The Legal Protection of Ngajat Lesung Dance as a Copyright for Traditional Cultural Expressions

Traditional art must be protected as it is included in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), including Copyrights. The Copyright law aims to protect works of art created by artists. In addition, it can facilitate individual creativity or expression for the broad benefit of humanity, ensuring that the rights to property owned by artists are recognized, respected and can be defended on actions that violate their rights. Ngajat Lesung dance is a traditional dance that belongs to the Village of Sejuang, Seluar District, Bengkayang Regency. The empirical legal approach is the method for conducting this research. This method involved by directly collecting predetermined data and information. The collected results were then collected and analyzed to determine how the implementation of Legal Protection for Ngajat Lesung dance as a Copyright of Traditional Cultural Expressions in Seluas District, Bengkayang Regency. Copyright Legal Protection for Ngajat Lesung dance has yet to be carried out optimally by the Regional Government of Bengkayang Regency through the Department of Youth, Sports, and Tourism. This is because the efforts made by the Regional Government have not been maximized to educate artists regarding the protection of Copyright law for traditional culture, causing the artist's ignorance of the importance of protection for the work that has been made. In addition, the artist thinks that registering the Copyright for Traditional Dances requires a large fee and is very expensive. Therefore, the Regional Government of Bengkayang Regency through the Youth, Sports, and Tourism Service, is expected to pay more attention and educate to help the artists inventory and register Ngajat Lesung Dance. This dance is part of various Traditional Cultural Expressions in the field of Intellectual Property. Registering the Copyright of Ngajat Lesung Dance and having it listed as a Traditional Cultural Art with the Directorate General of Intellectual Property is important

Perlindungan merek terkenal di Indonesia di era globalisasi

Hak milik intelektual merupakan kekayaan yang harus mendapat perlindungan hukum secara maksimal oleh negara sebagaimana ditetapkan dalam peraturan perundangundangan. Kekayaan intelektual (intellectual property) adalah hasil dari kreasi intelektual manusia yang terdiri dari Hak cipta, paten, merek, perlindungan varietas tanaman, rahasia dagang, desain industri dan desain tata letak sirkuit terpadu. Merek sebagai bagian dari persoalan hak milik intelektual (intellectual property rights) mempunyai peran yang sangat strategis dan menentukan dalam memajukan penjualan suatu produk baik barang maupun jasa. Karenanya merek lebih banyak dilihat dari sisi komersial semata, tanpa memandang aspek lainnya seperti penyalahgunaan merek oleh pihak ketiga dengan tanpa izin dari si pemilik merek

Implementasi Undang-undang No. 14 Tahun 2001 Tentang Paten Melalui Program Riset Pemerintah Daerah Provinsi Riau Sebagai Sarana Pemberdayaan Ekonomi Masyarakat

Act No. 14 Years 2001 about Patent can be a gate for Indonesia into economic development. Because of that research and development that do by the government including by the government of Riau Province by means, oftheAPBDof Riau should be direct to get invention for registered the patent right as a tool of economic empowermen

Response of U.S. university and college technology transfer to AMP v. Myriad (2013)

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) aims to stimulate and promote innovation, to strengthen the nation's industry and economy, and to maintain the United States' technological competitiveness on a global scale. One type of intellectual property protection offered by the USPTO is patents. Patent protection offers inventors a legal title to their innovation, as well as the right to exclude others from making, using, selling or importing their patented work for a term of 20 years. In exchange, the inventor agrees to publicly disclose information about their innovation. Prior to 1980, the patents of federally-funded research projects for small businesses and nonprofits, such as universities, were held by the U.S. government, resulting in billions of dollars of research innovation being unapplied for public use. The Bayh-Doyle Act marked a shift of patent titles and licensing responsibilities away from the government to the federally-funded research entities. This shift caused exponential growth in industrial innovation and "technology transfer" at academic institutions. In particular, patents of "natural products" skyrocketed in volume for the field of biotechnology. However, a string of Supreme Court decisions in the early 21st century, particularly the highly publicized Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., cast new uncertainty on the patentability of natural products. This study briefly reviews the patenting landscape of biotechnology leading up to Myriad and aims to provide greater insight as to the effects of the Supreme Court's decision at the level of academic research institutions, as perceived by surveyed members of the Association of University Technology Managers (AUTM). Statistically significant results were achieved on data in the following six areas: (1) demographics of survey respondents, (2) patenting behaviors post-Myriad, (3) attitudes toward patenting (in general), (4) attitudes toward Myriad, (5) the use of certain patenting strategies post-Myriad. However, there was insufficient survey response on section (6)—attitudes toward those same strategies (perception of their effectiveness)— to make claims from the data

Print Your Own Pandora\u27s Box: 3D Printing, Intellectual Property Law, and The Internet for Lay-Lawyers

This comment’s main purpose is to explore intellectual property law meant to protect against manufacturing infringement after manufacturing becomes decentralized. Part II glimpses into the applicable 3D printing technology, with a focus on its current capabilities and future application. Part III explores the rift between utility and design intellectual property protection within the framework of intellectual property protection. Part IV analyzes the overlap of the technology and the law. Part V projects the potential impact of inaction by drawing comparisons to parallel issues, as well as the potential impact of the technology itself

Odnos politike i tehnologije u savremenoj političkoj teoriji

A systematic study of politics-technology relation, both of them seen as relatively independent spheres of social reality, begins from mid-twentieth century. In this relatively short period of time, several significant theoretical approaches and problem circles had crystallized. Systematization and verification of these approaches is the aim of this study. Scientific goal, as well as subject of research, require application of dialectical general method, including the use of hypothetically-deductive, axiomatic, analytically-deductive and comparative scientific methods, and qualitative content analysis as operational method. In order to adequately systematize and evaluate contemporary theoretical thought on politics-technology relation, it is necessary to analyze its conceptual roots. Although some important elements of later theoretical discourses can be found in the ancient Greek thought, the basic framework for consideration of this relationship was posed by Francis Bacon in seventeenth century. After him, many other theorist have influenced the formation of modern theoretical discourse, including philosophers of Enlightenment, as well as Karl Marx and Max Weber who, each in his own way, determined, to a great, the course of later discussion about this problem. In parallel with boundless optimism and a belief in technological progress, identified too often with social progress, appears bleaker interpretation, where autonomy of technology is directly opposed to personal autonomy, and technological progress to progress of mankind. This latter perspective is represented by thinkers of the Frankfurt School, as well as Erich Fromm, Jacques Ellul and Lewis Mumford. Today, there are four dominant theoretical approaches: instrumentalism, technological determinism, socio-centric and systemic. Instrumentalism is based on definition of technology as a means, which implies its political neutrality. Technological determinism postulates, basically, that technology develops independently, and that its development stands as primary determinant of social and political systems. Conversely, socio-centric approach insists that technology develops within society, and that social factors, including political ones, play an important and often decisive role in the final design of technological artifacts. Systemic approach indicates a mutual shaping of politics and technology, or, more precisely, some of their elements. Different theoretical approaches are visible in a study of individual problem circles, such as relationship between technology and power, technology and state, technocracy, and politics in postindustrial or information society. Finally, theoretical thought about politics-technology relation frequently floats between utopia and dystopia, from uncritical enthusiasm for technology and the belief in its ability to transform society and politics in the direction of a better and fairer community, to apocalyptic visions of technology that locks mankind in the “iron cage”. This debate is continuing, and nowadays particularly controversial questions are posed by biotechnologies, global environmental problems and new information technologies. Some aspects of politics-technology relation are well explored in contemporary political theory. It seems, however, that this field still remains at the margins of interest of political scientists – fact that results in some serious problems in theoretical conceptualization. Key difficulties are linking of micro and macro levels of analysis, as well as absence of general theory that tends to explain the relationship between these two social spheres in their totality.Sistematično proučavanje odnosa između politike i tehnologije kao relativno samostalnih sfera drušvene realnosti počinje tek polovinom dvadesetog veka. U ovom relativno kratkom periodu iskristalisalo se nekoliko značajnih teorijskih pristupa i problemskih krugova čija je sistematizacija i verifikacija cilj ovog rada. Naučni cilj, kao i predmet rada, zahtevaju da se u istraživanju pođe od dijalektičkog opštefilozofskog metoda, uz upotrebu hipotetičko-deduktivnog, aksiomatskog, analitičko-deduktivnog i komparativnog kao opštenaučnih i kvalitativne analize sadržaja kao operativnog metoda. Da bi se savremena teorijska misao o odnosu politike i tehnologije mogla na odgovarajući način sistematizovati i proceniti neophodno je prethodno analizirati njene idejne korene. Iako se neki važni elementi kasnijeg teorijskog diskursa mogu naći već u antici, osnovni okvir za razmatranje ove relacije postavio je Frensis Bekon u sedamnaestom veku. Nakon njega i mnogi drugi autori su svojim idejama uticali na formiranje modernog teorijskog diskursa, uključujući filozofe prosvetiteljstva, kao i Karla Marksa i Maksa Vebera koji su, svaki na svoj način, u velikoj meri odredili tok kasnije diskusije o ovom problemu. Naporedo sa bezgraničnim optimizmom i verom u tehnološki napredak, prečesto identifikovan sa društvenim, javljaju se i sumornija viđenja u kojima se autonomnost tehnologije direktno suprotstavlja autonomiji ličnosti, tehnološki progres progresu čovečanstva. Ovakva perspektiva karakteristična je za pripadnike Frankfurtske škole, Eriha Froma, Žala Elila i Luisa Mamforda. Četiri danas dominantna teorijska pristupa odnosu politike i tehnologije su instrumentalizam, tehnološki determinizam, sociocentrični i sistemski. Instrumentalizam se zasniva na određenju tehnologije kao sredstva, iz čega proizilazi njena politička neutralnost. Osnovni postulat tehnološkog determinizma je da se tehnologija razvija autonomno, i da njen razvoj predstavlja primarnu determinantu društvenog, pa i političkog sistema. Nasuprot tome, sociocentrični pristupi insistiraju na tome da se tehnologija razvija unutar društva, te da društveni faktori, uključujući i političke, igraju važnu i često odlučujuću ulogu u konačnom dizajnu tehnoloških artefakata. Sistemski pristup ukazuje na uzajamno oblikovanje politike i tehnologije, tačnije njihovih pojedinih elemenata. Različiti teorijski pristupi vidljivi su i u proučavanju pojedinih problemskih krugova, kao što su odnos tehnologije i moći, tehnologije i države, tehnokratija, i politika u postindustrijskom odnosno informatičkom društvu. Konačno, teorijska misao o odnosu politike i tehnologije kreće se često između utopije i distopije, to jest od nekritičkog oduševljenja tehnologijom i vere u njenu sposobnost da transformiše društvo i politiku u pravcu bolje i pravednije zajednice, i apokaliptičnih vizija tehnologije koja je celokupno čovečanstvo zatvorila u svoj „gvozdeni kavez“. Ova debata se stalno iznova aktuelizuje, a danas su naročito kontroverzna pitanja koja otvaraju biotehnologije, globalni ekološki problemi i nove informacione tehnologije. Pojedini aspekti odnosa između politike i tehnologije su u savremenoj političkoj teoriji dobro obrađeni. Čini se, međutim, da ova oblast ostaje i dalje na marginama interesovanja politikologa, što je rezultiralo nekim ozbiljnim problemima u teorijskoj konceptualizaciji. Ključne teškoće su povezivanje mikro i makro nivoa analize, kao i nepostojanje opšte teorije koja bi pretendovala da objasni odnos ove dve društvene sfere u njegovom totalitetu

Politics-technology relation in contemporary political theory. Умножено за одбрану

Систематично проучавање односа између политике и технологије као релативно самосталних сфера друшвене реалности почиње тек половином двадесетог века. У овом релативно кратком периоду искристалисало се неколико значајних теоријских приступа и проблемских кругова чија је систематизација и верификација циљ овог рада. Научни циљ, као и предмет рада, захтевају да се у истраживању пође од дијалектичког општефилозофског метода, уз употребу хипотетичко-дедуктивног, аксиоматског, аналитичко-дедуктивног и компаративног као општенаучних и квалитативне анализе садржаја као оперативног метода. Да би се савремена теоријска мисао о односу политике и технологије могла на одговарајући начин систематизовати и проценити неопходно је претходно анализирати њене идејне корене. Иако се неки важни елементи каснијег теоријског дискурса могу наћи већ у антици, основни оквир за разматрање ове релације поставио је Френсис Бекон у седамнаестом веку. Након њега и многи други аутори су својим идејама утицали на формирање модерног теоријског дискурса, укључујући филозофе просветитељства, као и Карла Маркса и Макса Вебера који су, сваки на свој начин, у великој мери одредили ток касније дискусије о овом проблему. Напоредо са безграничним оптимизмом и вером у технолошки напредак, пречесто идентификован са друштвеним, јављају се и суморнија виђења у којима се аутономност технологије директно супротставља аутономији личности, технолошки прогрес прогресу човечанства. Оваква перспектива карактеристична је за припаднике Франкфуртске школе, Ериха Фрома, Жала Елила и Луиса Мамфорда. Четири данас доминантна теоријска приступа односу политике и технологије су инструментализам, технолошки детерминизам, социоцентрични и системски. Инструментализам се заснива на одређењу технологије као средства, из чега произилази њена политичка неутралност. Основни постулат технолошког детерминизма је да се технологија развија аутономно, и да њен развој представља примарну детерминанту друштвеног, па и политичког система. Насупрот томе, социоцентрични приступи инсистирају на томе да се технологија развија унутар друштва, те да друштвени фактори, укључујући и политичке, играју важну и често одлучујућу улогу у коначном дизајну технолошких артефаката. Системски приступ указује на узајамно обликовање политике и технологије, тачније њихових појединих елемената. Различити теоријски приступи видљиви су и у проучавању појединих проблемских кругова, као што су однос технологије и моћи, технологије и државе, технократија, и политика у постиндустријском односно информатичком друштву. Коначно, теоријска мисао о односу политике и технологије креће се често између утопије и дистопије, то јест од некритичког одушевљења технологијом и вере у њену способност да трансформише друштво и политику у правцу боље и праведније заједнице, и апокалиптичних визија технологије која је целокупно човечанство затворила у свој „гвоздени кавез“. Ова дебата се стално изнова актуелизује, а данас су нарочито контроверзна питања која отварају биотехнологије, глобални еколошки проблеми и нове информационе технологије. Поједини аспекти односа између политике и технологије су у савременој политичкој теорији добро обрађени. Чини се, међутим, да ова област остаје и даље на маргинама интересовања политиколога, што је резултирало неким озбиљним проблемима у теоријској концептуализацији. Кључне тешкоће су повезивање микро и макро нивоа анализе, као и непостојање опште теорије која би претендовала да објасни однос ове две друштвене сфере у његовом тоталитету.A systematic study of politics-technology relation, both of them seen as relatively independent spheres of social reality, begins from mid-twentieth century. In this relatively short period of time, several significant theoretical approaches and problem circles had crystallized. Systematization and verification of these approaches is the aim of this study. Scientific goal, as well as subject of research, require application of dialectical general method, including the use of hypothetically-deductive, axiomatic, analytically-deductive and comparative scientific methods, and qualitative content analysis as operational method. In order to adequately systematize and evaluate contemporary theoretical thought on politics-technology relation, it is necessary to analyze its conceptual roots. Although some important elements of later theoretical discourses can be found in the ancient Greek thought, the basic framework for consideration of this relationship was posed by Francis Bacon in seventeenth century. After him, many other theorist have influenced the formation of modern theoretical discourse, including philosophers of Enlightenment, as well as Karl Marx and Max Weber who, each in his own way, determined, to a great, the course of later discussion about this problem. In parallel with boundless optimism and a belief in technological progress, identified too often with social progress, appears bleaker interpretation, where autonomy of technology is directly opposed to personal autonomy, and technological progress to progress of mankind. This latter perspective is represented by thinkers of the Frankfurt School, as well as Erich Fromm, Jacques Ellul and Lewis Mumford. Today, there are four dominant theoretical approaches: instrumentalism, technological determinism, socio-centric and systemic. Instrumentalism is based on definition of technology as a means, which implies its political neutrality. Technological determinism postulates, basically, that technology develops independently, and that its development stands as primary determinant of social and political systems. Conversely, socio-centric approach insists that technology develops within society, and that social factors, including political ones, play an important and often decisive role in the final design of technological artifacts. Systemic approach indicates a mutual shaping of politics and technology, or, more precisely, some of their elements. Different theoretical approaches are visible in a study of individual problem circles, such as relationship between technology and power, technology and state, technocracy, and politics in postindustrial or information society. Finally, theoretical thought about politics-technology relation frequently floats between utopia and dystopia, from uncritical enthusiasm for technology and the belief in its ability to transform society and politics in the direction of a better and fairer community, to apocalyptic visions of technology that locks mankind in the “iron cage”. This debate is continuing, and nowadays particularly controversial questions are posed by biotechnologies, global environmental problems and new information technologies. Some aspects of politics-technology relation are well explored in contemporary political theory. It seems, however, that this field still remains at the margins of interest of political scientists – fact that results in some serious problems in theoretical conceptualization. Key difficulties are linking of micro and macro levels of analysis, as well as absence of general theory that tends to explain the relationship between these two social spheres in their totality

A comparative study of the patentability standards with respect to pharmaceutical inventions in the United Kingdom and South Africa

Using a comparative methodology the thesis analyses the patentability of pharmaceutical and related inventions in the UK and South Africa. The viewpoint adopted is that of the industry actors, who are engaged in the conception through to the commercialisation of inventions, although this perspective is measured against the concerns of wider stakeholders. Drawing, in particular, on the classical justifications of the patent system, the research identifies the attributes of an optimal patentability standard which can be adjusted as technology and the legislative landscape changes. Framing an optimal patentability benchmark as one that both promote and protect the invention, the thesis considers the elements that ground the judicial patentability decision-making process. As pharmaceutical patenting tends to be an emotive and contentious area, the interplay between the international and respective domestic patentability frameworks is also evaluated in its impact on the inventor within the pharmaceutical chain. The research then turns to investigate four individual patentability limbs as applied in the two jurisdictions. The definition of the invention and excluded subject matter is evaluated in mapping out the pharmaceutical activity and the associated research output that falls within patentable subject matter. The novelty, non-obviousness and industrial application limbs to patentability are then examined, giving particular attention to the tests used by the courts in evaluating whether an invention meets the requisite criteria. The argument is made that the courts in interpreting patentability must apply principles advancing the purpose of the patent system in arriving at decisions. A systematic and robust approach is advanced that improves repeatability and precision in arriving at patentability decisions whilst preventing subjective application of the criteria. It is suggested that the application of the tests whilst aligning with the rationale and policy of the patent system, have to make sense to the scientist working in inventive pharmaceutical activities.IP Herschel Smith scholarshi