scholarly journals KRITERIA TANDA PUBLIC DOMAIN YANG DIGUNAKAN SEBAGAI MEREK

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur Novy Tuwaidan
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Public Knowledge ◽  
Geographical Indications ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
Protection Period

This study examines the Criteria for Signs of Public Domain Used as a Brand. This research is legal research by using a method that is in accordance with the scientific characteristics of Law (jurisprudence), namely normative legal research. Concluded also some signs of criteria in the Public Domain Trademark law, namely: Public Domain because it is over the protection period, the Public Domain for distinguishing the substantive requirements are not met. (Article 20 letter (f) UU No. 16/2016 on Trademarks and Geographical Indications), Public Domain because it includes the area of public property, Public Domain because it does not open rivalry, Public Domain because it includes Public Knowledge. Public Domain since its birth, Public Domain because of government policy, Public Domain because something that can be enjoyed by everyone at any time, Public Domain because it is a public good, and Public Domain because there is no scarcity and is available to all

Knowledge as a Public Good and Knowledge as a Commodity

2020 ◽  
Vol 57 (4) ◽  
pp. 40-51
Author(s):  
Nico Stehr ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Social Inequality ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Wide Distribution ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Public Knowledge ◽  
The Public ◽  
Number Of Factors ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Legal Restrictions

In order to shed some light on the issue of public knowledge, particularly scientific and technological knowledge, I will first examine the thesis that incremental in the sense of ‘new’ knowledge is rarely found in the public domain. Additional knowledge mainly produced in the scientific community and by research outside of science tends to be treated as a commodity. The restriction on a wide distribution of new knowledge may be based on a number of factors. I will concentrate on contemporary legal restrictions, especially, modern patenting laws. The second part of my observations deals with some of the complexities linked to the thesis that knowledge is a public good. I conclude with remarks about the link between the ownership of knowledge and social inequality.

scholarly journals Aesthetic Performance Products as a Basis For Non Novelty of Industrial Design Based on The Public Domain Principle

Notaire ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Desy Rizki Ramadhani ◽  
Puteri Melati ◽  
Camellia Anand
Keyword(s):  
Industrial Design ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Product Performance ◽  
External Appearance ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Property ◽  
Photographic Evidence ◽  
Design Law ◽  
The Aesthetic ◽  
Protection Period

Comparative products are very important and must be considered about it because, Industrial Design assesses the performance of products that can be proven from evidence that can be seen or assessed by clear eye such as photographic evidence, catalogs or other evidence that can be proved bye Industrial Design which has existed before. Industrial design is based on its external appearance which does not have an aesthetic impression and contradicts Article 1 point 1 of the Industrial Design Law and article 25 Paragraph 1 of the TRIPs agreement, which is form creation, solely for function or technical configuration. Aesthetically cannot be registered. In the absence of aesthetic elements, the product performance can be used as the basis for the absence of new industrial designs based on the principle of "Public Domain", considering the aesthetic elements are one of the requirements of an item that can be categorized as Industrial Design. In the other hand, the protection period has expired and became a "Public Domain" then it can be registered as an Industrial Design if it packed with an aesthetic elements. If an item does not have an aesthetic impression, it can be ascertained that the item is not an industrial design and can be possible not to have novelty and become public property. Aesthetic impressions do not contradict with the laws and regulations, but this is an important requirement so the design can be categorized as an industrial design. In ordinance No. 31 in 2000 concerning Industrial Design itself does not limit of the notion novelty and aesthetics so, the multiple interpretations are often occur.

Public domain art in an age of easier mechanical reproducibility

2006 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 11-15
Author(s):  
Kenneth Hamma
Keyword(s):  
Education Research ◽  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Public Good ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Information Environment ◽  
Digital Resources ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
The Public

The current information environment presents opportunities for sharing information and enhancing the public domain of creative resources for education, research and the public good. Because the sharing paradigm for digital resources is fundamentally different from any we experienced in the analog world, practices of non-profit cultural heritage collecting institutions should be re-examined and re-evaluated with respect to aligning mission with new opportunities. One practice that deserves attention, particularly in this new environment, is the continued assertion of intellectual property rights in images of creative works that are themselves in the public domain.

Myths as errors and inventions: the shadow of tradition in pa praxis

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 158-170
Author(s):  
Ricardo Schmukler
Keyword(s):  
Public Good ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Life Experience ◽  
Human Life ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
The Other ◽  
Administrative State ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss the impossible segregation of founding myths from any actual understanding of life in common, the public good and PA theorizing. The notion of shadow as used by Robert Denhardt to designate the “other side” of rational motives in organizing fits well with the approach to PA myths here intended, in consonance with the theme of unity in apparent opposites and the “intensely meaningful acts of heroes and heroines” (Denhardt, 1981, p. xii). Finally, the questionable opposition between logos and myth will be reviewed along the discussion of the sacred and the secret in PA tradition. Design/methodology/approach The author examines PA myths and discusses conjectures and explanations. Findings PA founding myths are not false believes or illusionary entities but genuine precursors and effective backstage arrangers of theory and praxis. The processes of languaging, musicking and organizing, basic human traits and fundamental events for human life to occur and get structured as it does, cannot prescind from them. Myths are intertwined with reasons and desires, inseparable, coexisting in the unified and pluriversal forms of doing, knowing and valuing that configure human life. Nothing different corresponds to PA and its myths as key components of the processes of thought, action and judgment that constitute the public domain. Originality/value PA myths persist not only through the ages of the administrative state but through the transformations of thoughts also occurred in each theorist’s own life experience. At different times, situations and conditions all of us – the author guess – have addressed this or that PA myth for motives worth deserving the reiterated discussion. It was never the same discussion; it could not have been, it is not, and it will not ever be.

Justice and the Bounds of Welfare

1988 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Edwards
Keyword(s):  
Welfare State ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Welfare Provision ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
Means And Ends ◽  
Recent Debate ◽  
The Welfare State

ABSTRACTThe welfare state is but the vehicle for the provision of welfare and the latter does not necessarily entail the former. Much recent debate occasioned by government policy and rhetoric has therefore confused means and ends. This paper argues that a defence of welfare must come before a concern for protecting the welfare state. A number of foundations for guaranteed welfare provision, including justice, rights and contract are considered but the most persuasive foundation for welfare as need-meeting is found to lie in the Kantian categorical imperatives. Not only do these provide a moral prescription that welfare ought to be provided, they also dictate the ways in which it ought to be provided. It is against these requirements therefore that the necessity of a welfare state as a means of providing welfare can be tested. The second part of the paper then considers how extensive a welfare state needs to be, and how the boundaries between the public and private domains in the provision of welfare may be drawn. The equality principle, allied to the notion of equality of welfare, is found to be a useful instrument in determining the bounds of the public domain but only (so the paper concludes reluctantly) when harnessed to objective specifications of need.

Ethics, Rhetoric, and Culture

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald C. Arnett
Keyword(s):  
Social World ◽  
Public Domain ◽  
Public Knowledge ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World

Signification of human meaning dwells in ethics and culture, finding expression in and through rhetorical practices. Ethics and culture consist of goods and practices that gather the meaningful and the important together, yielding urgency for rhetorical employment of those practices. The union of ethics, culture, and rhetoric offers a coherent dwelling for the protection and promotion of the consequential. Ethics and culture house actions of meaningfulness that compel rhetorical expression, announcing a stance attentive to the vital, reminding self and informing other of a particular account of the consequential. Ethics and culture adjudicate a sense of ground that nourishes rhetorical understanding and engagement with the world. Rhetoric explicates practices of import that reflect the performative reality of ethics and culture, retelling self and other about the crucial. Rhetoric permits self and other to interrogate a ground of distinctive goods and practices that structure the noteworthy. Rhetoric facilitates discovery, testing, and knowledgeable implementation. It moves ethics and culture from points of abstraction to knowing public coordinates in a communicative social world that is impactful on self and others. The interplay of ethics, culture, and rhetoric in their triconstruction and enactment engenders human meaning. Rhetoric thrusts unique versions of ethics and culture into the public domain, and such action renders practical awareness of the existence of contrasting content of import. Acknowledging dissimilarity exposes and probes contrasting goods and practices. Rhetoric enhances public knowledge of differences undergirding juxtaposed ethical and cultural stances.

scholarly journals EXECUTORIAL DECISION OF REGISTERED BRAND CANCELLATION

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 11
Author(s):  
Eko Yuliyanto
Keyword(s):  
The State ◽  
Geographical Indications ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Legal Consequences

Brand cancellation is implemented through the delete list of the brands, it has brought legal consequences such the expire protection by the state. However, it is still leave some problems if the brand cancellation not accompanied by concrete actions such of a ban on re-use of the brand that has been canceled.The paper will focus on the analysis of judges' consideration in making the decision to cancel the registered brand (case study of decision No. 85 PK / Pdt.Sus-HKI / 2015), as well as an analysis of the execution of the decision to revoke registered brand (case study of decision No. 85 PK / Pdt.Sus -HKI / 2015). The method used is normative legal research. The results of the study showed that the legal basis by the Judges had accommodated all the substance of the juridical reason for the cancellation of the brand Cap Kaki Tiga by referring the provisions of Article 6 paragraph (3) letter b of Trademark Law (currently regulated in Article 21 Paragraph (2) letter b of the Trademark and Geographical Indications Law).Furthermore, an executorial decision regarding the cancellation of a registered brand may only be limited to procedural actions in administrative business such cancellation the brand from the general register and announcing the cancellation the brandin the official news of that brand.

scholarly journals Efektivitas Undang-Undang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis terhadap Daftar Merek Usaha Dagang Industri Kecil dan Menengah

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Irene Svinarky ◽  
Ukas Ukas ◽  
Padrisan Jamba
Keyword(s):  
Data Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Brand Image ◽  
Geographical Indications ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
Sociological Jurisprudence ◽  
Trademark Registration ◽  
Set Up

There are not easy for new companies to build a reputation or brand image. The company still needs trust first from the community that used their products. Trademark have a very important role, especially in maintaining fair business competition, because the brand can be a differentiating force for one company with another company. The purpose of this study to know the awareness of communities concerning the importance of registering the Trademark based on Law No. 20 of 2016 on Trademark and Geographical Indications. This study uses the method of empirical legal research with sociological jurisprudence approach, as well as data analysis using qualitative analysis. The study shows that the lack of company awareness in understanding the importance of trademark registration, they do not understand the benefits of registering trademark. Communities who set up businesses tend do not registering their trademark, one of the reason is caused by highly cost. As a result, the implementation of the Trademark Law becomes less effective in practice. Perusahaan yang baru berkembang tidak tidak mudah membangun reputasi atau brand image. Perusahaan masih  membutuhkan   kepercayaan terlebih dahulu  dari masyarakat pengguna mereknya.  Merek memiliki peran yang sangat penting terutama dalam menjaga persaingan usaha yang sehat, karena merek dapat menjadi daya pembeda bagi satu perusahaan dengan perusahaan lain. Tujuan tulisan ini untuk mengetahui kesadaran masyarakat akan pentingnya mendaftarkan merek berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek Dan Indikasi Geografis. Penulisan ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum empris dengan pendekatan sociological jurisprudence, serta analisa data menggunakan analisis kualitatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa masih kurangnya/kesadaran masyarakat dalam memahami penting pendaftaran merek, mereka tidak memahami manfaat pendaftaran merek. Masyarakat cenderung mendirikan usaha dengan tidak mendaftarkan mereknya, salah satu faktornya adalah biaya yang sangat mahal, sehingga menyebabkan implementasi ketentuan merek menjadi kurang efektif di dalam prakteknya.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document