Lupa Kata Sandi? Klik di Sini

atau Masuk melalui

Belum Memiliki Akun Daftar di Sini


atau Daftar melalui

Sudah Memiliki Akun Masuk di Sini

Konfirmasi Email

Kami telah mengirimkan link aktivasi melalui email ke rudihamdani@gmail.com.

Klik link aktivasi dan dapatkan akses membaca 2 artikel gratis non Laput di koran dan Majalah Tempo

Jika Anda tidak menerima email,
Kirimkan Lagi Sekarang

IKEA Loses to Local Copycat

Translator

Editor

11 February 2016 11:26 WIB

An IKEA store in Tangerang, Indonesia. The Swedish furniture-giant has lost a trademark dispute in Indonesia after the country's highest court decided that the IKEA brand belongs to a local company PT Ratania Khatulistiwa. TEMPOMarifka Wahyu Hidayat

TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - One 'bogeyman' for entrepreneurs in Indonesia is the lack of legal certainty. Businesses must not only deal with constantly changing regulations, they must also accept court rulings in trade disputes that are often unjust. The finding against Inter Ikea, a world-class furniture company from Sweden known as IKEA, in its legal battle with Ratania Khatulistiwa, a furniture company from Surabaya using the brand ikea, at the appeals court is the latest example.

It is essentially a simple matter: a difference in the interpretation of a 'dormant' brand. Ratania filed a lawsuit against IKEA at the Jakarta district court in December 2013. The subsidiary of the Kedaung Group from Surabaya held the view that the IKEA label for class 20 items (accessories, mirrors, picture frames and items made from wood and rattan) and class 21 items (household goods from pottery) had expired. Ratania asked for these items to be removed from the directorate-general of rights over intellectual property's list of items.

When it claimed that the IKEA label was 'dormant', Ratania cited Article 61 of Law No. 15/2001 on brands, which states that items can be removed from the list of brands if a label has not been used from three consecutive years from the date of registration.

If the panel of judges had simply looked at the date the patent was registered, the ruling against IKEA would have a stronger basis. Inter Ikea registered the trademark IKEA for class 20 items on October 27, 2010 and for class 21 items on October 9, 2006. This means that the IKEA brand for these two categories of goods, despite being registered, fell dormant after three years. Ratania then registered the ikea trademark on December 20, 2013.

But Ratania's argument is weak. In court, IKEA produced evidence in the form of sales invoices for the 2006-2013 period, clearly disproving the claim that the brands were dormant. IKEA sells products in Indonesia online, and also through two local distributors, Karya Sutarindo and Findora Indonesia. In October 2014, it opened an outlet in Alam Sutera, South Tangerang. The directorate-general of rights over intellectual property was clearly in the wrong when it allowed the registration of the ikea trademark.

The appeals court judges should have corrected the directorate's decision to accept the registration of the ikea trademark. IKEA products were clearly registered beforehand. Ratania was three years too late. According to Article 6 of the trademark law, the registration of the ikea brand should have not been allowed because it 'has basic or overall similarities to a trademark owned by another party that had been previously registered for the same type of good or service'. It also 'has basic or overall similarities to another trademark known to be the property of another party for goods and/or similar items'.

The ruling in favor of ikea seemingly adds to the lack of clarity over the legal basis for previous rulings. The dispute between IKEA and IKEMA, again between Inter Ikea and the Kedaung Group, also went to the appeal stage. The result was truly bizarre. In January 2013, the panel of judges allowed the IKEMA brand to be used for category 19 items in the form of pottery and tiles. But in April of the following year, the Supreme Court refused to allow the use of the IKEMA brand for category 20 and 21 items.

The appeal court judges should have used the same logic as Justice I Gusti Agung Sumanatha, who expressed a dissenting opinion. The judges should have favored the brand that had been legally registered and is a well-known brand that must be protected. (*)

Read the full story in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine



Election Fraud in a Neighboring Country

2 jam lalu

Election Fraud in a Neighboring Country

Seven members of the Kuala Lumpur PPLN are proven to have inflated the number of voters for the 2024 elections.


Because the State Is Not an Entrepreneur

1 hari lalu

Because the State Is Not an Entrepreneur

The government plans to accelerate the privatization of state-owned enterprises. Stop paying out budget funds for state companies.


Ignoring the Rights of Indigenous People

2 hari lalu

Ignoring the Rights of Indigenous People

Indigenous people are taking legal action against the President and the DPR for delaying deliberations of a bill. It has taken second place to the int


BTN Syariah's Acquisition of Bank Muamalat

6 hari lalu

BTN Syariah's Acquisition of Bank Muamalat

The government is to combine BTN's Sharia business unit with Bank Muamalat. This could lead to problems.


Lackadaisical Disaster Mitigation

7 hari lalu

Lackadaisical Disaster Mitigation

Hydrometeorological disasters hit a number of areas in Indonesia. Ironically, mitigation efforts are not yet a priority.


Child Pornography Syndicate in Indonesia

8 hari lalu

Child Pornography Syndicate in Indonesia

The crime of child pornography is continuing to spread. Perpetrators can operate from inside the jail.


Jokowi's Hand in the Golkar Party

9 hari lalu

Jokowi's Hand in the Golkar Party

Jokowi has ambitions to take control of the Golkar Party. It is his new way to stay relevant to those in power.


The Backers of Illegal Tin Mining

12 hari lalu

The Backers of Illegal Tin Mining

The Attorney General's Office is investigating alleged corruption over tin mining permits in Bangka Belitung.


The Importance of the Right of Inquiry

13 hari lalu

The Importance of the Right of Inquiry

Jokowi is taking Indonesia right back to the start of the Reformasi era. The right of inquiry could be a way to save democracy.


Funding for the Hasty Free Lunch Program

13 hari lalu

Funding for the Hasty Free Lunch Program

Jokowi and his ministers begin tinkering with the budget for the free lunch program. It is not appropriate and highly risky.