Main Article Content

Abstract

ABSTRAK


Indonesia telah mengakui dan melindungi merek non-tradisional khususnya merek tiga dimensi (3D) sebagaimana tertuang dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis. Namun demikian Undang-Undang tersebut belum mengatur merek 3D dengan jelas, baik itu terkait dengan persyaratan tanda 3D yang dapat didaftarkan sebagai merek maupun terkait dengan penentuan daya pembeda pada Merek 3D. Berangkat dari permasalahan ini Penulis hendak melakukan penelitian hukum dengan menggunakan pendekatan perbandingan. Penelitian ini mencoba mempelajari konsep merek 3D dalam hukum merek Amerika Serikat dan Uni Eropa guna memperoleh pemahaman tentang merek 3D yang belum diatur secara komprehensif dalam hukum merek Indonesia. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian mengenai konsep merek 3D di Amerika Serikat dan Uni Eropa terdapat ketentuan khusus berkaitan dengan persyaratan tanda 3D yang dapat didaftarkan sebagai merek dan terdapat metode penentuan daya pembeda pada merek 3D yang cukup berbeda dari metode penentuan daya pembeda yang biasa digunakan pada merek tradisional. Artikel ini memberikan argumen bahwa Indonesia dapat menggunakan konsep merek 3D di negara Amerika Serikat dan Uni Eropa untuk memperkaya konsep merek 3D.


Kata kunci: merek; merek non-tradisional; merek tiga dimensi.


 


ABSTRACT


Indonesia has recognized and protected non-traditional trademark, in particular three-dimensional (3D) trademark, as stated in Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications. However, the Law does not regulate 3D trademarks, either concerning the requirements for 3D trademarks or to determine the distinguish power of 3D trademarks. Departing from this problem, the author wants to conduct legal research using a comparative approach. This research tries to study the concept of 3D trademarks in the trademark law of the United States and the European Union to gain an understanding of the 3D trademark that has not been comprehensively regulated in Indonesian trademark law. Based on the results of the author's research regarding the 3D trademark concept in the United States and the European Union, there are special provisions relating to the requirements for a 3D trademark that can be registered as a trademark. There is a method of determining the distinguishing power of a 3D trademark. This method is different from the method to determine the distinguish power commonly used in traditional brands. This article argues that Indonesia can use the 3D trademark concept in the United States and the European Union to enrich the 3D trademark concept.


Keywords: 3D trademark; non traditional trademark; trademark.

Keywords

three dimentional trademark 3d trademark non traditional trademark

Article Details

How to Cite
Wijayanti, A. W., & Wauran, I. (2021). MEREK TIGA DIMENSI DALAM HUKUM MEREK INDONESIA. Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum, 6(1), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.23920/jbmh.v6i1.354

References

  1. Buku
  2. Rahmi Janed, Hukum Merek (Trademark Law) Dalam Era Global dan Integrasi Ekonomi, Prenadamedia Group, Jakarta: 2015.
  3. Titon Slamet Kurnia, Sistem Hukum Indonesia, Mandar Maju, Bandung: 2016.
  4. Jurnal
  5. Amir H. Khoury, “Three-Dimensional Objects As Marks: Does A “Dark Shadow” Loom Over Trademark Theory?”, Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, Vol. 26, 2008.
  6. Indirani Bastian Christy Wauran & Titon Slamet Kurnia, “confusion dan Pembatalan Merek oleh Pengadilan”, Mimbar Hukum Vol. 27, Juli 2015.
  7. Joan L. Dillon dan Michael Landau, “Development of Different Standards for Protection of Trade Dress,” Official Journal of The International Trademark Association, Vol. 94, 2004.
  8. Justin Hughes, “Cognitive and Aesthetic Functionality in Trademark Law”, Cardozo Law Review, vol. 36, 2015.
  9. Karen Feisthamel, Amy Kelly and Johanna Sistek, “Trade Dress 101: Best Practices for the Registration of Product Configuration Trade Dress with the USPTO,” Official Journal of The International Trademark Association, Vol. 95, 2005.
  10. Kexin Li, Where Is The Right Balance?-Exploring The Current Regulations On Nontraditional Three-Dimensional Trademark Registration In The United States, The European Union, Japan And China, Wisconsin International Law Journal, No. 2, Vol. 30, 2012.
  11. Kristen E. Knauf, “Shades of Gray: The Functionality Doctrine and Why Trademark Protection Should Not Be Extended To University Color Schemes”, Marquette Sports Law Review, Vol. 21, 2010.
  12. Mitchell M Wong, “The Aesthetic Functionality Doctrine and The Law of Trade-Dress Protection”, Cornell Law Review, Vol. 83, 1998.
  13. Rohit A. Sabnis, “Product Configuration Trade Dress and Abercrombie: Analysis of Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. v. SanGiacomo N.A. Ltd.,” The Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology, Vol. 1 issue 1, 2002.
  14. Tyler M. Seling, “The Kit Kat Conundrum: Difficulties In Obtaining Trademarks For Shapes And Containers”, Michigan State International Law Review, Vol. 25, 2017.
  15. Peraturan Perundang-undangan
  16. Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement.
  17. Undang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2001 tentang Merek.
  18. Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis.
  19. Peraturan Menteri Dalam Negeri Nomor 55 Tahun 2010 tentang Tata Naskah Dinas di Lingkungan Kementerian Dalam Negeri.
  20. United States Lanham Act.
  21. European Union Trade Mark Regulation.
  22. European Union Trade Mark Directive.