200 trademark owners lose their rights
200 trademark owners lose their rights
JAKARTA (JP): The Indonesian Trademark Office has denied to
process about 200 trademark applications from industrial
countries because of a new requirement imposed suddenly last week
by the director general of copyrights, patents and trademarks, a
noted patent lawyer said yesterday.
Lawyer J.B. Lumenta, of Amroos Law Consultants, said an
instruction issued by the director general on Jan. 29 and
effective Feb. 1, stipulated all trademark renewal applications
should be supported with a statement from the authority in charge
of the relevant business sector certifying that the marks are
being used.
"By denying the renewal applications, the statutory deadline
for filing a renewal application has been passed and juridically
the right to the trademark will lamentably come to an end after
its expiry date," Lumenta said.
The statutory deadline for filing a renewal application is six
months before the registration expires.
"We find it hard to see and accept the logic and sense of the
sudden instruction," Lumenta said.
Director General S. Kayatmo said his instruction, No.H-
UM.06.10-1, was meant to realign the administration of trademark
registration.
Lumenta said the policy lacked adequate legal grounds and,
worse still, was prejudicial to trademark owners and to
Indonesia's image as a member of the Geneva-based World Trade
Organization.
Indonesia is a party to the GATT Agreement on Trade Related
Intellectual Property Rights.
"The most frightening thing looming large before the eyes of a
trademark owner is the possibility that during the vacant period
of protection a third unrightful party may file an application
for registration of an identical trademark," Lumenta said.
He said that pursuant to Article 8 of Government Regulation
No.23/1993 on the procedure for the application of trademark
registration, an application for renewal of trademark
registration shall mandatorily be accompanied by a declaration
that the trademark is still being used.
"However, the regulation does not require that the declaration
shall be an official statement issued by the authority or
institution in charge of the relevant business sector, as
mandated by the director general's instruction," Lumenta said.
Lumenta quoted Article 9 of the same regulation as defining
the declaration required by Article 8.
The definition of a declaration meant it might just as well be
submitted or made by the trademark owner itself or be issued by
the authority in charge of the relevant business sector, he said.
"So the regulation actually grants the trademark applicant a
choice between the two options," Lumenta said.
He lambasted another requirement on copyright, as stipulated
in the instruction, as adding to the confusion.
The instruction stipulates all words of creation for which a
trademark registration has been applied for shall be supplemented
by a copy of the pertinent copyright registration certificate
granted by the copyrights directorate.
"Where in the world is a copyright to be established by
registration?" Lumenta asked. (vin)