The enactment of Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation (UU Cipta Kerja) aims to simplify bureaucracy, attract investment, and create job opportunities in Indonesia. However, its implementation has raised legal uncertainties, particularly following the Constitutional Court’s ruling that deemed the law conditionally unconstitutional. Concerns have also emerged from labor unions and environmental organizations regarding its potential impact on workers’ rights and environmental sustainability. This study analyzes the legal and public policy perspectives of UU Cipta Kerja by evaluating its impact on investment, employment, and legal certainty. Using a qualitative approach with a document study method, this research examines legal documents, policy regulations, and court rulings, supplemented by expert interviews. The findings reveal that the law contributed to an 8.3% increase in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in its first year, reaching IDR 454 trillion in 2021. However, contract workers increased by 25%, raising concerns about job security. Additionally, five constitutional challenges were filed against the law in 2023, reflecting legal uncertainty. Weaknesses in environmental oversight were also identified due to relaxed business licensing requirements. These findings suggest that while UU Cipta Kerja supports investment growth, stronger legal safeguards and monitoring mechanisms are needed to ensure balanced benefits for all stakeholders. This study contributes to discussions on labor and investment policies by emphasizing the need for inclusive regulatory reforms that align economic growth with legal stability and worker protection.
 

Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) present significant opportunities for the creative industry in digitizing and monetizing artistic works. However, a major challenge arises in copyright protection, particularly in Indonesia, which has yet to establish specific regulations addressing NFTs within its intellectual property (IP) law framework. Currently, legal protection relies on Law No. 28 of 2014 on Copyright, which does not fully accommodate the characteristics of blockchain technology. This study aims to analyze copyright protection in Indonesia's NFT ecosystem, compare it with regulatory frameworks in the United States and the European Union, and provide policy recommendations that are more adaptive to the advancement of digital technology. The research adopts a normative juridical approach, incorporating comparative legal analysis and empirical studies through interviews with 15 key stakeholders, including digital artists and legal practitioners. The findings indicate that 78% of respondents perceive Indonesia’s current regulatory framework as ineffective in protecting NFT copyrights, whereas regulatory developments in the United States and the European Union have successfully reduced NFT copyright disputes by 40% over the past five years. Additionally, an analysis of 30 NFT-related disputes on OpenSea and Rarible reveals that 65% of cases involve copyright claims that cannot be effectively resolved through national legal mechanisms. This study recommends implementing a takedown notice mechanism, integrating smart contracts for creator royalties, and strengthening digital arbitration frameworks within Indonesia’s legal system. With clearer regulations, Indonesia’s NFT ecosystem is expected to develop with stronger legal protections for digital content creators

Intellectual property rights are an implication of the development of international trade, especially in industrial countries. In developing countries, the understanding and protection of intellectual property rights receives less attention, which causes many violations of intellectual property rights and harms creators and inventors. Intellectual property rights have an important role in economic traffic, both regional and international, including investment in a country to spur economic growth of the country and its people. Indonesian society, which is diverse in culture, religion and ethnicity, has very rich creative works, and must take part in the utilization of intellectual property rights. Legal protection and use of copyright are very necessary to become a source of development for the national economy and Indonesian society
This research is aimed at examining the implications of Intellectual Property Rights on economic benefit gains. An owner of Intellectual Property Rights as a creative subject must obtain a guarantee of legal protection on his or her work. The result shows that the form of legal protection of intellectual property rights is that the owner of intellectual property rights in performing his or her rights must be protected by law. The economic rights owned by the owner will gain economic benefits if it is performed. The rights include the rights to use, to produce, to publish, to copy, to import, to export and to grant a license (permit) to another party that is intended to make use of the intellectual property. In a condition of law violation, the Law of Intellectual Property Rights as a preventive effort will give a right to an owner of intellectual property rights to sue on civil, criminal, or administrative law. The sanctions on the law breaker are also already written in each law of intellectual property rights that includes copy right, brand right, patent right, graphic design right, and integrated circuit lay-out right. The reason why an owner does not automatically gain economic benefits from his or her work is because he or she does not use the economic rights that he or she has. Some matters causing it are quite high costs of production, difficult licensing, and hard competition.
The law protection and economic benefits are two essentials of intellectual property rights. An owner of intellectual property rights is a creative subject that should have those two matters.
 

 This research was conducted with the aim of finding out how civil disputes are resolved in the District Court, either through Simple Lawsuits in Court or through Mediation in Court. By using normative juridical research methods, it is concluded: (1) The stages of simple lawsuit settlement in the District Court include registration, examination of the completeness of a simple lawsuit, determination of judges and appointment of substitute clerks, preliminary examination, determination of hearing days and summoning of parties, trial and peace hearings, evidence and decisions To resolve disputes in a simple and practical manner and avoid complicated settlements and in-depth examinations, Law Number 8 Year 1999 requires that amicable settlement, which is a legal remedy first attempted by the parties to the dispute, before the parties choose voluntarily to resolve disputes through the Judicial Body or other forum. (1) The Mediation Procedure in Article 13 on Submission of Case Resume and Duration of Mediation Procedure, states: (1) Within a maximum of 5 (five) working days after the parties have appointed an agreed mediator, each party may submit the case resume to each other and to the mediator. (2) Within a maximum of 5 (five) working days after the parties fail to select a mediator, each party may submit the case resume to the appointed mediator judge. (3) The mediation procedure shall last for a maximum of 40 (forty) working days from the time the mediator is selected by the parties or appointed by the chairman of the panel of judges as referred to in article 11 paragraphs (5) and ( 6). (4) Based on the agreement of the parties, the mediation period may be extended by a maximum of 14 (fourteen) working days from the expiry of the 40 (forty) day period as referred to in paragraph 3: (5) The period of the mediation procedure shall not include the period of case examination. (6) If necessary and based on the agreement of the parties, mediation may be conducted remotely using communication devices. Settlement of civil disputes in principle has two aspects, namely settlement through litigation and non-litigation, in the District Court itself where litigation settlement can be pursued also prioritizing the principles of fast, cheap, and simple.