This study aims to examine and analyze how disputes arising from copyright infringement can be resolved by applying the fair use defense doctrine in the copyright protection regime in Indonesia. This study uses normative legal research with the statute, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. The collected legal material is then qualitatively analyzed to describe the problem and answer study purposes. The results show that Indonesia must apply the doctrine of fair use defense as a mechanism in copyright dispute settlement. Despite its unfamiliarity in Indonesia, the fair use defense aligns with the principle of minimum standards and the FET principle regulated in the TRIPs Agreement. This agreement binds Indonesia under Law Number 7 of 1994. The proportionality of this doctrine has also been tested through legal findings by the U.S. Supreme Court, which is based on Section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Act. Therefore, it is recommended that the House of Representatives amend Law Number 28 of 2014 to include more specific clauses explaining what factors qualify as fair use. In addition to amending Law Number 28 of 2014, it is recommended that the Government or the Supreme Court establish implementing regulations for Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning factors that qualify as fair use of copyrighted works. On the other hand, researchers and academics are encouraged to conduct further research on applying the fair use defense doctrine. This research can also provide valuable recommendations for the Government and the House of Representatives in strengthening Indonesia’s legal framework and copyright protection regime.

This article analyzes the Trade Policy Review Body (TPRB) review of Indonesia in 2020, mainly in the agricultural sector, and how Indonesian compliance with the WTO Agreement is helpful for the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). This study uses the normative method by gathering primary and secondary legal sources. The 2020 TPRB review perceives that Indonesia has applied untransparent safeguard measures related to its agricultural products, prohibited subsidies, and quantitative restrictions on other WTO member states. However, the Job Creation Law, launched in 2020, can be viewed as a proportional law as it puts imported products in an equivalent position with domestic agriculture or food products. The discussions reveal that Law No 11/2020 aims to balance its national interest with the WTO Agreement and the TPRB review of Indonesian trade policy, mainly in agriculture. With such legal certainty, this article recommends that Indonesia consider the TPRB review in good faith by invoking transparent safeguards, reducing its export subsidies on agricultural products, conducting a persistent report to the Committee on Agriculture, and protecting its public health and morals. The Indonesian government should also conduct text mining to determine its trade policies and deal with international trade uncertainty.

The purpose of this article is to explain the urgencies of ASEAN Regional Cooperation in upholding the South China Sea Exclusive Economic Zone. Furthermore, this article also explains how such regional cooperation can effectively be applied by ASEAN according to international law rules and principles. This article is legal research based on the theoretical framework by gathering legal scholars' opinions and normative framework by gathering related articles in international treaties. By applying these frameworks, the authors gathered the data for this article through secondary data collection in a form of primary sources, secondary sources, and tertiary sources. In discussing the urgency of the article herein, the authors found out that ASEAN as an international organization consisting of sovereign states shall exercise its primary obligations under UNCLOS 1982 and ASEAN Charter in a good faith, ASEAN shall exercise its sovereign rights on the South China Sea EEZ according to the coastal state rights entitled by UNCLOS 1982, and ASEAN shall prevent the potential armed conflict due to the tension of China, Taiwan and the AUKUS Pact in this region. Meanwhile, the mechanism applied by ASEAN is through interdependent national law enforcement, based on each member state’s law regarding maritime resources conservation and environmental protection. Through this measure, ASEAN may conduct their cooperation despite each of their responses to China’s Hegemony and AUKUS Existence. In presenting the outcome of this article, the authors emphasized the three urgencies described above and the framework of the regional cooperation regarding the interdependent national law enforcement with the respect to the second analysis herein. Such collective consent is indeed significant, to uphold each ASEAN Member States EEZ’s political sovereignty and territorial integrity.

This article analyses how Indonesia as World Trade Organization Member State, may utilize and apply Trade Policy Review Mechanism's Review Outcome to prevent dispute settlement in the Dispute Settlement Body. This article consists of two legal issues, the first issues discuss how Indonesia may utilize the TPRM Review Outcome to prevent dispute in DSB Appellate Body. Meanwhile, the second issues discuss how Indonesia may apply the TPRM Review Outcome to prevent such dispute settlement. By applying Indonesia v. Brazil Dispute concerning Indonesia Measures on Brazil Chicken Meat and Chicken Product Case as this article's minor premise, writers may explain how TPRM Review Outcome may provide an individual well to Indonesia as the WTO Member States and may represent WTO's Common Will to achieve free trade. Furthermore, writers also explain how Indonesia may apply the TPRM Review Outcome which is by conducting bilateral cooperation with Brazil. This cooperation shall Indonesia conducted by involving Indonesia National Consumer Protection Agency as one of its technical negotiation teams and Indonesia Halal Product Assurance Agency as one of its operational negotiation teams. Furthermore, this cooperation shall also entail measures that abolish Indonesia's quantitative restriction measure or safeguard policy application.

This article explains the differences and similarities between the British legal system and German Law and reflects their application to Indonesian law which was influenced by the swift flow of legalism. The writing uses a normative juridical method with a comparative law approach. Authors use English common law sources along with their application and German civil law along with their application under the stuffenbau theory. The difference between these legal systems is the common law system prioritizes precedent application, while the civil law system prioritizes statutes. Furthermore, these systems also have similarities whereas both systems are applying customs, doctrines, and legal interpretations as to their complementary legal instruments. The authors address that Indonesia needs to apply methods beyond the statute approach, and Indonesia shall take into account customs, doctrines, and interpretations to achieve justice.