Journal of Private and Commercial Law
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL
<p><strong>Journal of Private and Commercial Law</strong> is a peer-reviewed journal published by the <a href="https://law.uii.ac.id/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Faculty of Law, Universitas Islam Indonesia</a>. JPCOL examines various actual legal issues in the field of private and commercial law both from a global and Indonesian perspective. JPCOL is dedicated to support the improvement and development of knowledge, especially in private and commercial law fields. JPCOL is published twice a year in June and December.</p>en-US<p style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:</p> <p style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">a. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Creative Commons Attribution License</a> that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.</p> <p style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial;">b. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.</p> <p><span style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">c. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See </span><a style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;" href="http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html" target="_new">The Effect of Open Access</a><span style="color: #000000; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 10px; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; display: inline !important; float: none;">).</span></p>[email protected] (Dr. Inda Rahadiyan, S.H., LL.M.)[email protected] (Jeffri Ardiansyah)Wed, 12 Jun 2024 07:42:59 +0000OJS 3.3.0.10http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss60Principal's Liability Against Agents for Unlawful Acts Outside the Agency Agreement (Case Study: Decision Number 1666 K/Pdt/2022)
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34103
<p><em>This research discusses the principal's liability toward agents for unlawful acts outside the agency agreement following The Case Study of Decision Number 1666 K/PDT/2022. The problem that will be discussed in this thesis is the legal relationship between the principal and the parties for unlawful acts outside the agency agreement, and the principal's liability to the agent who commits unlawful acts outside the agency agreement following The Case Study of Decision Number 1666 K/Pdt /2022. The used research method is the normative research method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. The legal material collection technique used is researching library materials such as books, journals, legislation, and scientific articles that are related to the legal issues to be studied using data sources, namely primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The author concludes that the results of this research are that the parties obtain a principal legal relationship with the parties for unlawful acts outside the agency agreement. The principal is also liable to the agent who commits unlawful acts outside the agency agreement. Furthermore, the parties should be more careful and more thorough in carrying out sales and purchase agreements, both principals, agents, and buyers.</em><br /><em><strong>Keywords: Liability, Principal, Agent, Unlawful Act, Agency Agreement</strong></em></p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Penelitian ini membahas mengenai tanggung gugat prinsipal terhadap agen atas perbuatan melawan hukum diluar kesepakatan perjanjian keagenan sesuai dengan Studi Putusan Nomor 1666 K/PDT/2022. Permasalahan yang akan dibahas di dalam skripsi ini adalah bagaimanakah hubungan hukum prinsipal terhadap para pihak atas perbuatan melawan hukum diluar kesepakatan perjanjian keagenan, dan bagaimanakah tanggung gugat prinsipal ke agen yang melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum diluar kesepakatan perjanjian keagenan sesuai dengan Studi Putusan Nomor 1666 K/Pdt/2020. Metode penelitian yang digunakan merupakan metode penelitian normative dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan, kasus, serta konseptual. Teknik pengumpulan bahan hukum yang digunakan adalah meneliti bahan pustaka seperti buku, jurnal, perundang-undangan, artikel ilmiah yang memiliki keterkaitan dengan permasalahan hukum yang akan dikaji dengan sumber data yakni bahan hukum primer, sekunder, serta tersier. Penulis menyimpulkan bahwa hasil dari penelitian ini adalah para pihak mendapatkan hubungan hukum prinsipal terhadap para pihak atas perbuatan melawan hukum diluar kesepakatan perjanjian keagenan. Selain itu tanggung gugat prinsipal ke agen yang melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum diluar kesepakatan perjanjian keagenan. Selanjutnya, para pihak dapat berhati-hati dan lebih teliti dalam melakukan perjanjian jual beli baik prinsipal, agen maupun pembeli.<br /><strong>Kata Kunci: Tanggung Gugat, Prinsipal, Agen, Perbuatan Melawan Hukum, Perjanjian Keagenan</strong></p>Alfa Desya Andreasari, Lucky Suryo Wicaksono
Copyright (c) 2024 Alfa Desya Andreasari, Lucky Suryo Wicaksono
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34103Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000Legal Protection Over the 'GOTO' Trademark Ownership Dispute between PT Terbit Financial Technology and PT GoTo Gojek Tokopedia
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34104
<p><em>A trademark serves as the identity of a product, aimed at distinguishing one product from the other producers’ product. In Indonesia, there is a protection for trademark owners, governed by Law No. 20 of 2016 on Trademarks and Geographical Indications. The main principles used in the protection of rights to a trademark are the constitutional principle and the first-to-file principle. The study is about the legal protection of rights to a trademark over the "GOTO" brand ownership dispute between PT Terbit Financial Technology and PT GoTo Gojek Tokopedia. This study uses a normative legal research method with approaches based on legislation and conceptual frameworks. According to the conducted research, the "GOTO" trademark owned by PT GoTo Gojek Tokopedia should not exist and its registration should not have been accepted because Indonesian trademark law adheres to the constitutional principle and the first-to-file principle. Legal protection, therefore, allows PT Terbit Financial Technology to file a trademark infringement lawsuit and/or a trademark cancellation. Consequently, the authorities responsible for enforcing rights to a trademark protection are expected to perform their duties effectively to prevent future brand ownership disputes.</em><br /><em><strong>Keywords: Trademark, Legal Protection, GOTO</strong></em></p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Merek merupakan identitas dari sebuah produk yang bertujuan untuk membedakan antara produk yang satu dengan produk milik produsen lainnya. Di Indonesia telah terdapat perlindungan bagi pemilik hak atas merek. Perlindungan tersebut diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 20 Tahun 2016 Tentang Merek dan Indikasi Geografis. Prinsip utama yang digunakan dalam perlindungan pemilik hak atas merek adalah prinsip konstitusi dan prinsip first to file. Permasalahan yang dikaji dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai perlindungan hukum terhadap pemilik hak atas merek atas sengketa kepemilikan merek “GOTO” antara PT Terbit Financial Technology dan PT GoTo Gojek Tokopedia. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan metode pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Menurut penelitian yang dilakukan penulis, merek “GOTO” milik PT GoTo Gojek Tokopedia seharusnya tidak ada dan tidak diterima pendaftarannya karena hukum merek Indonesia menganut prinsip konstitusi dan prinsip first to file. Perlindungan hukumnya yaitu PT Terbit Financial Technology ini dapat mengajukan gugatan pelanggaran merek dan/atau pembatalan merek. Oleh karena itu, pihak yang berwenang dalam proses penegakan perlindungan hukum pemilik hak atas merek merek diharapkan melakukan tugasnya dengan maksimal agar tidak terjadi sengketa kepemilikan merek di masa yang akan datang.<br /><strong>Kata kunci: Merek, Perlindungan Hukum, GOTO</strong></p>Arrifah Amarya Putri, Ery Arifudin
Copyright (c) 2024 Arrifah Amarya Putri, Ery Arifudin
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34104Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000A Comparative Study of Regulations on the Use of Trademarks as Objects of Fiduciary Security Between Indonesia and Denmark
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34106
<p><em>In practice, trademark as part of Intellectual Property Rights in the form of intangible assets is often faced with problems when the applied as a fiduciary object due to the absence of an IPR asset assessment institution as the benchmark for the said trademark to be used as an object object of guarantee. This research aims to identify the similarities and differences in trdemark regulations between Indonesia and Denmark in relation to objects of Fiduciary Guarantee and to examine the factors that lead to the said similarities and differences in trademark regulations in Indonesia and Denmark. This is juridical-normative legal research using statutory, comparative and conceptual approaches. The results of the research conclude that the position of trademark as object of fiduciary security is recognised in both Indonesia and Denmark as it serves as intangiable asset. This is because trademar is deemed as object, namely movable object with an intangible form and possess economic value that can be transferred as well as encumbered with fiduciary guarantees. Therefore, because a trademark can be used as a collateral object, a valuation institution is needed to support the trademark which will be used as a collateral object. The causal factor for the similarities and differences in trademark regulations in Indonesia and Denmark is due to juridical factors where there are no regulatory guidelines related to assessing the economic value of intangible assets.</em><br /><em><strong>Keywords: Trademark, Guarantee, Valuation</strong></em></p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Merek sebagai bagian dari Hak Kekayaan Intelektual yang berupa aset tidak berwujud (intangible assets) dalam praktiknya sering kali mengalami kendala pada saat pengajuan merek sebagai benda objek jaminan fidusia dikarenakan belum adanya lembaga penilai aset HAKI sebagai tolak ukur agar suatu merek tersebut dapat dijadikan sebagai benda objek jaminan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui apa yang menjadi persamaan dan perbedaan pengaturan merek diantara Negara Indonesia dan Negara Denmark tersebut kaitannya dengan benda objek Jaminan Fidusia dan Apa saja faktor penyebab persamaan dan perbedaan pengaturan merek di Negara Indonesia dan Negara Denmark tersebut. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum yuridis-normatif dengan metode pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, perbandingan dan pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach). Hasil penelitian menyimpulan bahwa Kedudukan merek sebagai benda objek jaminan fidusia baik di Negara Indonesia maupun Negara Denmark keduanya sama-sama diakui karena memiliki kedudukan sebagai intangiable assets. Hal tersebut dikarenakan merek termasuk sebagai benda, yaitu benda bergerak dengan bentuk tidak berwujud serta memiliki nilai ekonomis dan dapat dialihan juga dibebani dengan jaminan fidusia. Oleh karena itu dikarenakan merek dapat dijadikan benda objek jaminan maka dibutuhkan lembaga valuasi dalam halnya untuk menunjang merek yang akan dijadikan benda objek jaminan. Faktor penyebab dari persamaan dan perbedaan pengaturan merek di Negara Indonesia dan Negara Denmark dikarenakan faktor yuridis dimana belum adanya peraturan pedoman terkait dengan penilaian atas nilai ekonomis dari aset tidak berwujud (intangible assets).<br /><strong>Kata Kunci: Merek, Jaminan, Valuasi.</strong></p>Irsalina Putri Lukito, Ratna Hartanto
Copyright (c) 2024 Irsalina Putri Lukito, Ratna Hartanto
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34106Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000The Negative Impact of Predatory Pricing Practice to Fair Competition (The Study of KPPU Decision Number 03/KPPU-L/2020)
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34502
<p><em>This study analyzes the KPPU Decision Number 03/KPPU-L/2020 pertaining to the case of predatory pricing in South Kalimantan’s cement industry. In this particular case, the Reported is a company that enters the cement market in 2015, and rapidly increases its market share while the other competitors experience a decline. The analysis reveals that the evidence supports the proof of predatory pricing through the Pre-Cost Test and Recoupment Test approaches, and also by implementing the Rule of Reason approach. This predatory pricing practice has a negative impact that widespreads and lessens fair competition, harms consumers, inhibits innovation, and potentially creates monopoly. A sharp decline of price forces other competitors to exit the market and the rest to experience financial loss. The implication is not only suffered by business actors, but also by the economy as a whole. The government and supervisory bodies have to supervise, apply effective test, and create collaboration between business actors, the government, and consumers in order to maintain fair competition. The importance of the Rule of Reason approach is also emphasized to prevent excessive scrutiny towards legitimate business practices. It is expected that these steps will be able to create a business environment that is just, innovative, sustainable, and one that protects consumers and public interest altogether.</em><br /><em><strong>Keywords: Analysis, Negative Impact, Cement Industry, Predatory Pricing, KPPU Decision</strong></em></p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Studi ini menganalisis Putusan Nomor 03/KPPU-L/2020 tentang kasus predatory pricing di industri semen Kalimantan Selatan. Dalam kasus ini, terlapor adalah perusahaan baru yang memasuki pasar semen pada 2015, dengan cepat meningkatkan pangsa pasarnya sementara pesaing mengalami penurunan. Analisis mengungkapkan bahwa bukti mendukung pembuktian predatory pricing melalui pendekatan pre-cost test dan recoupment test, dengan menerapkan pendekatan rule of reason. Praktik predatory pricing ini memiliki dampak negatif yang meluas, termasuk penurunan persaingan sehat, merugikan konsumen, menghambat inovasi, dan potensial menciptakan monopoli. Penurunan harga yang tajam mengancam pesaing keluar dari pasar dan pesaing lain mengalami penurunan pendapatan. Implikasinya tidak hanya pada pelaku usaha, tetapi juga ekonomi secara keseluruhan. Pemerintah dan lembaga pengawas harus melakukan pengawasan, menerapkan uji efektif, serta kolaborasi antara pelaku usaha, pemerintah, dan konsumen untuk menjaga persaingan sehat. Pentingnya pendekatan rule of reason juga ditekankan untuk menghindari penilaian berlebihan terhadap praktik bisnis yang sah. Diharapkan langkah-langkah ini mampu menciptakan lingkungan bisnis adil, inovatif, dan berkelanjutan, melindungi kepentingan konsumen serta masyarakat secara menyeluruh.<br /><strong>Kata Kunci: analisis, dampak negatif, industri semen, predatory pricing, Putusan KPPU.</strong></p>Muhammad Alfath Satrio Puruhito, Siti Anisah
Copyright (c) 2024 Muhammad Alfath Satrio Puruhito, Siti Anisah
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/34502Wed, 12 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000Legal Issues In Implementing The Legislation Provisions Regarding Youtube Content As Fiduciary Collateral
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/31591
<p><em>Technological developments have a positive impact on legal subjects in earning income in the form of nominal money. Uploading videos on the YouTube application can make money according to YouTube's terms, and videos uploaded to YouTube pages can be classified as intellectual property rights. The government makes it easy for creative economy actors to obtain easy financing or credit from financial institutions. The formulation of the problem proposed by the author concerns legal issues regarding the implementation of statutory provisions regarding YouTube content as fiduciary collateral. The research results show that there are legal problems regarding the application of statutory provisions regarding YouTube content as fiduciary collateral, namely determining the economic value of YouTube content, weak security of YouTube content, and regulation of collateral execution.</em><br /><em><strong>Keywords: Youtube Content, Issues, Sanctions</strong></em></p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Perkembangan teknologi memberikan dampak positif bagi subjek hukum dalam mendapatkan penghasilan berupa nominal uang. Mengunggah video di aplikasi YouTube dapat menghasilkan uang sesuai dengan ketentuan YouTube, dan video yang diunggah ke laman YouTube dapat diklasifikasikan sebagai Hak Kekayaan Intelektual. Pemerintah memberikan kemudahan bagi para pelaku ekonomi kreatif untuk mendapatkan pembiayaan atau kredit yang mudah dari lembaga keuangan. Rumusan masalah yang diajukan oleh penulis ialah permasalahan hukum mengenai implementasi ketentuan perundang-undangan konten YouTube sebagai jaminan fidusia. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat permasalahan hukum mengenai penerapan ketentuan perundang-undangan mengenai konten YouTube sebagai jaminan fidusia, yaitu penentuan nilai ekonomis konten YouTube, lemahnya pengamanan konten YouTube, dan pengaturan eksekusi jaminan.<br /><strong>Kata kunci: Konten Youtube, Permasalahan, Sanksi</strong></p>Tasya Avreanne Putri Laksono, Siti Hapsah Isfardiyana
Copyright (c) 2024 Tasya Avreanne Putri Laksono, Siti Hapsah Isfardiyana
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/31591Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0000Legal Protection for Consumers on the Right to be Heard Regarding Indihome Service Complaints on Twitter
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/35308
<p><em>This study discusses consumer complaints regarding indihome services via DM indihome twitter which were not immediately responded to by customer service. The formulation of the problem is first, how is the legal protection for consumers for the right to be heard regarding complaints about indihome services on twitter?, second, how can indihome consumers make complaints if the right to be heard regarding is violated by TELKOM?. This study uses normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches. Research objects include the Civil Code, Law Number 8/1999 concerning Consumer Protection, Law Number 36/1999 concerning Telecommunications, Indihome Subscription Agreement. Collection techniques include literature study and document study. Data analysis was descriptive qualitative. The results of the research, first, preventive legal protection are regulated in Article 4 letters c and d UUPK concerning consumer rights, Article 7 letters b, c, d UUPK regarding obligations of business actors and indihome subscription agreements regarding consumer rights and obligations of business actors. Repressive legal protection is regulated in Article 19 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the UUPK and Article 15 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of the Telecommunications Law in the form of providing compensation if business actors harm consumers. Second, efforts to make complaints that can be made by indihome consumers through consumer protection agencies (BPKN, LPKSM, BPSK), if they are not successful, consumers can file a lawsuit with the court as specified in Article 45 paragraph (4) UUPK.</em><br /><em><strong>Keywords: Consumers, Complaints, Indihome, Legal Protection</strong></em></p> <p><strong>Abstrak</strong><br />Penelitian ini membahas pengaduan konsumen terkait layanan indihome melalui DM twitter indihome yang tidak segera direspon oleh customer service. Rumusan masalah yaitu pertama, bagaimana perlindungan hukum bagi konsumen atas hak untuk didengar terhadap pengaduan layanan indihome di twitter?, kedua, bagaimana upaya pengaduan yang dapat dilakukan konsumen indihome apabila hak untuk didengar dilanggar oleh pihak TELKOM?. Penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konseptual. Objek penelitian meliputi KUHPerdata, UU Nomor 8/1999 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen, UU Nomor 36/1999 tentang Telekomunikasi, Perjanjian Berlangganan Indihome. Teknik pengumpulan meliputi studi pustaka dan studi dokumen. Analisis data secara deskriptif kualitatif. Hasil penelitian, pertama perlindungan hukum secara preventif diatur dalam Pasal 4 huruf c dan d UUPK tentang hak konsumen, Pasal 7 huruf b, c, d UUPK tentang kewajiban pelaku usaha serta perjanjian berlangganan indihome tentang hak konsumen dan kewajiban pelaku usaha. Perlindungan hukum secara represif diatur dalam Pasal 19 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UUPK serta Pasal 15 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UU Telekomunikasi berupa pemberian ganti kerugian apabila pelaku usaha merugikan konsumen. Kedua, upaya pengaduan yang dapat dilakukan konsumen indihome melalui lembaga perlindungan konsumen (BPKN, LPKSM, BPSK), jika tidak berhasil, konsumen dapat mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 45 ayat (4) UUPK.<br /><strong>Kata kunci: Indihome, Konsumen, Pengaduan, Perlindungan Hukum.</strong></p>Tia Anindya Vania Yudiantoro, Indah Parmitasari
Copyright (c) 2024 Tia Anindya Vania Yudiantoro, Indah Parmitasari
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0
https://journal.uii.ac.id/JPCOL/article/view/35308Wed, 17 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0000