Notaris adalah Pejabat umum yang berwenang untuk membuat akta autentik dan kewenangan lainnya yang diatur dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Disamping tugas dan wewenang Notaris sebagai pejabat umum, Notaris juga berkedudukan sebagai subyek hukum pribadi (natuurlijk person) yaitu memiliki kehendak bebas untuk melakukan perbuatan hukum. Kedudukan Notaris sebagai subyek hukum ini melibatkan kegiatan pembentukan perusahaan yakni Notaris berkedudukan sebagai direksi dalam bentuk Perseroan Terbatas (PT). Setiap perusahaan memiliki visi keberlanjutan dan keunggulan, namun untuk mewujudkannya diperlukan pembiayaan sehingga mengharuskan PT untuk melakukan perjanjian utang piutang. Konsekuensinya ketika utang piutang tersebut tidak mampu dibayar maka perusahaan yang dipimpin oleh Notaris tersebut mengalami pailit dan telah ditetapkan melalui Putusan Pengadilan Niaga yang telah memiliki kekuatan hukum tetap. Dengan demikian status Notaris menjadi Notaris Pailit sehingga berakibat pada sanksi yang telah diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) yaitu Notaris diberhentikan dengan tidak hormat dari jabatannya.

Dengan adanya kebijakan penghapusan peradilan adat maka secara yuridis yang diakui dalam sistem peradilan di Indonesia yaitu peradilan negara. Namun di Sumatera Barat eksistensi lembaga penyelesaian sengketa adat ini masih berjalan sebagaimana mestinya. Berdasarkan hal tersebut tulisan ini akan mengkaji mengenai praktik penyelesaian sengketa adat di Sumatera Barat. Penulisan artikel ini menggunakan metode pendekatan sosiologis yuridis, mengkaji kaidah, konsep, pandangan masyarakat, doktrin-doktrin hukum. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa tahapan beracara penyelesaian sengketa secara adat dilakukan dengan asas bajanjang naiak batanggo turun yaitu melalui tahap Bakaum (musyawarah antara kaum), Bakampuang (penyelesaian di setiap kampung), kemudian tahap Pasukuan (penyelesaian dibantu oleh suku lain) dan Babalai Bamusajik. Apabila tidak selesai maka diajukan kepada Lembaga Kerapatan Nagari.

Society 5.0 will bring a change for Settlement Competition Law, for example an independent institutions in the field of business law creates independence in the supervision and resolution of business disputes. The Business Competition Supervisory Commission is an independent institution authorized by Law of Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition, to oversee the activities of business actors. According Sociological Jurisprudence, Society 5.0 affect social structure and Indonesian law enforcement.

The decision of the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) is the result of the assessment of the Commission Council read out in an open session to the public regarding whether a violation has occurred and the imposition of sanctions or the absence of a violation. The formulation of the KPPU's decision consists of the alleged violation, consideration and assessment of evidence submitted and/or obtained during the trial as well as an analysis of the application of the articles in the Antimonopoly Law which the Reported Party allegedly violated. The KPPU decision is declared to have permanent legal force, if there is no objection from the business actor, and then the KPPU decision must be implemented by the business actor and may be requested for execution at the District Court. Considering the nature and type of KPPU's decisions, when viewed from the types of decisions in civil procedural law, the KPPU's decisions are Condemnatoir decisions, namely decisions that contain punishments and can be implemented. However, the regulations regarding KPPU Decisions that have permanent legal force still do not fulfill the requirements as condemnatoir decisions because KPPU is not a judicial institution and these regulations are still multi-interpretative in nature, namely that legislators do not provide a clear interpretation of the meaning of permanent legal force in KPPU's decisions.

Globalization has offered a multitude of opportunities and challenges, mainly when it deals with copyright. The scope of copyright has been broad, encompassing various aspects of life, especially in literature and education. This study aims to analyze Indonesia's copyright issues, particularly regarding the reproduction of books deemed to have lesser protection for authors, dealing with the fair use doctrine. This doctrine considers that work is allowed to a limited extent for use by other parties without the creator or copyright holder's permission to keep it fair. This fair use doctrine permits limited and fair use of literary works for specific purposes without royalty payments and the author's consent. Given the author's more protection, this study then displays a comparative analysis of the U.S. framework on the Copyright Act portrayed into two main discussions. First, this study will discuss photocopying for educational purposes from the lens of Indonesia's Copyright Act. Second, this study considers the possible adjustment to adopt the so-called future concept of restrictions for educational purposes from the U.S. States Copyright Act 1976. KEYWORDS: Fair Use Doctrine, Copyright Act, Copyright for Educational Purposes.