesia> CHRP Become a Public Domain<Indonesia> Sharp and Sanken Scrambling
Dispenser System

CHRP trademark owned by Yon Nofiar was deleted fromthe trademark general list after the judges of theCommercial Court approved the lawsuit of PT GML
Performance Consulting. The judge said that CHRP
trademark already known in various countries and it’salready become a public domain. Besides that, Yon Nofiar
filed the trademark with having bad faith.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 4 December 2014)

PT. Sharp Electronics Indonesia (plaintiff) ask for patentrights cancellation of water dispenser with a groove
charging double diffusing automatically belonging to
PT.Sanken Argadwija (defendant), because the patent (No.
IDS00001292, dated 8 October 2014) is considered tohaving lack of novelty. This dispute entering phases ofsubstantiation which is commanded the defendant tosubmit evidence on the next trial.
(Bisnis Indonesia, 17 December 2014)***6