scholarly journals PERAN MASYARAKAT DALAM PERLINDUNGAN DAN PENGELOLAAN Bentuk PERALIHAN KEPEMILIKAN HAK ATAS LUKISAN DITINJAU DARI UNDANG-UNDANG NO. 28 TAHUN 2014 TENTANG HAK CIPTA

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-34
Author(s):  
Hidayat Andyanto
Keyword(s):  

Indonesia memiliki jumlah penduduk yang sangat besar di dunia. Jumlah penduduk yang sangat besar tentu saja tidak bisa dilepaskan dengan hasil kebudayaan yang ikut tumbuh dengan banyak penduduk. Hasil kebudayaan itu bisa berupa musik, seni kriya, seni sastra, dan lain-lain.Selain itu, “karya cipta tidak lagi sekedar lahir karena semata-semata hasrat, perasaan, naluri, dan untuk kepuasan batin penciptanya sendiri tetapi dilahirkan karena keinginan untuk mengabdikan kepada suatu nilai atau sesuatu yang dipujanya kepada lingkungan maupun kepada manusia di sekelilingnya”. Hal-hal semacam ini tentunya patut mendapatkan perlindungan dari pemerintah agar tidak ditiru oleh orang lain. HaKI Sistem merupakan hak privat (private rights). Disinilah ciri khas HaKI. Seseorang bebas untuk mengajukan permohonan atau mendaftarkan karya intelektualnya atau tidak. Hak eksklusif yang diberikan Negara kepada individu pelaku HaKI (inventor, pencipta, pendesain dan sebagainya) tiada lain dimaksudkan sebagai penghargaan atas hasil karya (kreativitas)nya dan agar orang lain terangsang untuk dapat lebih lanjut mengembangkannya lagi, sehingga dengan sistem HaKI tersebut kepentingan masyarakat ditentukan melalui mekanisme pasar. Dengan dukungan dokumentasi yang baik tersebut, diharapkan masyarakat dapat memanfaatkannya dengan maksimal untuk keperluan hidupnya atau mengembangkannya lebih lanjut untuk memberikan nilai tambah yang lebih tinggi lagi.

Author(s):  
Arthur Ripstein

This chapter articulates the Kantian approach to private law. It begins by explaining the aims and ambitions of Kantian legal philosophy more generally and, in particular, introducing the Kantian idea that a particular form of thought is appropriate to a particular domain of inquiry or conduct. The chapter situates the Kantian view within a broad natural law tradition. For the part of that tradition that Immanuel Kant develops, the moral structure of natural law is animated by a conception of personal interaction that is so familiar as to be almost invisible. Despite its centrality to both morality and law, in the absence of legal institutions, this natural law is inadequate to its own principles. It requires legal institutions to render it fully determinate in its application consistent with everyone’s independence. It also requires public institutions of adjudication. The chapter further looks at Kant’s “division” of private rights, distinguishing first between the innate right that everyone has simply in virtue of being human and acquired rights that require an affirmative act to establish them. It then goes through the Kantian division of the titles of private right, situating them in relation to the distinction between persons and things. Finally, the chapter articulates the Kantian account of what might be called the naïve theory of remedies—that is, that the remedy is an imperfect continuation of the right that was violated.


Author(s):  
Benjamin C. Zipursky

This chapter examines civil recourse theory. The phrase “civil recourse theory” has developed two connotations, suggesting: (1) a structural theory of the normative underpinnings of private law liability placing primary emphasis on a plaintiff’s right of redress and the role of the state in affording plaintiffs the power to exact damages from those who have violated the plaintiff’s legal rights; and (2) a distinctive, overarching tort theory that emphasizes a plaintiff’s right of redress while simultaneously emphasizing relational duty in negligence law and torts as legal wrongs. The chapter identifies several other views developed in connection with civil recourse theory but meant to stand apart from it. The thesis that negligence law’s duty of care is relational is among them; so too is the thesis that tort law consists of specifications of legal wrongs, that these wrongs are defined in relatively strict manner, and that plaintiffs must have an injury to prevail on a tort claim. Deploying the narrower conception of civil recourse theory, the chapter defends the principle of civil recourse as a matter of political morality and depicts the place of private rights of action in the basic structure of a just liberal democracy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document