Co-Ownership of Communal Intellectual Property in Perspective Support to Regional Tourism

IF 0.3
Zulkifli Zulkifli, Waspada Santing, Firman Menne, Almusawir Almusawir, Ashar Fahri
{"title":"Co-Ownership of Communal Intellectual Property in Perspective Support to Regional Tourism","authors":"Zulkifli Zulkifli, Waspada Santing, Firman Menne, Almusawir Almusawir, Ashar Fahri","doi":"10.55908/sdgs.v11i10.459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: The aim of this research is to determine the extent to which cross-conceptions in intellectual property rights can be resolved, and ultimately can be used to support efforts to record the legality of rights both individually and communally. The next goal is to encourage communal intellectual property to become a regional tourism commodity. Theoritical Reference: Theoretically, Intellectual Property Rights have an individual and personal nature, while communal intellectual property actually has a communal nature. So, placing communal intellectual property rules into intellectual property rights law brings about theoretical confusion. Method: The research method used uses a doctrinal approach by collecting data through literature study and then presenting it. Data were analyzed descriptively. Result and conclusion: This study found: the fact that IPR legislation in Indonesia places communally owned objects into IPR legislation, such as the inclusion of Geographical Indications containing Communal Intellectual Property in the Trademark and Geographical Indications Law, which is actually a statutory regulation. IPR invitation (personal). Likewise, the further impact is the weak potential for utilizing economic rights in the form of loss of potential tourism commodities, especially regional tourism. It is concluded that there is equalization of intellectual property legal institutions, namely the incorporation of communal intellectual property objects into intellectual property legislation. Even though this equality does not constitute equal distribution of legal principles, the resulting legal consequences weaken the economic influence of a commodity. Optimizing the economic potential of communal intellectual property, especially to support regional tourism development, will be disrupted. Research Implication: This research has implications for harmonization of the principles of intellectual property law so that they can be applied in the development of economic rights, especially in the tourism sector. Originality/value: This research is something new because it not only looks at conflicting conceptions in the regulation of intellectual property rights, but synergizes with legal benefit factors, namely the economic impact of tourism that can be achieved if.","PeriodicalId":41277,"journal":{"name":"McGill International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy","volume":"2 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"McGill International Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55908/sdgs.v11i10.459","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

Purpose: The aim of this research is to determine the extent to which cross-conceptions in intellectual property rights can be resolved, and ultimately can be used to support efforts to record the legality of rights both individually and communally. The next goal is to encourage communal intellectual property to become a regional tourism commodity. Theoritical Reference: Theoretically, Intellectual Property Rights have an individual and personal nature, while communal intellectual property actually has a communal nature. So, placing communal intellectual property rules into intellectual property rights law brings about theoretical confusion. Method: The research method used uses a doctrinal approach by collecting data through literature study and then presenting it. Data were analyzed descriptively. Result and conclusion: This study found: the fact that IPR legislation in Indonesia places communally owned objects into IPR legislation, such as the inclusion of Geographical Indications containing Communal Intellectual Property in the Trademark and Geographical Indications Law, which is actually a statutory regulation. IPR invitation (personal). Likewise, the further impact is the weak potential for utilizing economic rights in the form of loss of potential tourism commodities, especially regional tourism. It is concluded that there is equalization of intellectual property legal institutions, namely the incorporation of communal intellectual property objects into intellectual property legislation. Even though this equality does not constitute equal distribution of legal principles, the resulting legal consequences weaken the economic influence of a commodity. Optimizing the economic potential of communal intellectual property, especially to support regional tourism development, will be disrupted. Research Implication: This research has implications for harmonization of the principles of intellectual property law so that they can be applied in the development of economic rights, especially in the tourism sector. Originality/value: This research is something new because it not only looks at conflicting conceptions in the regulation of intellectual property rights, but synergizes with legal benefit factors, namely the economic impact of tourism that can be achieved if.
从支持区域旅游的角度看公共知识产权共有
目的:本研究的目的是确定知识产权交叉概念可以解决的程度,并最终用于支持个人和社区记录权利合法性的努力。下一个目标是鼓励公共知识产权成为一种区域旅游商品。理论参考:理论上,知识产权具有个体和个人的性质,而公共知识产权实际上具有公共的性质。因此,将公共知识产权规则纳入知识产权法会带来理论混乱。方法:研究方法采用理论方法,通过文献研究收集数据,然后提出。对数据进行描述性分析。结果与结论:本研究发现:印度尼西亚的知识产权立法将公有物纳入知识产权立法,如《商标和地理标志法》将包含公有知识产权的地理标志纳入其中,这实际上是一项法定规定。知识产权邀请(个人)。同样,进一步的影响是利用经济权利的潜力较弱,其形式是潜在的旅游商品,特别是区域旅游的损失。结论是存在知识产权法律制度的平等化,即将公共知识产权客体纳入知识产权立法。尽管这种平等并不构成法律原则的平等分配,但由此产生的法律后果削弱了一种商品的经济影响力。优化公共知识产权的经济潜力,特别是支持区域旅游发展的潜力,将受到干扰。研究意义:本研究对知识产权法原则的协调具有启示意义,以便它们可以应用于经济权利的发展,特别是在旅游部门。原创性/价值:这项研究是新颖的,因为它不仅着眼于知识产权监管中相互冲突的概念,而且还与法律利益因素协同作用,即旅游可以实现的经济影响。
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