Dispute Trademark with WD 40, Get All 40 Owner Suspects There’s a ‘Game’, Jakarta –The legal process for the trademark dispute of anti-rust liquid products between the WD40 and Get All 40, which has been running for more than a year, is still ongoing. Get All 40 will appeal to the Supreme Court for the decision of the Central Jakarta District Court of Niaga Judges which is considered not to apply the principle of justice and seems reckless.

The feud began in 2015 when WD40 filed a lawsuit for the cancellation of the Get All 40 certificate to the level of the Supreme Court (MA). However, Get All 40 managed to reclaim its rights through the Intellectual Property Rights Appeal Commission (HAKI) by taking advantage of the issuance of PP 10 of 2019, concerning Procedures for Appealing Marks in Intellectual Property Rights.

After getting the certificate back, on August 18, 2020, Benny Bong as the owner of the Get All 40 trademark sued for compensation to WD40.

The trial of the lawsuit was submitted on August 6, 2021. However, on January 5, 2021, WD40 through its attorney Hadiputranto, Hadinoto & Partner (HHP) filed a lawsuit against the cancellation of the Get All 40 certificate as previously done on January 5, 2021, then the Panel of Judges granted WD40 lawsuit with decision Number 03/Pdt.Sus-Merek/2021/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst on August 25th, however, the decision of the Panel of Judges led by Dulhusin,SH,MH was considered legally flawed, reckless and not based on the principles of justice. and propriety, legal defects due to the shortcomings of the parties.

Benny Bong as the owner of the Get All 40 trademark felt that the court’s decision had violated the law and the process was not based on the principle of justice, “All the defenses that we submitted were not taken into consideration. The Panel of Judges only refers to the arguments presented by the plaintiffs,” said Benny Bong to a number of media crews on Monday (6/9/2021).

This businessman who was once a WD40 dealer suspected that there was a ‘game’ behind the decision,

While the testimony of expert witness Dr. Suyud Margono, SH., MHum., FCIArb. The panel of judges who said there was no similarity were ignored by the panel of judges. “Pak Suyud is the most expert in the field of trademarks. But his statement was not taken into consideration,” said Benny Bong.

Benny Bong deeply regrets the attitude of law enforcement officers who do not take sides with local entrepreneurs who are struggling to create domestic products to be able to compete with imported products. “Even President Jokowi has repeatedly said that we love domestic products,” he said.

The same thing was conveyed by Chandra Suwono, a businessman and chairman of the HWI Lintedeves Market Cooperative. According to him, there has been injustice against local entrepreneurs, as well as playing around with the law in Indonesia by foreign businessmen with WD 40, because the panel of judges is of the opinion that WD40 is a large company, registered worldwide.

“But we should refer to the law in Indonesia. Indonesian products must be supported by all Indonesian people, including law enforcement officers. The President himself supports domestic products, “said Chandra.

Chandra suspects that there are big powers who deliberately make efforts with all events to play with the law in Indonesia and try to shut down domestic production. “We should support Get All 40 as a domestic product so that it can compete in the global world,” said Chandra.

In the absence of legal certainty, according to Chandra, the business world, especially domestic production, will be left hanging, because it is attacked by large outside parties.

From that decision, we should suspect that there has been a legal affair. In addition to making an appeal to the Supreme Court, I will also complain to Commission III of the DPR, the Judicial Commission, and the KPK to oversee the next legal process, Chandra said.

As the attorney for Get All 40, Djamhur, S.H, he has many notes that will be written down in the memory of the appeal later. There are several important points that weaken the decision, such as the lack of parties and the validity of the legal standing.

According to Djamhur, in their consideration regarding the lack of parties, the Panel of Judges said that it was the right of the plaintiff’s initiative to determine which parties would be sued in accordance with the jurisprudence of Supreme Court Decision No. 546K/Sip/1970 issued on 28 October 1970.

“It turned out that after I checked, the Supreme Court Decree No. 546 does not concern the party being sued, the decision is only for a dispute over the sale of rubber between Eka Nasrun, President Director of PT Bintang Jaya Raya and the head of Bank BNI City Branch. It has nothing to do with this matter. This means that the Panel of Judges ‘shoots from the ground’, as if we were tricked and fooled, “said Djamhur.

Djamhur wondered why some of the jurisprudence related to the trademark dispute that he submitted was ignored, but the Panel of Judges instead used jurisprudence that had nothing to do with the case being decided.

“The Appeal Commission should have been involved as a defendant because what is being questioned is the certificate issued by the Appeals Commission. In fact, every decision of the Appeals Commission is usually challenged in the Commercial Court,” explained Djamhur.

Djamhur also highlighted the decision of the Panel of Judges which did not take into account the opinion of expert witnesses who stated that there were no similarities in essence between WD40 and Get All 40.

According to Djamhur, his party has also filed an exception regarding the Legal Standing of the plaintiff’s attorney because the principal’s passport is only in the form of a photocopy legalized by the local Indonesian Embassy, not the original document.

“The legalization of the local Indonesian Embassy is only limited to stamps and signatures, but not about the contents. The judge’s decision stated that the signature on the document was confirmed by the Consulate General of the Republic of Indonesia. Well, the words ‘justified’ cannot be proven. So the word justify is just an assumption by the Panel of Judges, not based on documentary evidence,” said Djamhur, who hoped that the Supreme Court would consider his appeal wisely and fairly.

According to him, there has been injustice against local entrepreneurs, as well as playing around with the law in Indonesia by foreign businessmen with WD 40, because the panel of judges think that WD 40 is a large company, registered worldwide. [cs/rc]


To Top