Pelindungan Rahasia Dagang Dalam Proses Pengadilan Tertutup Dikaitkan Dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2000 Tentang Rahasia Dagang

Stephanie Regina Tanjung, M. Amirulloh
{"title":"Pelindungan Rahasia Dagang Dalam Proses Pengadilan Tertutup Dikaitkan Dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2000 Tentang Rahasia Dagang","authors":"Stephanie Regina Tanjung, M. Amirulloh","doi":"10.31004/jerkin.v2i1.133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Intellectual Property is a right that arises from the results of thought that produce a product or process that is useful for humans. One form of Intellectual Property is Trade Secret. Trade Secrets are recognized and protected under Law No. 30 of 2000 concerning Trade Secrets. The purpose of this study is to determine the legal certainty of conducting closed hearings against trade secret violations in the UURD and its comparison with regulations of other countries, as well as determining the legal actions that should be taken by the owner of a trade secret in facing court proceedings to protect trade secrets in relation to the UURD and its comparison with other countries. \nThis study uses a normative juridical method with descriptive analytical research specifications. The comparison method used is the method of comparison of legal instruments, especially comparison of legislation. Data collection techniques used in this study were literature studies and interviews. \nBased on the research conducted, it can be concluded that the provisions in Article 18 of the Trade Secret Law do not provide legal certainty regarding how trade secrets can be protected in the trial process. The condition in which both parties must request to close the trial is not in line with the Judge's obligation to protect Trade Secrets. The legal remedy that can be taken by the Trade Secret Owner is to request that the trial of the Trade Secret case be held behind closed doors. This application is made not because of the conditions contained in Article 18 UURD, but based on the obligation of the Trade Secret Owner to make all proper efforts to safeguard the Trade Secret. An application to close the trial should not be rejected by the Judge, because refusal is a violation of the Owner's right to maintain a Trade Secret.","PeriodicalId":401411,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset Pendidikan","volume":"C-26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat dan Riset Pendidikan","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31004/jerkin.v2i1.133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intellectual Property is a right that arises from the results of thought that produce a product or process that is useful for humans. One form of Intellectual Property is Trade Secret. Trade Secrets are recognized and protected under Law No. 30 of 2000 concerning Trade Secrets. The purpose of this study is to determine the legal certainty of conducting closed hearings against trade secret violations in the UURD and its comparison with regulations of other countries, as well as determining the legal actions that should be taken by the owner of a trade secret in facing court proceedings to protect trade secrets in relation to the UURD and its comparison with other countries. This study uses a normative juridical method with descriptive analytical research specifications. The comparison method used is the method of comparison of legal instruments, especially comparison of legislation. Data collection techniques used in this study were literature studies and interviews. Based on the research conducted, it can be concluded that the provisions in Article 18 of the Trade Secret Law do not provide legal certainty regarding how trade secrets can be protected in the trial process. The condition in which both parties must request to close the trial is not in line with the Judge's obligation to protect Trade Secrets. The legal remedy that can be taken by the Trade Secret Owner is to request that the trial of the Trade Secret case be held behind closed doors. This application is made not because of the conditions contained in Article 18 UURD, but based on the obligation of the Trade Secret Owner to make all proper efforts to safeguard the Trade Secret. An application to close the trial should not be rejected by the Judge, because refusal is a violation of the Owner's right to maintain a Trade Secret.
在非法司法程序中的商业秘密保护与2000年第30条关于商业机密的法律有关
知识产权是一种产生对人类有用的产品或过程的思想结果所产生的权利。知识产权的一种形式是商业秘密。商业秘密受到2000年第30号《商业秘密法》的承认和保护。本研究的目的是确定就香港邮政的商业秘密侵权行为进行非公开聆讯的法律确定性,并与其他国家的规例进行比较,以及确定商业秘密拥有人在面对法庭诉讼时应采取的法律行动,以保护与香港邮政有关的商业秘密,并与其他国家进行比较。本研究采用规范的法学方法,辅以描述性分析研究规范。所采用的比较法是法律文书比较法,特别是立法比较法。本研究采用文献研究法和访谈法收集资料。通过研究可以得出结论,商业秘密法第十八条的规定并没有对商业秘密在审判过程中如何保护提供法律上的确定性。双方当事人要求结案的条件不符合法官保护商业秘密的义务。商业秘密所有人可以采取的法律救济是要求对商业秘密案件进行闭门审理。提出此申请并非由于urd第18条所载的条件,而是基于商业秘密所有人有义务尽一切适当努力保护商业秘密。法官不应拒绝结案申请,因为拒绝是对权利人保守商业秘密权利的侵犯。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信