scholarly journals Desain Indutri Sebagai Karya Yang Dilindungi (HAKI)

Author(s):  
Azhari AR Azhari AR

A designer has a copyright on the results of his creativity in the form of a blueprint and has the exclusive right to make the artwork into three or two dimensions. The industrial design law is directed at protecting mass-produced goods. People prefer protection with the right to industrial design, which is only protected for 10 years. This is because a design is very easy and can be imitated quickly by the general public. When it is protected by copyright, it becomes ineffective and wasteful. Copyright does not protect mass products.Keywords: Design, Industry, Work, Intellectual Property Rights

While the Treaty does not affect the existence of intellectual property rights, there are nonetheless circumstances in which the exercise of such rights may be restricted by the prohibitions laid down in the treaty. 2. Article 36 permits exceptions to the free movement of goods only to the extent to which such exceptions are necessary for the purpose of safeguarding the rights that constitute the specific subject-matter of the type of intellectual property in question. Perhaps the main advantage of this formula, apart from the fact that it narrows the scope of the exceptions permitted by Article 36, is that it allows subtle distinctions to be made depending on the type of intellectual property in issue. 3. The exclusive right conferred on the owner of intellectual property is exhausted in relation to the products in question when he puts them into circulation anywhere within the Common Market. Spelt out more fully, ‘the proprietor of an industrial or commercial property right protected by the legislation of a Member State may not rely on that legislation in order to oppose the importation of a product which has lawfully been marketed in another Member State by, or with the consent of, the proprietor of the right himself or person legally or economically dependent on him’. The expression ‘industrial and commercial property’ clearly embraces patents and trademarks. It also extends to such specialised areas as plant breeders’ rights. The court has held that copyright can also be a form of industrial or commercial property because it ‘includes the protection conferred by copyright, especially when exploited commercially in the form of licences capable of affecting distribution in the various Member States of goods incorporating the protected literary or artistic work’. The principle that the Treaty does not affect the existence of industrial and commercial property rights is derived from Article 222 of the treaty. This provides that ‘the treaty shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership’. Consequently intellectual property rights are unaffected by the provisions of the treaty unless they hinder free movement or offend the rules of competition. In Keurkoop v Nancy Kean (see below) the design of a handbag which was manufactured in Taiwan was registered in the Benelux countries but without the authority of the actual author. In Case 78/70, Deutsche Grammophon v Metro-SB Grossmärkte [1971] ECR 487, [1971] CMLR 631, the European Court stated:


Author(s):  
Smith Marcus ◽  
Leslie Nico

This chapter examines intellectual property. The governing principles relating to intellectual property are very different from the principles that underlie other choses, like rights under contracts or debts. Like shares, intellectual property rights are characterized by specific statutory rules relating to their creation, as well as to their transfer. Intellectual property rights can be divided under six heads: patents; copyright; moral rights; industrial design rights; trademarks; and confidential information. In each case, the holder of the right is able—by virtue of ownership—to prevent others from doing what they otherwise could do. Each of these intellectual property rights has four different aspects: the intellectual property right itself; rights of action for infringement; validity challenges; and licensing.


2020 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 24-27
Author(s):  
Tatyana V. Ivanova ◽  

The article considers certain situations that arise while using a patent for an invention by co-authors and successors and some issues of publicity in legal disputes over the protection of intellectual property rights. The invention created by a team of authors serves as the basis for the association of co-authors in an organization aimed at the commercial use of a patent. The exclusive right to a patent shall transfer to the successors, but the right to membership in the organization where the patent was supposed to be used may not be transferred, in which case the successors shall have limited access to information on the use of the patent. Various secrets, confidentiality of information, unavailability of information, complexity of protecting intellectual property rights, complex relationship between members of the organization and successors represent only some of the problems that create obstacles to the normal exercise of the right to use a patent for an invention and to get profit from its use. There is no special method to protect intellectual property right, such as the request to provide access to the information on shared use of a patent. The publicity principle, being one of the principles of legal proceedings, provides the condition for defining the truth in the process of proving, the court provides the conditions for the timely receipt by the participants of the required and sufficient procedural information on a particular case. The publicity of information in a legal case is most likely to provide the opportunity to satisfy a claim for the protection of intellectual property right. The right to membership in the organization, in which the patent was supposed to be used when it had been developed by the co-authors of the organization, can be considered as a guarantee for the right to use the patent. The exclusion of at least one element from this system shall create unequal rights and shall make it impossible to achieve a result — receive profit from the use of a patent.


2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-87
Author(s):  
Billy Handiwiyanto ◽  
Wisnu Aryo Dewanto

Intellectual Property Rights consist of various types, one of which is Copyright, Copyright is one of the Intellectual Property Rights that has a broad scope of scope of objects, to the Copyright that is owned, the Author and / or the Copyright Holder get an Exclusive Right on the Work , in which this Exclusive Right consists of 2 (two) types, namely the Moral Right to the Work, and also the Economic Right to the Work. The right to exploit the Work rests with the Author and/or the Copyright Holder of the Work, but there are often violations of the Exclusive Rights in this case the Economic Right which is the Right of the Author and/or the Copyright Holder to obtain economic benefits from the utilization of the Copyright, in which a Work is commercialized without Rights by other Parties who do not have the Right to Commercialize the Work. This study aims to determine the basis of the Liability of those commercializing a Work without Rights, which violates the Exclusive Rights of the Author and/or the Copyright Holder to utilize the Work in order to obtain economic benefits from the Work. This research was conducted using the Normative Jurisdiction research method which examines a problem on the basis of applicable laws and regulations, as well as from views and doctrines in the science of law. The results of this study state that other parties who without the right to commercialize a Work must be held accountable for violating the Exclusive Rights in this case the Exclusive Rights to the Economic Rights of the Author and/or the Copyright Holder.Hak Kekayaan Intelektual terdiri dari berbagai macam jenis, salah satunya Hak Cipta, Hak Cipta merupakan salah satu Hak Kekayaan Intelektual yang memiliki ruang lingkup cakupan obyek yang luas, terhadap Hak Cipta yang dimiliki, Pencipta dan/atau Pemegang Hak Cipta mendapatkan Hak Eksklusif atas Ciptaan tersebut, yang mana Hak Eksklusif ini terdiri dari 2 (dua) macam, yaitu Hak Moral atas Ciptaannya, dan juga Hak Ekonomi atas Ciptaan. Hak untuk mengeksploitasi Ciptaan tersebut terletak pada Pencipta dan/atau Pemegang Hak Cipta dari Ciptaan tersebut, namun seringkali terjadi pelanggaran terhadap Hak Eksklusif yang dalam hal ini ialah Hak Ekonomi yang merupaan Hak dari si Pencipta dan/atau Pemegang Hak Cipta untuk mendapatkan manfaat ekonomi dari pemanfaatan terhadap Hak Cipta tersebut, yang mana suatu Ciptaan dikomersialkan tanpa Hak oleh Pihak lain yang tidak punya Hak untuk Mengkomersialkan Ciptaan tersebut. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dasar Tanggung Gugat dari pihak yang mengkomersialkan suatu Ciptaan tanpa Hak, yang melanggar Hak Eksklusif Pencipta dan/atau Pemegang Hak Cipta untuk memanfaatkan Ciptaan tersebut guna mendapatkan manfaat ekonomi dari Ciptaan tersebut. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan dengan metode penelitian Yuridis Normatif yang mana meneliti suatu masalah dengan dasar peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku, juga dari pandangan-pandangan dan doktrin-doktrin dalam ilmu hukum. Hasil penelitian ini menyatakan bahwa pihak lain yang dengan tanpa hak mengkomersialkan suatu Ciptaan harus bertanggung gugat karena melanggar Hak Eksklusif dalam hal ini Hak Eksklusif terhadap Hak Ekonomi dari Pencipta dan/atau Pemegang Hak Cipta.


Author(s):  
Andriy Yevkov ◽  

The article examines the problems of normative establishment in the legislation of Ukraine of the exclusive right to export goods containing protected intellectual property objects, as well as the conditions and grounds for applying of legal norms enshrining the principle of exclusive intellectual property rights exhaustion to the exclusive right to export. Considering the limitation of the protection of exclusive rights to the territory of each individual state, the paper examines the problems of the territorial aspect (territorial models) of the exhaustion of rights, as well as the influence of exclusive rights to import, distribution and export on the implementation of international trade. The article notes that the right to export is directly established in the current domestic legislation of Ukraine only in respect of certain protected intellectual property objects, and substantiates the view that, given the inexhaustible list of property rights (ways of usage) for many other protected objects, the exclusive right of rightholders to export must also be recognized in respect of such objects. Concerning the implementation of export operations by the licensee the paper substantiates the point of view according to which, if in the license agreement the territory of validity of licensing rights is limited to the territory of Ukraine, then the licensee receives permission for distribution within the scope of this subjective right (i.e. within Ukraine) and, accordingly, is not entitled to export if there are no compelling reasons to consider such a prohibition as a way of restricting competition, abuse of right, etc. Regarding the export of goods by their purchasers after the first legal sale of such goods in a particular country, the paper notes that, despite the lack of direct instructions in the legislation, it can be assumed that the exclusive right to export should be exhausted after the first legal sale of goods containing protected objects, unless there are other grounds to believe that the export of such goods may further harm the rights and essential interests of the rightholder in the country where such initial introduction of goods into circulation took place (in the country of origin of the goods).


SASI ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Muchtar A. H. Labetubun

Agenda Intellectual Property Rights in particular the actual industrial designs among other things how the autonomous regional government can develop the potential of intellectual property rights owned by the community. Various potential intellectual property rights in the form of knowledge, skills and wisdom of local characteristics such as shellfish Craft Pearls can be protected and utilized for the greater good of society and regions. One potential intellectual property rights in the city of Ambon is the pearl handicraft products, therefore diligence pearl mussels need IPR protection and utilization of industrial design, especially for the greater public interest, especially Maluku Ambon City. Protection of industrial designs pearl handicraft products of the designers have not registered industrial design rights because many of those who do not know the first to file registration system adopted Industrial Design Law No. 31 of 2000, so that n Trademark Copyright protection of intellectual property as an alternative to Craft Shells Of Pearls .


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (7) ◽  
Author(s):  
Umar Husin

<p>Intellectual Property Rights give the owner the right to enjoy the economic benefits of the creations produced. Copyright and Industrial Design are part of Intellectual Property Rights. The dispute between Copyright and Industrial Design is commonplace in the community known as the tangent point. Decision No. 238 K / Pdt.Sus-HKI / 2014 is one of the results of a decision on the case of tangent copyright and industrial design, where the decision of the cassation considers the space for similar violations. Copyright is born automatically in realization without any registration and given to copyright holders, while protection for industrial design is not automatic because it is given in accordance with the registration of the new design. From the brief description above, it is obtained the formulation of the problem in the form of how to protect the law against the copyright holder and what factors can cause a dispute between copyright and industrial design.</p>


2020 ◽  
pp. 43-46
Author(s):  
L.V. Zolota ◽  
O.V. Ulizko

The article deals with the issue of protection of intellectual property rights by customs authorities. The current problems of infringement of intellectual property rights during moving across the customs border of Ukraine are considered, in particular: transportation of counterfeit products, which includes goods that are subject to infringement of intellectual property rights to the trademark and goods that are the subject of infringement of intellectual property rights to a geographical indication in Ukraine and pirated products, which includes goods that are the subject of infringement of copyright and / or related rights or intellectual property rights to a registered industrial design in Ukraine and which are or contain copies made without the consent of the copyright and related rights or intellectual property rights to the industrial design or a person authorized by such right holder in the country of production, as well as moving across the customs border of small consignments of goods with violation of customs legislation and introduction of simplified procedure for destruction of such goods. The article also analyzes issues of novelty of the Ukrainian legislation – “original goods”, that is, those that were made with the consent of the right holder, as a basis for the existence of the international principle of exhaustion of intellectual property rights. It has been established that national legislation does not sufficiently protect intellectual property rights and that Ukraine remains one of the four points of transit and transit of counterfeit goods to the European Union. The mechanism of regulation of compensation of costs in connection with storage of goods suspected of violation of intellectual property rights after all, the owner of the rights has the opportunity to demand compensation for these costs from the owner of goods that violate his intellectual property rights, as well as the destruction of such goods by the owner of intellectual property rights. Key words: intellectual property rights, customs border, promotion of protection of intellectual property rights, procedure for destruction of goods, counterfeit goods.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document