200 trademark owners lose their rights<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian Trademark Office has denied to
\nprocess about 200 trademark applications from industrial
\ncountries because of a new requirement imposed suddenly last week
\nby the director general of copyrights, patents and trademarks, a
\nnoted patent lawyer said yesterday.<\/p>\n
Lawyer J.B. Lumenta, of Amroos Law Consultants, said an
\ninstruction issued by the director general on Jan. 29 and
\neffective Feb. 1, stipulated all trademark renewal applications
\nshould be supported with a statement from the authority in charge
\nof the relevant business sector certifying that the marks are
\nbeing used.<\/p>\n
\"By denying the renewal applications, the statutory deadline
\nfor filing a renewal application has been passed and juridically
\nthe right to the trademark will lamentably come to an end after
\nits expiry date,\" Lumenta said.<\/p>\n
The statutory deadline for filing a renewal application is six
\nmonths before the registration expires.<\/p>\n
\"We find it hard to see and accept the logic and sense of the
\nsudden instruction,\" Lumenta said.<\/p>\n
Director General S. Kayatmo said his instruction, No.H-
\nUM.06.10-1, was meant to realign the administration of trademark
\nregistration.<\/p>\n
Lumenta said the policy lacked adequate legal grounds and,
\nworse still, was prejudicial to trademark owners and to
\nIndonesia's image as a member of the Geneva-based World Trade
\nOrganization.<\/p>\n
Indonesia is a party to the GATT Agreement on Trade Related
\nIntellectual Property Rights.<\/p>\n
\"The most frightening thing looming large before the eyes of a
\ntrademark owner is the possibility that during the vacant period
\nof protection a third unrightful party may file an application
\nfor registration of an identical trademark,\" Lumenta said.<\/p>\n
He said that pursuant to Article 8 of Government Regulation
\nNo.23\/1993 on the procedure for the application of trademark
\nregistration, an application for renewal of trademark
\nregistration shall mandatorily be accompanied by a declaration
\nthat the trademark is still being used.<\/p>\n
\"However, the regulation does not require that the declaration
\nshall be an official statement issued by the authority or
\ninstitution in charge of the relevant business sector, as
\nmandated by the director general's instruction,\" Lumenta said.<\/p>\n
Lumenta quoted Article 9 of the same regulation as defining
\nthe declaration required by Article 8.<\/p>\n
The definition of a declaration meant it might just as well be
\nsubmitted or made by the trademark owner itself or be issued by
\nthe authority in charge of the relevant business sector, he said.<\/p>\n
\"So the regulation actually grants the trademark applicant a
\nchoice between the two options,\" Lumenta said.<\/p>\n
He lambasted another requirement on copyright, as stipulated
\nin the instruction, as adding to the confusion.<\/p>\n
The instruction stipulates all words of creation for which a
\ntrademark registration has been applied for shall be supplemented
\nby a copy of the pertinent copyright registration certificate
\ngranted by the copyrights directorate.<\/p>\n
\"Where in the world is a copyright to be established by
\nregistration?\" Lumenta asked. (vin)<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/200-trademark-owners-lose-their-rights-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}