Legal Certainty Based Protection of Well-Known Marks: Lessons from India
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v34i2.42820Keywords:
Well-known Marks, Legal Protection, Legal Certainty, Legal ComparisonAbstract
This study identifies issues in the protection of 'well-known marks' in Indonesia and proposes remedies for their preservation through amendments to Indonesia's trademark legislation, with a focus on legal certainty. This study employs a normative legal analysis utilising a technique based on court decisions, statutes, concepts, and comparisons, with India serving as the reference point. This study concludes that, from a philosophical standpoint, legal protection for 'well-known marks' protects both the economic rights of legitimate trademark holders and consumers from misguided product choices due to the exploitation of 'well-known marks' by unscrupulous entities seeking to profit from the brand's reputation. The difficulty of protecting prominent trademarks in Indonesia stems from ambiguous and perhaps illogical legislation. The absence of a definition and standards for 'well-known marks' in the 2016 Trademarks Act, along with provisions on trademark infringement that solely protect registered trademarks. Conversely, India has clearly defined 'well-known marks' in the 1999 Trademarks Act. Indian trademark law protects 'well-known marks' via a mechanism wherein the judiciary or the trademark registration authority acknowledges certain marks. It also outlines trademark infringement related to both registered and unregistered trademarks, including 'famous trademarks'. Therefore, amending Indonesia's trademark legislation to protect 'well-known marks' is crucial for ensuring legal clarity by: first, defining 'well-known marks' and their criteria under the 2016 Trademark Law; second, providing administrative protections for 'well-known trademarks' through recognition by the Directorate General of Intellectual Property; third, broadening the meaning of trademark infringement to include not only registered trademarks but also all trademarks, including 'well-known marks.'
Downloads
References
Alsalamat, M. A. M., Al-Qudah, M. A. K. A., Albalawee, N., Al Masadeh, A. M., Alassaf, B. K., & Alwrekat, A. A. A. (2025). Criteria For Trademarks (Well-Known and Ordinary) Under Intellectual Property Conventions and Related Rights. Indian Journal of Information Sources and Services, 15(4), 143 – 152. https://doi.org/10.51983/ijiss-2025.IJISS.15.4.16
Asean intellectual property matrix. (2017). In International Intellectual Property and the Asean Way: Pathways to Interoperability. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316711606.025
Bereskin, D. R. (2023). Trademark Dilution and Free Riding. In Trademark Dilution and Free Riding. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035312405
Bhat, S. R. (2018). Innovation and intellectual property rights law-an overview of the Indian law. IIMB Management Review, 30(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iimb.2017.12.003
Boadu, F. O. (2016). Chapter 7 - Trademarks and Patents. In F. O. Boadu (Ed.), Agricultural Law and Economics in Sub-Saharan Africa (pp. 215–262). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-801771-5.00007-1
Choudhary, V. K. (2010). Protection of well-known trademarks and weakening of honest concurrent user defense. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 15(4), 293 – 301. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-78149488308&partnerID=40&md5=21169146f171a7ea8588fc15602ca122
Dhingra, J. (2023). Remedy for Trademark Infringing Domain Names and Counterfeits. Journal of World Trade, 57(4), 643 – 662. https://doi.org/10.54648/TRAD2023025
Disemadi, H. S., Bajury, M. S. M., Nurlaily, N., Anggraini, R., & Sihombing, D. A. (2026). IPR-Based Sustainable Tourism: Comparative Analysis of Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand. Legality: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 34(1), 113–136. https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v34i1.43454
Feng, S. (2013). How are unregistered trademarks protected in china? IIC International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 44(7), 815 – 830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40319-013-0106-6
Fernandes, S. (2014). A Case Study Approach – An Analysis of the Infringement of Trademark by Comparative Advertising. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 133, 346–357. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.200
Ghose, A., & Ali, S. M. A. (2022). Protection of Cuisine under Intellectual Property Law: A Global Perspective. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 27(3), 171 – 180. https://doi.org/10.56042/jipr.v27i3.59568
Gomase, V., Kemkar, K., & Potnis, V. (2024). Intellectual Property Rights: Protection of Biotechnological Inventions in India. Recent Patents on Biotechnology, 18(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2174/1872208317666230612145600
Gultom, H. D. A., Sardjono, A., Budi, H. S., & Yuwono, U. (2024). Problems Of Obligation to Use Indonesian as Trademarks Against International Principles Concerning Words as Mark. Indonesian Journal of International Law, 22(2), 321 – 352. https://doi.org/10.17304/ijil.vol22.2.1902
Gunawan, Y. (2023). Legal Analysis of Ambiguity of Trademark Registration in Indonesia. Nurani, 23(1), 163 – 170. https://doi.org/10.19109/nurani.v23i1.17305
Howell, R. G. (2008). A watershed year for well-known or famous marks. In An Emerging Intellectual Property Paradigm: Perspectives from Canada. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781848445024.00009
Kim, B. (2019). Protection of famous product configuration mark (viagra trademark for diamond shape and blue colour) in Korea. In Annotated Leading Trademark Cases in Major Asian Jurisdictions. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429316395-24
Landy, G. K., & Mastrobattista, A. J. (2008). Chapter 4 - Trademarks and Domain Names. In G. K. Landy & A. J. Mastrobattista (Eds.), The IT Digital Legal Companion (pp. 61–97). Syngress. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-1-59749-256-0.00004-7
Li, Y. (2010). Analysis on the impact of the ‘dilution theory’ on ruling of trademark cases. Frontiers of Law in China, 5(1), 27 – 55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11463-010-0002-7
Lobo, L. P., & Wauran, I. (2021). Kedudukan Istimewa Merek Terkenal (Asing) Dalam Hukum Merek Indonesia. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 50(1), 70 – 83. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.50.1.2021.70-83
Marcellinno, M., & Fathoni, M. Y. (2023). The establishment of simple lawsuit rules in business disputes in Indonesia: a challenge to achieve fair legal certainty. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 1(1), 19–35.
Medury, R. (2019). Trade mark dilution before and after section 29(4) of the Indian trademarks act. In Annotated Leading Trademark Cases in Major Asian Jurisdictions. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429316395-21
Nam, Y., & Barnett, G. A. (2011). Globalization of technology: Network analysis of global patents and trademarks. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 78(8), 1471–1485. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.06.005
Naser, M. A. (2008). Re-examining the functions of trademark law. Journal of Intellectual Property, 8(1). https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-53249097807&partnerID=40&md5=f07fee2003f84284db53db3ae790a858
News on patent, trade mark and design databases on the internet. (2018). World Patent Information, 53, 66. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2018.05.004
Pamungkas, A. M., & Hulwanullah, H. (2025). Celebrity Persona: Can Intellectual Property Law in Indonesia Provide Adequate Protection? Jambura Law Review, 7(1), 197–224. https://doi.org/10.33756/JLR.V7I1.27579
Permata, R. R., Ramli, T. S., & Utama, B. (2019). Similarity In Indonesia trademark law. NTUT Journal of Intellectual Property Law and Management, 8(1), 52 – 65. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85089955896&partnerID=40&md5=8b81891c68ce5fc54096f622a8fa0c87
Pratiwi, L. Y. E., Adi, T., Rahman, K., Arifin, S., & Islam, M. S. (2023). In-depth Review: Legal review on human rights enforcement in the ASEAN and EU context. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 1(3), 202–224. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v1i3.16
Pujiyono, P., Waluyo, B., & Manthovani, R. (2021). Legal threats against the existence of famous brands a study on the dispute of the brand Pierre Cardin in Indonesia. International Journal of Law and Management, 63(4), 387–395. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-01-2018-0006
Rai, P. (1997). India - the trademarks automated system. World Patent Information, 19(2), 125–128. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0172-2190(97)00013-6
Roderick, P., & Pollock, A. M. (2012). India’s patent laws under pressure. The Lancet, 380(9846), e2–e4. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61513-X
Roisah, K., & Setiyono, J. (2019). Penerapan Trademark Dilution Pada Penegakan Perlindungan Hukum Hak Merek Terkenal Di Indonesia. Law Reform: Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, 15(2), 303 – 319. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v15i2.26188
Rojali, M. R. R. (2024). Generic Brand Law on Bakmie Bangka Brands that Use Public Domain. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune, 7(2), 143 – 153. https://doi.org/10.30996/jhbbc.v7i2.10934
Samaranayake, W. R. (2025). Well-Known Marks: Jettisoning the ‘Domestic Registration Requirement’ Vis-à-Vis Dissimilar Goods and Services. GRUR International, 74(6), 507 – 524. https://doi.org/10.1093/grurint/ikaf054
Saputra, R., Naresta, W., & Ariesto, V. (2025). Post-Mining Land Use Regulations and Practices in the United States of America: Lesson for Indonesia. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 3(1), 104–133. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v3i1.118
Saputro, T. A., Febriandika, N. R., Hertanto, I., & Rahmawati, A. R. (2025). Addressing Intellectual Property Crime in Indonesia: Challenges to achieving economic justice. Indonesian Journal of Crime and Criminal Justice, 1(2), 208–229. https://doi.org/10.62264/ijccj.v1i2.152
Sharma, B. (2018). Chapter 17 - Trademark. In D. Vohora & G. Singh (Eds.), Pharmaceutical Medicine and Translational Clinical Research (pp. 301–304). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-802103-3.00018-3
Sujatmiko, A., Haq, H. U., Romadhona, M. K., & Antons, C. (2024). Pierre Cardin and the Legal Battle for Well-Known Marks: Insights from Indonesia and the Netherlands. Hasanuddin Law Review, 10(3), 240 – 271. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v10i3.5583
Sujatmiko, A., Romadhona, M. K., Keizer, P., & Antons, C. (2024). The legal reform of trademark protection and dispute mitigation: Lessons from licensing well-established brands in Indonesia. Journal of Law and Legal Reform, 5(2), 459 – 494. https://doi.org/10.15294/jllr.vol5i2.3467
Sukania, I. W., Irawan, A. P., Dewi, F. I. R., & Esirgapovich, E. A. (2025). Legal Protection of Intellectual Property Rights in Indonesia for SME Performance. Journal of Sustainable Development and Regulatory Issues (JSDERI), 3(3), 515–539. https://doi.org/10.53955/JSDERI.V3I3.104
Sun, H. (2015). Anti-dilution protection of luxury brands in the global economy. In International Intellectual Property: A Handbook of Contemporary Research. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781782544807.00024
Syafira, V. T. (2021). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pemegang Hak Merek Superman Terhadap Pelanggaran Merek. Jurnal Suara Hukum, 3(1), 85 – 114. https://doi.org/10.26740/jsh.v3n1.p85-114
Venkatasubramanian, P. B. (1979). The law of trademarks in India. World Development, 7(7), 737–746. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-750X(79)90085-8
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Rian Saputra, Pujiyono Suwadi, Willy Naresta Hanum, Tiara Tiolince, Giovan Bintang Graha Pratama
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
