The capital market is an important part of representing the country's economic conditions. In the capital market there are several instruments that are traded, one of which is mutual funds. Mutual funds are quite an attractive option for the community, but there are cases of default that make mutual fund investors suffer losses. This research uses a normative juridical approach method, namely library legal research conducted by examining library materials or secondary data as a basis for research by conducting a search for laws and literature related to the problems studied. Legal protection can be done by using preventive and repressive legal protection in mutual fund investment cases as a form of protection to investors from the government. The losses suffered by investors due to the default of PT TDPM to MMI, indicate that TDPM has a responsibility that can be in the form of paying all obligations and compensation and accepting all sanctions that can be in the form of administrative, civil, to criminal. Preventive legal protection can be seen in the existence of laws and regulations such as the Capital Market Law, P2SK Law, POJK 48/2015, POJK 31/2015, and others. Repressive legal protection is in the form of enforcement of sanctions from administrative even to bankruptcy. Responsibility must be carried out by TDPM, namely paying obligations along with interest according to the debt restructuring agreement until the imposition of sanctions. And it is necessary to see the form of MMI's responsibility as the Investment Manager in this case.

This study aims to determine the criteria for plagiarism of fine arts according to Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright. In addition, it also seeks to determine the basis for the judge's consideration in Decision Number 31 / Pdt.Sus-Copyright / 2020 / Pn.Jkt.Pst. In this study, normative legal research was prescriptive. Normative is prescriptive, namely, examining library materials indicated in written regulations. The approaches used in writing this law are the case and statutory approaches. The results of this research, according to Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright, the criteria for plagiarism of works of fine art are if they meet the elements of 1) the existence of similarities in whole or in part that are substantial, 2) the recognition of private property to imitation works and 3) cause losses to the creator of imitation of works. In the judge's consideration in deciding the alleged case of plagiarism, the judge should take into account the following: 1) Proving the similarity between Love Light and Urban Light; 2) There is a loss incurred by the Plaintiff. In this case, the judge's consideration is based on the regulations of Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning copyright, and the plaintiff can also prove all of them so that the defendant is found guilty.
 
 

This research aims to determine whether actio pauliana is an appropriate legal remedy in providing legal protection for creditors in bankruptcy cases. It also aims to determine the basis of the judge's considerations in Verdict No. 06/Pdt.Sus.Gugatan Lain-lain-AP/2020/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. Jo. No. 27/Pdt-Sus-PKPU/2015/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. This research is a normative legal research with statutory and case approach. The type of data used is secondary data. The technique used in collecting legal materials in this research is literature study. This research uses syllogism analysis technique and deductive thinking pattern, using major premises and minor premises which then these premises can produce conclusions. Based on this research, it is found that actio pauliana is an appropriate legal remedy in providing legal protection for creditors who are harmed by debtors in bankruptcy cases because there is internal legal protection and external legal protection in accordance with Isnaeni's legal protection theory used as an analysis. The basis of the judge's consideration used as the curator's right to file an actio pauliana lawsuit is Article 47 paragraph (1) and Explanation of Article 3 paragraph (1) of the Bankruptcy Law, then in deciding the case used as the analysis material, the judge uses Article 41 and Article 42 of the Bankruptcy Law.