The Comparative Study About Intellectual Property Rights And The Transfer Of Land Rights For The Development Of Indonesia Land Law

Yazid Fatoni, Adi Sulistiyono, Lego Karjoko
{"title":"The Comparative Study About Intellectual Property Rights And The Transfer Of Land Rights For The Development Of Indonesia Land Law","authors":"Yazid Fatoni, Adi Sulistiyono, Lego Karjoko","doi":"10.29303/ulrev.v7i1.263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The transfer of land rights is a classic problem whose implementation is often uncertain. In the framework of alternative material for developing national land law, this article will try to compare the transfer of land rights with the transfer of Intellectual Property Rights. The method in this article is a normative legal research method with a comparative law approach as the primary approach. In the transfer of land rights, at least several types of law are used as a component in assessing their validity. When compared to the transfer of Intellectual Property Rights, an Intellectual Property Right must be registered for protection, as well as when the Intellectual Property Right is transferred. Regulations in Intellectual Property Rights are more specific because they are under specific statutory law and through a registration mechanism. The transfer of land rights seen from the perspective of Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Regulations or what is often referred to as UUPA (Basic Agrarian Law) and Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration does require land registration, but that does not mean that land that is not registered does not get protection, this also implements in the transfer of land rights. Even though the transfer of land rights does not use the mechanisms and conditions specified in Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997, the transfer of land rights under the main provisions in customary law is still recognized. It is usually implemented when the dispute goes to court.","PeriodicalId":406021,"journal":{"name":"Unram Law Review","volume":"195 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Unram Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29303/ulrev.v7i1.263","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

The transfer of land rights is a classic problem whose implementation is often uncertain. In the framework of alternative material for developing national land law, this article will try to compare the transfer of land rights with the transfer of Intellectual Property Rights. The method in this article is a normative legal research method with a comparative law approach as the primary approach. In the transfer of land rights, at least several types of law are used as a component in assessing their validity. When compared to the transfer of Intellectual Property Rights, an Intellectual Property Right must be registered for protection, as well as when the Intellectual Property Right is transferred. Regulations in Intellectual Property Rights are more specific because they are under specific statutory law and through a registration mechanism. The transfer of land rights seen from the perspective of Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Regulations or what is often referred to as UUPA (Basic Agrarian Law) and Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration does require land registration, but that does not mean that land that is not registered does not get protection, this also implements in the transfer of land rights. Even though the transfer of land rights does not use the mechanisms and conditions specified in Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997, the transfer of land rights under the main provisions in customary law is still recognized. It is usually implemented when the dispute goes to court.
印尼土地法发展中知识产权与土地权利流转的比较研究
土地权流转是一个典型的问题,其实施往往存在不确定性。在国家土地法发展的替代材料框架下,本文将尝试比较土地权利的转让与知识产权的转让。本文的研究方法是以比较法为主要研究方法的规范法学研究方法。在土地权利的转让中,至少有几种类型的法律被用作评估其有效性的一个组成部分。与知识产权的转让相比,知识产权必须登记保护,以及当知识产权转让时。知识产权方面的法规更为具体,因为它们是根据具体的成文法并通过注册机制制定的。从1960年《土地基本条例》第5号法或通常被称为《土地基本法》和1997年《土地登记条例》第24号政府条例的角度来看,土地权利的转让确实需要土地登记,但这并不意味着未登记的土地不得到保护,这也体现在土地权利的转让中。尽管土地权利的转让不采用1997年第24号政府条例所规定的机制和条件,但根据习惯法的主要规定转让土地权利仍然得到承认。这通常是在纠纷诉诸法庭时实施的。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信