Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Japan and Indonesia should work closely to achieve their needs. Japan imports coal particularly steam coal and exports its technology, CCT. Indonesia exports its coal as well as develops domestic coal utilization. This mutually benefit cooperation program has actually been starting since the 1980s that involves exploration, utilization technology and environment. It is worthwhile to take an advantage of Japan's coal policy by enhancing further mutually benefit cooperation between the two countries."

"Japan is the largest source of foreign direct investment (FDI) and market for Indonesian export. The purpose of this study is to measure the relationship of Japanese direct investment on Indonesia export to Japan. The result show that Japanese FDI have significant relation with Indonesian export to Japan. The reasons are that Japanese FDI are export oriented, resource based (vertical integration motive), non-trade barrier circumventing, complement relationship, and backward linkage effect. The implication of this study is that Japanese FDI is a strategic push factor of Indonesian export to Japan. Indonesian investment policy should attract Japanese FDI by creating climate and incentive for Japanese FDI in Indonesia."

"Pasca Perang Dunia II, Pemerintah Orde Baru memiliki cara pandang yang berbeda dengan Pemerintah Orde Lama dalam memandang Jepang. Cara pandang yang berbeda ini membuat corak diplomasi kedua Pemerintahan pun berbeda dalam menjalin hubungan kenegaraan dengan Jepang. Tulisan ini menitikberatkan pada pembahasan hubungan diplomasi Pemerintah Orde Baru dengan Pemerintah Jepang, khususnya di bidang ekonomi. Tidak seperti Pemerintahan sebelumnya, hubungan Indonesia dengan Jepang pada masa Orde Baru ini dapat dikatakan dekat. Kedekatan ini tidak lepas dari peran salah seorang Asisten Pribadi (Aspri) Soeharto pada awal Pemerintahannya, yakni Soedjono Hoemardani. Lewat lobilobinya, ia berhasil membujuk Pemerintah Jepang untuk mengeluarkan berbagai bantuan ekonomi, pinjaman, hibah dan investasinya. Namun di sisi lain, ia dianggap sebagai antek Jepang yang membuat Jepang mendominasi perekonomian Indonesia sehingga menimbulkan kesenjangan di kalangan pengusaha nasional yang berujung pada Peristiwa Malari (Malapetaka 15 Januari) di tahun 1974. Perannya yang kontroversial ini membuatnya lengser dari jabatan Aspri. Meski jabatan tersebut dicabut, namun kedekatannya dengan Pemerintah Jepang masih tetap berlanjut dengan posisinya sebagai Inspektur Jenderal Pembangunan. Walaupun hubungan tersebut tidak seintensif seperti ketika ia menjabat sebagai Aspri. Pasca Peristiwa Malari, hubungan Indonesia dengan Jepang berjalan normal kembali setelah Jepang mengubah cara diplomasinya secara Heart to Heart. ......After The World War II, Indonesian government?s perspective about Japan had changed. This changing differentiated The Old Order and The New Order's bilateral relationship between the two countries. This thesis emphasize on diplomacy between The New Order Government and Japanese Government particularly on economic diplomacy. In contrast to The Old Order Government, Indonesia-Japan relation under The New Order Government was close. This closeness was a result of Soedjono Hoemardani?s diplomacy that had been commenced since the beginning of Soeharto's Government. At that time Soedjono Hoemardani was charged as Soeharto's Personal Assistance. By his lobbies, he succeeded to persuade Japanese Government to give some financial assistances through investment, grant, and credit. Nevertheless, he was judged as Japan puppet whose duty helping Japanese Government dominated economy of Indonesia on which the domination caused social discrepancy between local industrialist and Japanese industrialist that lead to The Malari Riot (riot at January 15th) 1974. This controversial role led him to retire from his position as Soeharto's Personal Assistance. Even though he had left his formal position as Soehartos's Personal Assistance, his close relation with Japanese Government set him remain lobbying Japanese Government under his new position as General Inspectorate of Development. However, the intensity of the relation was not as high as it used to be. After The Malari, Indonesia-Japan relationship returned to be normal because Japanese Government changed their diplomacy strategy to heart to heart diplomacy."

"ABSTRAKFokus pembahasan dalam tesis ini adalah membandingkan hal-hal penting berkaitan dengan aspek significantly different yang diatur dalam UU No. 31 Tahun 2000 dan Japanese Design Law, Act No. 36 of 2014. Melalui studi kepustakaan dan pendekatan komparatif, tesis ini membahas tentang arti significantly different, known design, combination of known design features, dan bagaimana cara menentukan aspek significantly different dalam aplikasi permohonan dan pemeriksaan desain industri yang diterapkan dalam UUDI dan Japanese Design Law, dengan mengacu pada ketentuan Pasal 25 ayat 1 TRIPS Agreement. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah: pertama, tafsiran hukum desain Jepang tentang significantly different lebih baik daripada UUDI. Kedua, frasa known design, baik dalam hukum desain Jepang maupun UUDI sama-sama mengedepankan aspek publikasi sehingga dikenal umum, perbedaannya ada pada waktu publikasi di mana di Jepang dimungkinkan adanya jangka waktu ?non - publicly known design?, yang tidak terdapat dalam hukum desain industri Indonesia. Sementara itu, frasa combination of known design features dalam hukum desain Jepang menekankan aspek fitur dari suatu desain tanpa mempertimbangkan kesamaan article, sementara dalam UUDI tidak diatur. Ketiga, pemeriksaan substansial dalam DA Jepang bersifat wajib setelah persyaratan administratif dipenuhi, sementara dalam UUDI, pemeriksaan substansial dilakukan berdasarkan sanggahan/keberatan. Fakta ini memungkinkan tidak adanya pemeriksaan terhadap aspek significantly different dalam hukum desain industri Indonesia. Keempat, Penentuan aspek significantly different pada dasarnya sama-sama dilakukan berdasarkan observasi mata. Perbedaannya terletak pada acuan penilaian yang diukur berdasarkan kesan estetis, dimana dalam hukum desain Jepang, kesan estetis tersebut ada dalam sudut pandang konsumen (termasuk pedagang), sementara dalam UUDI kesan estetis yang terdapat dalam pengertian desain industri tidak dijelaskan artinya dan pada sudut pandang siapa dinilai.

---

ABSTRACT

Focus of this thesis is comparing important aspects of significantly different case ruled in Indonesian Industrial Design Law No. 31 Of 2000 and Japanese Design Law, Act No. 36 of 2014. This study uses literature study and comparative approach to discuss about significantly different, known design, and combination of known design features interpretation, and how to determine significantly different aspect in design application and industrial design examination ruled in Indonesian Design Law and Japanese Design Law referring to TRIPS Agreement Provision Article 25 (1) as the main substance. This study has some results: first, Japanese Design Law better than Indonesian Design Law in applying significantly different aspects interpretation. Second, both Japanese Design Law and Indonesian Design Law take publication factor as the internal part of known design phrase interpretation. The different between them is the time of publication with create non-publicly known design only in Japanese Design Law. Besides, combination of known design features phrase specially concerns to the features aspect of design without taking consideration to the article in Japanese Design Law; it is not specifically ruled in Indonesian Design Law. Third, regarding to the substantial examination, Japanese Design law regulates it as compulsory provision; in Indonesian Design Law, it shall not be done if there isn?t a disclaimer from the plaintiff. This said provision will make the probability in determining significantly different aspect in Indonesian Industrial Design Law become weak. Fourth, both Japanese Design Law and Indonesian Design Law basically determine the significantly different aspect by sight observation. The different between them occurs when aesthetical impression is used; Japanese Design Law uses aesthetical impression in the view of consumer (including trader), but Indonesian Design Law doesn?t regulate it specifically."