dc.contributor.author |
Marbun, Putri Andita Natasyah |
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2024-12-05T06:48:08Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2024-12-05T06:48:08Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2023 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://repository.president.ac.id/xmlui/handle/123456789/12399 |
|
dc.description.abstract |
The Brand is essential for a business because it identifies the things the company
researchoffers. This study aims to determine the dispute resolution process in the
brand field Law Number 20 of 2016 (Brand) and to find out the process of
resolving MS Glow and PS Glow brand disputes regarding decision No.
02/PDT.sus.IPR/Brand/2022. This study is part of normative legal research that
uses secondary data sources. The dispute occurs because there is an alignment
with the Brand, namely in using the word GLOW. This research uses qualitative
methods using primary and secondary data and with a statute approach and case
approach. This study's findings indicate that companies must register marks
within the scope of business because it is essential to get solid legal protection. |
en_US |
dc.language.iso |
en_US |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
President University |
en_US |
dc.relation.ispartofseries |
Law;017202000013 |
|
dc.title |
ANALYSIS OF THE JUDGMENT ON THE MS GLOW AND PS GLOW DISPUTE REGARDING TRADEMARKS (JUDGMENT NO. 02/ PDT. SUS.IPR / BRAND / 2022 / SBYCommerce Court) |
en_US |
dc.type |
Thesis |
en_US |