When Weather Can Be Engineered in Indonesia: Is There a Role for Patents? Who Owns It? - AFFA IPR

When Weather Can Be Engineered in Indonesia: Is There a Role for Patents? Who Owns It?

Patent, Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

Recently, Indonesia has once again been confronted with extreme weather phenomena: high-intensity rainfall within short periods, urban flooding, and drought in other regions. Climate variability is becoming increasingly evident—and increasingly costly in its impact. Amid this situation, a strategic question arises: “Are we merely spectators of changing weather patterns, or can we become technological innovators capable of managing them?” Weather Modification Technology (WMT) shows that Indonesia has never been passive. Since the trials in Bogor in 1977 and the Jatiluhur project in 1979, Indonesia has developed the capacity to intervene in cloud microphysical processes. However, behind these operational activities lies a much broader space for innovation—particularly in the field of Patents.   Correcting Misconceptions: WMT Does Not Create or Move Rain Scientifically, WMT does not create clouds out of nothing, nor does it eliminate them. The intervention targets existing clouds by introducing hygroscopic particles that function as Cloud Condensation Nuclei (CCN). The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) has emphasized that the atmospheric energy scale is far too large to create rain instantly. Realistic intervention focuses on optimizing condensation and droplet coalescence processes. This is where the engineering dimension opens up real innovation opportunities—not myths—and where the role of Patents becomes crucial.   From Table Salt to Engineered Compositions: The Evolution of Inventions The classical approach in Indonesia involves dispersing NaCl powder of approximately 50 microns from aircraft, even using food-grade salt to minimize contamination risks. Domestic studies have shown that its use does not significantly impact water quality. However, innovation has not stopped at simply dispersing salt.   Engineering Hygroscopic Solution Compositions  Patent S00202512764, owned by the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN), introduces a composition of NaCl (95–99%) and methanol (90–99%) in a 1:5 ratio, designed to produce micro hygroscopic particles (≥1 µm) through combustion in a Ground Particle Generator system without pyrotechnic mechanisms.  This means: Not merely adding material; But engineering aerosol characteristics; With a controlled particle size as CCN.  This approach reflects a paradigm shift—from “adding material” to “designing particles.” More Hygroscopic Alternatives: MgCl₂ and CaCl₂  Patent P00201602375, owned by the Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology (BPPT), explores magnesium chloride hydrate (MgCl₂·nH₂O), which is more hygroscopic than NaCl. The claimed advantages: More effective moisture absorption; More practical than pyrotechnic flares; Less corrosive to equipment. Here we see that innovation extends beyond meteorology into logistics, safety, and operational efficiency.   Alternative Platforms: From Aircraft to Ground-Based Towers Beyond aircraft, Indonesia has developed Ground-Based Generators (GBG) for orographic rain clouds. Advantages include: Lower operational costs; Automation capability; Remote operation; Suitability for mountainous regions.   Patent P00202506598, also owned by BRIN, details an ejector nozzle system operating at ≥10 bar, designed to reach warm cloud targets up to 100 meters above the unit. The design has been validated through CFD simulations—entering the realm of precision fluid engineering. Thus, this is no longer merely field operations, but a mature engineering system design.   The Future: Engineered CCN and Nano-Particles The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), often considered the U.S. equivalent of Indonesia’s meteorological agency, explains that every cloud droplet forms around condensation nuclei—dust, salt, or other hygroscopic particles. Patent P00201300563, owned by BPPT, attempts to go further by: Producing nano-particles (0.1–0.3 µm); At high particle generation rates; Through atomization and high-temperature processing. If particle size and concentration can be controlled stably: Material efficiency increases; Operations become more consistent; Generators can be ground-based; Dependence on flares decreases. This is where disruptive innovation can continue to evolve—and be protected through Patents.   Extreme Weather as a Catalyst for Innovation and Patent Protection Ultimately, extreme weather is not merely an environmental issue. It concerns food security, energy (hydropower and reservoirs), infrastructure, and even geopolitics. Within every technological solution lies a Patent opportunity. Indonesia already possesses operational WMT capabilities, technical human resources, universities, research institutions, and real market demand. Yet protection of inventions at an early stage, commercialization strategies, and the courage to transform technology into IP assets remain limited. This phenomenon should inspire Indonesian innovators to continue innovating—because market needs exist, licensing opportunities exist, and royalty potential exists through Patents. Imagine if Indonesia could: Design next-generation, more efficient CCN; Develop IoT- and AI-based aerosol generators; Integrate CFD simulations with real-time radar data; Create next-generation, environmentally friendly seeding materials; Export GBG systems to other tropical countries. In the end, weather engineering is no longer merely a government project. It has evolved into a Patent ecosystem—a space of innovation that offers economic value and strategic advantage for inventors. With proper, strategically designed, and legally protected Patent registration, research results do not stop as technical reports. They transform into assets with bargaining power, commercial value, and ownership certainty. Everything begins with one fundamental step: the courage to turn research into inventions—and inventions into protected assets. If you are a researcher, startup founder, systems engineer, chemical industry professional, or technology investor, today’s extreme weather phenomenon is not merely an environmental challenge. It is a momentum for innovation.   Should you need assistance with Patent registration strategy and protection, contact us through the following channels and receive a FREE 15-minute consultation: 📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889   About AFFA:  Established in 1999, AFFA Intellectual Property Rights is an Indonesia-based boutique IP law firm serving international brands and innovators, offering full-service support—from prosecution and licensing to enforcement and commercialization—in Indonesia’s dynamic IP landscape. Our firm is widely recognized for its excellence, with accolades including “Best Boutique Law Firm in Indonesia” and “IP Enforcement Firm” at the Indonesia Law Firm Awards 2025 by Asia Business Law Journal, as well as being listed as a “Recommended Firm 2024 — Indonesia” by WTR 1000: The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals. For more information, please visit: www.affa.co.id.

IP Infringed Online? Now You Can Request Official Takedowns in Indonesia - AFFA IPR

IP Infringed Online? Now You Can Request Official Takedowns in Indonesia

Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

Trademark and Copyright infringement on marketplaces, social media, and websites is not a minor issue in Indonesia. Despite frequent warnings, illegal content distribution, counterfeit product sales, and unauthorized use remain easy to find. Often, enforcement struggles to keep pace with the growth of infringements—take one down, and many more appear in its place. The good news is that the Indonesian IP Office – Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) now provides an official mechanism to request the takedown of infringing content, listings, accounts, and even entire websites. This mechanism is expressly regulated under Minister of Law Regulation No. 47 of 2025 on the Handling of Reports of Intellectual Property Infringements in Electronic Systems. This means that Trademark owners, Copyright holders, and other Intellectual Property (IP) rightsholders no longer have to remain passive in the face of digital infringements.   What Is the New Solution Under This Regulation? Under this regulation, IP owners or rightsholders may submit an official report to DJKI for suspected IP infringements occurring on: Marketplaces/e-commerce platforms Websites Digital media operating through electronic systems Including live streaming content If the report is deemed to meet the elements of infringement, DGIP may recommend access termination, which may include: Removal of content (takedown of listings); Account suspension; or Partial or full blocking of a website. This is an official administrative pathway provided by the state, not merely an internal platform mechanism that may be unavailable or inadequately implemented.   Types of Intellectual Property Protected This regulation applies broadly and covers all IP rights protectable in Indonesia, including: Trademarks Copyright and Related Rights Patents Industrial Designs Trade Secrets Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits Geographical Indications Communal Intellectual Property As long as the rights are registered or recorded with DGIP, this mechanism may be used.   Who Is Entitled to Submit a Report? Please note that reports may only be submitted by: Registered/recorded IP rightsholders with DGIP; or IP licensees whose license agreements have been recorded with DGIP. Reports may be submitted directly or through an authorized representative, such as a trusted and reliable IP Consultant.   How to Submit a Takedown Request Prepare the Report Containing the Following Information Identity of the reporter; Type of IP infringement; Website address, platform name, account, or content link being reported; Brief description of the alleged infringement; and Additional information related to the infringing goods/services. Attach Mandatory Supporting Documents Proof of IP ownership (e.g., Trademark certificate, Copyright recordation, etc.); or Proof of recordation of the IP license with DGIP.Without these documents, the report cannot be processed. Administrative Examination by DGIP After the report is received, DJKI will conduct an administrative examination: If the submission is incomplete, the reporter will be given up to 14 business days to complete it. If the deficiencies are not remedied within this period, the report will be deemed withdrawn. Substantive Verification by the DGIP Verification Team If the report passes the administrative stage, DGIP will form a cross-sector Verification Team (involving DGIP, relevant ministries, associations, and/or experts). The team will examine the substance of the alleged infringement and may request information from: Electronic System Operators (ESOs); and/or The reported party.Verification timeline: a maximum of 3 business days from the date the report is recorded. Recommendation for Access Termination If the infringement is confirmed, DGIP will: Issue a recommendation for partial or full site closure or access termination; and Submit the recommendation to the relevant digital authority or directly to the ESO.The recommendation must be delivered within 1 x 24 hours of being signed. Special Provision for Live Streaming Infringements For infringements occurring via live streaming, the verification and recommendation process is expedited to a maximum of 1 x 24 hours.   Can Access Be Restored After a Takedown? Yes, subject to certain conditions, including: Authorization or cooperation from the IP owner/rightsholder; or A settlement agreement resulting from mediation with the reporter. A request for restoration must be submitted to DGIP and will undergo a further review process.   With this newly regulated mechanism, trademark owners, creators, and other IP rightsholders now have an additional, effective option for enforcement, beyond court proceedings and internal marketplace complaints. Importantly, the regulation also provides clear timelines, strengthening the position of rightsholders by offering multiple pathways to stop infringements. That said, document completeness and reporting strategy are critical to achieving a successful outcome. Should you need further information on protecting and enforcing intellectual property in the digital space, including marketplaces and websites, please contact us through the following channels and receive a FREE 15-minute consultation.   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889   About AFFA:  Established in 1999, AFFA Intellectual Property Rights is an Indonesia-based boutique IP law firm serving international brands and innovators, offering full-service support—from prosecution and licensing to enforcement and commercialization—in Indonesia’s dynamic IP landscape. Our firm is widely recognized for its excellence, with accolades including “Best Boutique Law Firm in Indonesia” and “IP Enforcement Firm” at the Indonesia Law Firm Awards 2025 by Asia Business Law Journal, as well as being listed as a “Recommended Firm 2024 — Indonesia” by WTR 1000: The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals. For more information, please visit: www.affa.co.id.

Examination of Responses to a Provisional Refusal in Indonesia: Understanding the Different Types of Responses and Their Effectiveness - AFFA IPR

Examination of Responses to a Provisional Refusal in Indonesia: Understanding the Different Types of Responses and Their Effectiveness

Intellectual Property, TrademarkLeave a comment

In the Trademark registration process in Indonesia, the issuance of a “Provisional Refusal” does not necessarily mark the end of the road. However, many applicants mistakenly assume that every response has an equal chance of overturning the examiner’s decision. In reality, not all responses are treated the same, and not all will be accepted. This article discusses how examiners assess responses to a provisional refusal, the types of responses recognized under the examination guidelines, and when a response is effective—and when it is ultimately futile.   How Examiners Assess an Applicant’s Response Under the Substantive Examination Guidelines, an applicant’s response is not reviewed merely as a matter of formality. The examiner will: Re-examine the basis of the provisional refusal; Review the type of response submitted; Assess whether the response, from a legal and factual standpoint, adequately addresses the grounds for refusal; and Render a final decision: to accept the application, reject it, or uphold the refusal. In other words, the examination of a response is a substantive evaluation, not a simple administrative confirmation.   Types of Responses to a Provisional Refusal Based on the examination guidelines, there are several forms of responses commonly submitted by applicants. However, their effectiveness largely depends on the nature of the refusal being faced. Agreement with the Provisional Refusal This is the simplest form of response, yet often the most rational. When is it effective? Where the refusal is based on clear absolute grounds (e.g., contrary to morality, misleading, or constituting a common sign); or Where the mark clearly lacks distinctiveness and cannot realistically be remedied through argumentation. When is it a wise option? When proceeding further would only increase costs and time without any realistic prospect of success. Amendment or Formal Changes Amendments may include: Clarification of the mark description; Adjustment of the list of goods and/or services; or Correction of administrative errors. When is it effective? If the refusal is formal or administrative in nature; or If the examiner expressly requests limited clarification or correction. Arguments or Written Rebuttals to the Provisional Refusal This is the most frequently submitted type of response, and also the one that most often fails if not prepared properly. When is it effective? When the arguments directly address the legal grounds of the refusal; When supported by visual, phonetic, and/or conceptual analysis; When able to demonstrate genuine differences in the relevant goods and/or services; and When supported by relevant jurisprudence that can be relied upon as precedent. Letter of Consent (Statement of No Objection) This type of letter is often misunderstood as a “shortcut,” even though some examiners may occasionally accept it. When is it effective? In certain cases involving relative grounds of refusal; Where it does not give rise to public confusion; Where the mark is still considered sufficiently distinctive; and Where there is a business relationship between the applicant and the owner of the cited mark (e.g., parent and subsidiary companies). Request for Extension of Time A request for extension may be submitted, but it is limited in nature and not always granted. When is it effective? Where the applicant genuinely requires additional time to prepare supporting documents; or Where there are relevant parallel proceedings underway.   When Is a Response Effective, and When Is It a Strategic Choice to Refrain? Grounds for Refusal Effective Response Absolute Grounds Agreement with the Refusal Formal Deficiencies Amendment (Making Corrections) Limited (Partial) Similarity Measured Legal Argumentation Strong Similarity Letter of Consent, but often unsuccessful Common / Descriptive Signs Arguments are almost always futile   A response to a provisional refusal is not merely a procedural obligation, but a strategic decision. Submitting an inappropriate response not only fails to change the outcome, but also consumes time and resources without adding value.   In practice, success is not determined by the length of the response, but by the quality of the arguments, the clarity and accuracy of the legal basis, and the relevance of the supporting evidence presented.   Should you require further information on how to respond to a Trademark provisional refusal in Indonesia or abroad, please contact us through the following channels and receive a FREE 15-minute consultation:   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889   About AFFA:  Established in 1999, AFFA Intellectual Property Rights is an Indonesia-based boutique IP law firm serving international brands and innovators, offering full-service support—from prosecution and licensing to enforcement and commercialization—in Indonesia’s dynamic IP landscape. Our firm is widely recognized for its excellence, with accolades including “Best Boutique Law Firm in Indonesia” and “IP Enforcement Firm” at the Indonesia Law Firm Awards 2025 by Asia Business Law Journal, as well as being listed as a “Recommended Firm 2024 — Indonesia” by WTR 1000: The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals. For more information, please visit: www.affa.co.id.

8 Key Considerations in Conducting a Patent Search in Indonesia - AFFA IPR

8 Key Considerations in Conducting a Patent Search in Indonesia

Patent, Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

Before an invention is filed to obtain Patent protection in Indonesia, you, as an inventor, must ensure that the technical solution you developed has never been disclosed to the public before. This is where a Patent search plays a critical role. The process is not merely a formality, but an analytical tool to evaluate your invention’s position within the global technological landscape. Unlike a Trademark search that focuses on identity, a Patent search is not simply about checking for similar documents. It is a strategic step to assess whether your invention is truly new and suitable for filing. An ideal Patent search provides early evidence that your invention has the potential to meet Patent requirements at the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) or other Patent offices.   What Is a Patent Search and Why Is It Important? A Patent search is the process of searching Patent documents and other relevant publications (prior art) related to your invention, to determine whether the key elements of your invention have been previously disclosed. In Patent law, prior art refers to any information available to the public before the filing date that may affect the assessment of novelty and inventive step of an invention. Without a proper search, an invention that appears new on the surface may have actually been disclosed in other documents. This can lead to rejection of a Patent application, even after a lengthy examination process and significant filing costs.   An Ideal Patent Search Process Below are practical and strategic steps to ensure that a Patent search is truly effective: Define the Objective of the Search Determine what you want to find out: Novelty Search → whether the invention is truly new Freedom-to-Operate (FTO) → risk of infringing other Patents Landscape Search → mapping relevant technologies Each objective requires a different search strategy. Break the Invention into Key Technical Elements Identify the core technical features that make your invention unique. Break them down into technical terms that will be used as search keywords. Use a Combination of Keywords and Classifications Combine: Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) Technical synonyms Patent classification codes (IPC / CPC) Classification-based searching helps identify relevant documents that may not appear through keyword searches alone. Search Official Patent Databases Use major Patent databases such as: World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) PATENTSCOPE European Patent Office (Espacenet) United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) Public Search Indonesian Intellectual Property Database (PDKI DGIP) These sources provide more reliable technical and novelty information than general search engines such as Google Patents. Broaden the Scope of Prior Art Do not limit your search to Patent documents. Also, review non-Patent literature such as scientific journals, conference proceedings, and technical articles that may qualify as prior art. Analyze Claims, Not Just Titles or Drawings The most important part of a Patent document is the claims, as they define the scope of protection. Two documents with different titles may still have very similar claim scopes. Record and Document References All relevant references should be documented in detail (publication number, date, technical summary). This information forms the basis for evaluation and for drafting the Patent application. Evaluate Results Systematically Search results should be analyzed using a structured method: Are there Patents that are closely related? Which technical elements have already been disclosed? How significant is the technical overlap? Measured analysis helps determine whether the invention has novelty or needs refinement before filing.   Common Mistakes in Patent Searches Using keywords that are too narrow or too broad Searching only one database Failing to check legal status (e.g., expired or rejected Patents) Ignoring non-Patent publications These mistakes can lead to misleading or incomplete search results. Ideally, an effective Patent search is a combination of: Clear objectives Measured search strategies Proper database selection Accurate technical analysis Although a search can be conducted independently, its complexity often requires technical and legal expertise. A well-executed Patent search strengthens the quality of your Patent application documents and reduces the risk of rejection during examination at the DGIP or other Patent offices worldwide.   Should you need further information regarding Patent search processes domestically or internationally, contact us through the following channels and receive a FREE 15-minute consultation:   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889   About AFFA:  Established in 1999, AFFA Intellectual Property Rights is an Indonesia-based boutique IP law firm serving international brands and innovators, offering full-service support—from prosecution and licensing to enforcement and commercialization—in Indonesia’s dynamic IP landscape. Our firm is widely recognized for its excellence, with accolades including “Best Boutique Law Firm in Indonesia” and “IP Enforcement Firm” at the Indonesia Law Firm Awards 2025 by Asia Business Law Journal, as well as being listed as a “Recommended Firm 2024 — Indonesia” by WTR 1000: The World’s Leading Trademark Professionals. For more information, please visit: www.affa.co.id.