•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Investment includes tangible and intangible assets. Intangible assets are often connected with intellectual property which leads to intangible results. The lack of “visibility” in intangible assets makes them difficult to measure. Current international regulations have not also explicitly provided room for enforcement regarding intellectual property rights in terms of foreign investment. Therefore, an emergence of cases is observed in investment disputes within the field of intellectual property rights through the Investor–State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) mechanism. In this research, we discuss cases of foreign investment disputes in such a field. From these cases, we find the factors that determine the occurrence of foreign investment disputes in the field of intellectual property rights. The ISDS mechanism can be used to resolve foreign investment disputes in the field of intellectual property. Furthermore, this research discusses the perspective of Indonesian law regarding foreign investment disputes in the mentioned field by using the ISDS mechanism. Qualitative methods and secondary data analysis are also used. The research aims to discover and identify foreign investment disputes in the field of intellectual property rights.

Bahasa Abstract

Investasi tidak hanya menyangkut aset yang berwujud tetapi juga mencakup aset tidak berwujud. Aset tidak berwujud sering dihubungkan dengan kekayaan intelektual, yang menghasilkan hasil yang tidak berwujud. Kurangnya ‘visibilitas’ dalam aset tidak berwujud membuat aset ini sulit untuk diukur dan peraturan internasional saat ini belum secara langsung mengatur mengenai hak kekayaan intelektual dalam hal investasi asing. Oleh karena itu, muncul kasus dalam sengketa investasi di bidang hak kekayaan intelektual melalui mekanisme Investor-State Dispute Settlement/ Penyelesaian Perselisihan Investor-Negara (ISDS). Pada penelitian ini, akan dibahas mengenai kasus-kasus sengketa penanaman modal asing dalam bidang hak kekayaan intelektual. Dari kasus-kasus ini, kita akan menemukan bahwa adanya faktor-faktor yang menetukan terjadinya sengketa penanaman modal asing dalam bidang hak kekayaan intelektual dan mekanisme ISDS dapat menjadi cara untuk menyelesaikan sengketa investasi asing di bidang hak kekayaan intelektual. Selanjutnya, penelitian ini akan membahas perspektif hukum Indonesia tentang sengketa investasi asing di bidang hak kekayaan intelektual menggunakan mekanisme ISDS. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kualitatif dan analisis data sekunder. Pentingnya penelitian ini adalah untuk menemukan dan mengidentifikasi sengketa investasi asing di bidang hak kekayaan intelektual.

References

Book

An Chandrawulan, Hukum Perusahaan Multinasional, Liberalisasi Hukum Perdagangan Internasional dan Hukum Penanaman Modal, Bandung: Alumni, 2011.

Baskoro Suryo Banindro, Implementasi Hak Kekyaan Intelektual (Hak Cipta, Merek, Paten, Desain Industri) Seni Rupa, Kriya dan Desain, Jogjakarta: Dwi Quantum, 2015.

Suyud Margono & Amir Angkasa, Komersialisasi Aset Intelektual Aspek Hukum Bisnis, Jakarta: Grasindo, 2002.

M. Sornarajah, The International Law on Foreign Investment Forth Edition, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Illias Bantekas, An Introduction to International Arbitration, Cambridge Universty Press, United Kingdom, 2015.

Nigel Blackaby, et al., Redfern and Hunter on International Arbitration, New York: Oxford University Publishing, 2009.

Journal

Kenneth C Randal, “A New Paradigm for Internasional Business Transactions”, Washington University Law Review, Vol 71 No. 3, 1993.

Harold Hongju Koh, “Why Transnational Law Matter?”, Penn State International Law Review, Vol 24 No. 4, 2006..

Paula Barnes dan Andrew McClure, “Investment in Intangible Assets and Australia’s Productivity Growth”, Productivity Commision Staff Working Paper, 2009.

Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan, “Litigating Intellectual Property Rights in Investor-State Arbitration, From Plain Pacaging to Patent Revocation”, St Peter’s College, Oxford, 2016.

Henning Grosse Ruse-Khan, “Challenging Compliance with International Intellectual Property Norms in Investor–state Dispute Settlement”, Journal of International Economic Law, vol. 19, 2016.

UNCTAD, “Investor-State Dispute Settlement and Impact on Investment Rulemaking”, United Nations: New York, 2007.

Andrew Beattie, “How Companies Create A Brand”, (2019), https://www.investopedia.com/articles/professionaleducation/11/how-companies-create brands.asp.

Apoorva Sharma, “Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanism and Intellectual Property Matters”, Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, Vol. 21, 2016.

Lisa Diependaele, et.al., “Eli Lilly v Canada: The Uncomfortable Liaison Between Intellectual Property And International Investment Law”, Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property, Vol.7, 2017.

Yuniar Kurniawaty, “Efektivitas Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa Dalam Sengketa Kekayaan Intelektual (Alternative Dispute Resolution On Intellectual Property Dispute)”, Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, Vol. 14 No.2, 2017.

Peter K Yu, “Crossfertilizing ISDS with TRIPS”, Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, Vol. 49, 2017.

Putri, Resha Roshana, An-An Chandrawulan, dan Prita Amalia, “Peringkat Arus Investasi Indonesia Dalam Kerangka Asean-China Free Trade Agreement (Perbandingan Dengan Singapura, Malaysia, Thailand, Dan Vietnam) Ditinjau Dari Prinsip Fair And Equitable Treatment”, Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, Vol. 48, No. 2, 2018.

National Regulations

Act Number 25 Years 2007 concerning Investment

Act of Dispute Settlement between of State and Foreign Investment about Investment

Treaties

Convention on The Stettlement of Investment Dispute Between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convetion Year 2015)

Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS),

ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA),

Uruguay-Switzerland Bilateral Investment Treaty,

Indonesia-Thailand BIT,

Indonesia-Finland BIT.

Cases

Philip Morris v Uruguay (ICSID Case No. ARB/10/7)

Philip Moris Asia (PMA) v. Australia (PCA Case No. 2012-12)

Eli Lilly v. Canada (Case No. UNCT/14/2)

AHS Niger and Menzies Middle East and Africa S.A. v. Republic of Niger (ICSID Case No. ARB / 11/11)

Internet Source

Lei, “Mencari Arah Pengembangan HAKI Nasional”, (2018), .

ICSID, “ Cases, Advance Search”, [01/11/2019].

ICSID, List Of Contracting States And Other Signatories Of The Convention, ICSID: Washington DC, 2019, accsessed at: https://icsid.worldbank.org/en/Documents/icsiddocs/List%20of%20Contracting%20States%20and%20Other%20Signatories%20of%20the%20Convention%20-%20Latest.pdf, on 31/10/2019.

No name, “Investing in Strong Brands Doubles Returns over S&P Average”, (2015) https://brandfinance.com/press-releases/investing-in-strong-brands-doubles-returns-over-sandp-average/.

Download

Share

COinS