Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search
Journal : Kerta Dyatmika

PENYELEWENGAN TUJUAN PENDIRIAN BADAN USAHA PENUNJANG KEGIATAN OLEH LEMBAGA YAYASAN DALAM PERSPEKTIF UNDANG-UNDANG YAYASAN Ida Bagus Bayu Brahmantya
Kerta Dyatmika Vol 17 No 1 (2020): Kerta Dyatmika
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Dwijendra

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (81.355 KB) | DOI: 10.46650/kd.17.1.816.31-43

Abstract

This research is entitled "Misappropriation of Establishment Objectives of Supporting Business Activities by Foundation Institutions in Foundation Law Perspectives." The background of this research is the opportunity to misuse Foundation institutions that can occur because the Foundation can carry out business activities to achieve the aims and objectives of establishing the Foundation with how to set up a business entity or participate in a business entity. Article 5 of the Foundation Law stipulates that the wealth of the Foundation, including the proceeds of the Foundation's business activities, is the full wealth of the Foundation to be used to achieve the aims and objectives of the Foundation. Criminal provisions against violations of the Article are regulated in Article 70 of the Foundation Law, for those who violate the provisions of imprisonment for a maximum of 5 (five) years and are obliged to return it. Article 6 of the Foundation Law is used as a shield against the prohibition. This study focuses on two legal issues, namely, how is the Foundation's business activities to obtain profits as capital in managing the Foundation according to the Foundation Law? And what about sanctions for misappropriation of a Foundation's business activities according to the Foundation Law? The research method used in analyzing legal issues in this study is the normative legal research method. This normative legal research is carried out using the statutory approach, the historical approach to the comparative approach. Based on the analysis, it is known that the Foundation Law uses the method of prevention by including provisions that do not allow or at least, complicating the misuse of the foundation by the organs of the Foundation. However, in the Foundation Law there is a legal obscurity that affects the attitude and quantity of non-compliance and has a real effect on legal behavior, including the behavior of lawbreakers. Keywords: Foundation, Criminal, Business Entity, Misappropriation.
PENGATURAN KEKAYAAN YAYASAN DITINJAU DARI PASAL 6 UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 16 TAHUN 2001 TENTANG YAYASAN Ida Bagus Bayu Brahmantya
Kerta Dyatmika Vol 21 No 2 (2023): Kerta Dyatmika
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Dwijendra

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.46650/kd.21.2.1441.48-57

Abstract

Undang-Undang tentang Yayasan keberadaannya hingga saat ini menimbulkan kritik dari berbagai kalangan, karena terdapat beberapa pasal yang dianggap berbeda dengan praktek/pelaksanaan pengelolaan yayasan yang telah berlaku khususnya pada ketentuan Pasal 6 Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2001 tentang Yayasan, yang menyebutkan bahwa “yayasan wajib membayar segala biaya atau ongkos yang dikeluarkan oleh organ yayasan dalam rangka menjalankan tugas yayasan.” Pada pasal tersebut di atas memiliki multi tafsir khususnya pada istilah “biaya dan ongkos”. Perihal pengaturan mengenai tugas organ yayasan telah diatur dalam Undang-Undang tentang Yayasan, sehingga yang perlu diketahui adalah pembayaran biaya dan ongkos seperti apa yang menjadi kewajiban yayasan. Berdasarkan latar belakang tersebut maka rumusan masalah pada penelitian ini yaitu: bagaimanakah pengaturan kekayaan yayasan berdasarkan Undang-Undang tentang Yayasan dan bagaimanakah kewajiban yayasan membayar segala biaya atau ongkos yang dikeluarkan oleh organ yayasan dalam rangka menjalankan tugas yayasan? Jenis penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum nomratif yakni kekaburan norma pada Pasal 6 Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2001 tentang Yayasan yang dapat mengakibatkan pengelolaan kekayan yayasan tidak sesuai dengan maksud dan tujuan yayasan. Penelitian ini menggunakan 2 (dua) pendekatan yaitu: pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan konsep (conseptual approach). Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah pengaturan kekayaan yayasan diatur di dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2001 tentang Yayasan dan perubahannya pada Undang-Undang Nomor 28 Tahun 2004 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2001 tentang Yayasan, dimana sumber kekayaan yayasan berasal dari pendiri yang dipisahkan, sumbangan, hibah, wakaf, hibah wasiat, dan perolehan lain yang dikelola sesuai dengan kewajiban para pengelola yayasan yaitu pembina, pengurus, dan pengawas didasari atas kewenangannya dan kewajiban yayasan membayar segala biaya atau ongkos yang dikeluarkan oleh organ yayasan dalam rangka menjalankan tugas yayasan diatur pada Pasal 6 Undang-Undang Nomor 16 Tahun 2001 tentang Yayasan, akan tetapi tidak dijelaskan secara rinci, biaya atau ongkos apakah yang wajib dikeluarkan oleh yayasan kepada organ yayasan dalam rangka menjalankan tugasnya sehingga menimbulkan kekaburan norma (vague norm) yang berakibat pada timbulnya ketidakpastian hukum, mengandung multi tafsir. The existence of the Law on Foundations has led to criticism from various groups, because there are several articles that are considered different from the practice/implementation of foundation management that has been in force, especially in the provisions of Article 6 of Law Number 16 of 2001 concerning Foundations, which states that " the foundation is obliged to pay all fees or costs incurred by the organs of the foundation in order to carry out the duties of the foundation. The article above has multiple interpretations, especially in the term "costs and expenses". Regarding the arrangements regarding the duties of foundation organs, it has been regulated in the Law on Foundations, so what needs to be known is the payment of fees and what fees are the foundation's obligations. Based on this background, the formulation of the problem in this research is: how is the regulation of foundation assets based on the Law on Foundations and what is the obligation of the foundation to pay all fees or expenses incurred by the organs of the foundation in order to carry out the duties of the foundation? This type of research is normative legal research, namely the blurring of the norms in Article 6 of Law Number 16 of 2001 concerning Foundations which can result in the management of the foundation's assets not in accordance with the aims and objectives of the foundation. This study uses 2 (two) approaches, namely: the statutory approach (statute approach) and the concept approach (conceptual approach). The conclusion of this study is that the arrangement of foundation wealth is regulated in Law Number 16 of 2001 concerning Foundations and its amendments to Law Number 28 of 2004 concerning Amendments to Law Number 16 of 2001 concerning Foundations, where the foundation's source of wealth comes from the founder separated, donations, grants, endowments, testamentary grants, and other acquisitions that are managed in accordance with the obligations of the foundation managers, namely the builders, administrators, and supervisors based on their authority and the foundation's obligation to pay all fees or costs incurred by the organs of the foundation in order to carry out their duties Foundations are regulated in Article 6 of Law Number 16 of 2001 concerning Foundations, however, it is not explained in detail what fees or costs are required to be incurred by foundations to foundation organs in order to carry out their duties causing a blurring of norms (vague norms) which results in the emergence of legal uncertainty, contains multiple interpretations.
PENGATURAN HUKUM PENGGUNAAN MEREK KOLEKTIF TERDAFTAR BERDASARKAN PASAL 79 UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG MEREK DAN INDIKASI GEOGRAFIS Ni Made Trisna Dewi; Ida Bagus Bayu Brahmantya; Kadek Yoga Artha Diputra
Kerta Dyatmika Vol 23 No 2 (2024): Kerta Dyatmika
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Dwijendra

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.46650/kd.23.2.1540.1-12

Abstract

Hak Kekayaan Intelektual (HKI) adalah hak-hak untuk berbuat sesuatu atas kekayaan intelektual tersebut yang diatur oleh norma-norma atau hukum yang berlaku. Hak kekayaan intelektual merupakan hasil olah otak manusia yang diimplementasikan berupa ciptaan berbentuk karya, seni, desain, maupun penemuan yang dapat dimanfaatkan dalam kehidupan manusia. Merek merupakan sesuatu yang ditempelkan atau dilekatkan pada satu produk, tetapi ia bukan produk itu sendiri, merek sebuah produk tidak dapat dinikmati oleh pembeli. Merek hanya menimbulkan kepuasan saja bagi pembeli. Benda materiilnya yang dapat dinikmati. Pendaftaran terhadap merek memiliki beberapa syarat-syarat dalam pengajuan merek ke Direktorat Jenderal Kekayaan Intelektual Kementerian Hukum dan Hak Asasi Manusia (DJKI). Menurut yuridis syarat-syarat pendaftaran merek berada pada pasal 4 Undang-Undang Merek No. 20 Tahun 2016 tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis. Dalam latar belakang tersebut, rumusan masalah yang dapat ditemukan yaitu Bagaimana Pengaturan Hukum Penggunaan Merek Yang Tidak Sesuai Dengan Merek Yang Didaftarkan? Bagaimana Kepastian Hukum Penggunaan Merek Kolektif terdaftar Berdasarkan Pasal 79 Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Merek Dan Indikasi Geografis? Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normative (normative law research). Jenis penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah jenis penelitian hukum yuridis normatif (normative law research) yag mana penelitian hukum yuridis normative adalah penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau sekunder menggunakan studi kasus normatif. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini yaitu Pengaturan Hukum Penggunaan Merek Yang Tidak Sesuai Dengan Merek Yang Didaftarkan masih terdapat norma kabur dimana jika melihat Pasal 79 Undang-Undang No. 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis, pada isi pasal tersebut tidak menjelaskan secara jelas dan terperinci mengenai asas mutatis mutandis dimana hal tersebut menyebabkan multitafsir dan membuat pasal tersebut menjadi kurang jelas normanya atau adanya kekaburan norma. Kepastian hukum dalam pendaftaran merek sangat penting bagi pemilik merek karena dapat memberikan perlindungan hukum yang memadai terhadap penggunaan merek oleh pihak lain yang tidak sah atau tidak diizinkan. Selain itu, pendaftaran merek juga dapat memperkuat hak-hak pemilik merek dalam mengajukan gugatan dan menyelesaikan sengketa merek di pengadilan. Dalam konteks bisnis, kepastian hukum dalam pendaftaran merek juga dapat memberikan kepercayaan dan kepastian bagi investor untuk melakukan investasi di Indonesia. Hal ini karena merek yang telah terdaftar dan mendapatkan perlindungan hukum dapat meningkatkan nilai merek dan nilai bisnis perusahaan. Pendaftaran merek memerlukan kepastian hukum yang memadai untuk memberikan perlindungan dan meningkatkan nilai merek dan bisnis perusahaan. Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) are rights to do something about intellectual property that is regulated by applicable norms or laws. Intellectual property rights are the result of processing of the human brain which is implemented in the form of creations in the form of works, art, designs, and inventions that can be utilized in human life. A brand is something that is affixed or attached to a product, but it is not the product itself, the brand of a product cannot be enjoyed by buyers. Brands only cause satisfaction for buyers. Material objects that can be enjoyed. Registration of a mark has several requirements in submitting a mark to the Directorate General of Intellectual Property, Ministry of Law and Human Rights (DJKI). According to the juridics terms of marks registration are under article 4 of the Trademark Law No. 20 of 2016 concerning Marks and Geographical Indications. In this background, the formulation of the problem that can be found is How is the Legal Arrangement for the Use of a Mark That Does Not Conform to a Registered Mark? How is the Legal Certainty on the Use of Collective Marks Registered Based on Article 79 of Law Number 20 of 2016 Concerning Marks and Geographical Indications? The research method used in this research is normative law research. The type of research used in this research is normative juridical research, where normative juridical research is legal research conducted by examining literature or secondary materials using normative case studies. The conclusion of this research is that legal arrangements for the use of marks that are not in accordance with registered marks still have blurred norms where if you look at Article 79 of Law No. 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications, the contents of this article do not explain clearly and in detail the mutatis mutandis principle, which causes multiple interpretations and makes the article less clear on norms or there is a blurring of norms. Legal certainty in trademark registration is very important for brand owners because it can provide adequate legal protection against unauthorized or unauthorized use of the mark by other parties. In addition, trademark registration can also strengthen the rights of trademark owners in filing lawsuits and resolving trademark disputes in court. In the business context, legal certainty in trademark registration can also provide confidence and certainty for investors to invest in Indonesia. This is because a registered trademark and legal protection can increase the brand value and business value of the company. Trademark registration requires adequate legal certainty to provide protection and increase the value of the company's brand and business.