Analisis Akibat Hukum Terhadap Dua Putusan yang Berbeda dalam Sengketa Merek Antara “MS Glow” dan “PS Glow/PSTORE Glow” (Studi Putusan Nomor 2/PDT.SUS.HKI/MEREK/2022/PN. Niaga MDN dan Putusan Nomor 2/PDT.SUS.HKI/Merek/2022/PN. Niaga SBY)

Abstract

Trademark disputes are often triggered by the act of imitating a trademark. Therefore, the problems discussed in this research are namely how about the legal certainty of a registered trademark ownership according to Law No. 20 of 2016 on Trademarks and Geographical Indications, how about the legal consequences of the trademark dispute between "MS GLOW" and "PS GLOW/PSTORE GLOW" based on two different decisions namely decision Number 2/Pdt.Sus.HKI/Merek/2022/PN. Niaga Mdn and 2/Pdt.Sus. HKI/Merek/2022/PN. Niaga Sby, and how about the "MS GLOW" and certainty regarding the trademark dispute between "PS GLOW/PSTORE GLOW" following the issuance of Supreme Court decision mumber 161 K/Pdt.Sus-HK1/2023. Normative juridical legal research method is employed in this research, namely by referring to legal norms. This is descriptive analytical research and the sources of data are primary data and secondary data. Data are collected by conducting document study or library research, namely by studying statutory regulations, judge's decisions, books, internet sites, mass media, and dictionaries related to the title of this thesis. Based on the research results obtained, it is clear that there is legal certainty regarding the registered trademark ownership according to Law Number 20 of 2016 on Trademark and Geographical Indications. It also can be seen whether the provisions regarding trademark registration are applied or not in accordance with Article 3 of Law Number 20 of 2016 on Trademark and Geographical Indications, namely the rights to a trademark are obtained after it is registered. The legal consequence of a trademark dispute between MS GLOW and PS GLOW/PSTORE GLOW based on two different decisions is that there is a legal uncertainty for registed trademark holders since both parties believe that they are the lrgitimate trademark holders. In addition, the legal certainty in the dispute between MS GLOW and PS GLOW following the issuance of the Supreme Court decision Number 161 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2023 has been realized.