Resolution 2026: Own Your Trademark – The First Step to Starting Any Business - AFFA IPR

Resolution 2026: Own Your Trademark – The First Step to Starting Any Business

Intellectual Property, TrademarkLeave a comment

As we enter 2026, business practices are undergoing increasingly significant changes. Business is no longer limited to selling physical products or providing conventional services on online platforms. The rise of content creators, podcasters, streamers, influencers, and professionals with strong personal brands has made the business landscape more competitive, dynamic, and diverse. They, too, engage in commercial activities—monetizing value, reputation, and trust built through their public personas.   Amid intensifying competition, one element stands out as a key differentiator: Trademark.   A strong name is not merely an identity; it is the foundation of branding that allows a product, service, or persona to stand apart, be recognized, and be remembered.   BMW? Nike? Amazon? Certainly. But today, we are also familiar with names such as ISawSpeed, MrBeast, or You Can’t See Me by John Cena, and IP-based characters like Bumblebee and Kamen Rider—brands that are not only popular but have also been registered as Trademarks.   Because branding without legal protection is a risk that is often only realized when problems have already arisen.   Branding Alone Is Not Enough Without Legal Ownership   Many business owners and content creators focus on building their name, audience, and reputation over the years. Followers increase, loyal customers are formed, and commercial value grows. Unfortunately, many overlook one critical question: “Do we actually own this name legally?”   Without Trademark registration, there is no exclusive legal ownership of the name being used. This means another party may still have the opportunity to register the same name first. If that happens, the consequences can be severe—an established product, service, or persona may be forced to change its name and could even face legal claims.   This situation is far from rare. In fact, it often affects those who have already achieved success without securing Trademark protection from the outset.   A Trademark Is an Asset—From Day One   There is still a common perception that Trademark registration is only relevant for large companies. In practice, however, a Trademark is most critical at the earliest stage—when a business, channel, or personal brand is just being built.   Whether you are running a small or medium-sized enterprise, a digital startup, a service-based business, or developing a personal brand as a content creator or professional, the name you use is a commercial asset. The more your activities grow, the more valuable that asset becomes. Without legal protection, it is highly vulnerable.   How to Become the Lawful Owner of a Trademark   To obtain lawful and exclusive ownership, Trademark registration must be carried out strategically. The process is not merely about filling out forms; it requires legal understanding and sound business planning. Below are five key steps to consider:   Conduct a Trademark Search A search aims to ensure that the intended name does not conflict with an existing registered Trademark. Similarity is assessed not only visually, but also in terms of pronunciation, sound, and overall impression. This step is essential to avoid the risk of rejection at a later stage. Understand Whether the Name is Registrable Not all names qualify for Trademark protection. Names that are too generic, merely descriptive of the goods or services, misleading, contrary to law, or similar to well-known Trademarks may be rejected. An ideal Trademark has distinctiveness and a clear identity. Determine the Appropriate Trademark Class Trademark registration is based on classifications of goods and/or services. Class selection must be done carefully, as it defines the scope of protection. Incorrect class selection may result in inadequate protection or create opportunities for others to register the same name in different fields. Understand the Examination Stages Once filed, a Trademark application goes through formality examination, publication, and substantive examination. During these stages, refusals or objections from third parties may arise. Proper handling requires legal insight and a well-prepared strategy. Consult a Trademark Consultant to Protect Your Business Future If your focus is on long-term business sustainability, the role of a Trademark Consultant becomes highly relevant. A consultant does not merely handle administrative matters, but also: analyzes risks from the outset; provides strategic recommendations on names and classes; assists in responding to refusals or objections; and ensures that Trademark protection aligns with long-term business plans.   For example, if you plan to add product variants, diversify your business, or expand internationally, a Trademark Consultant can provide precise guidance on how your Trademark should be protected.   With proper assistance, Trademark registration becomes a legal investment, not merely a formal obligation. From a cost perspective, this investment is highly reasonable, considering that Trademark protection is valid for 10 years.   Your Resolution – Your Future   Resolution 2026 is not only about increasing revenue, expanding markets, or gaining more followers. A far more fundamental resolution is ensuring that whatever you build—products, services, or personas—stands on a solid legal foundation.   A Trademark is not an accessory; it is an identity and an exclusive right. Register your Trademark from the outset to ensure that your business journey is secure, sustainable, and legally protected.   Because in the business world, those who endure are not only those who grow the fastest, but those who are best prepared to protect their assets.   Should you need more information on Trademark registration in Indonesia or globally, please contact us directly 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

New Year, New Patent Annuity Payment in Indonesia is Due - AFFA IPR

New Year, New Patent Annuity Payment in Indonesia is Due

Patent, Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

As the year draws to a close, business owners and inventors typically focus on closing their books, evaluating performance, and planning business strategies for the coming year. However, for Patent owners, there is one crucial aspect that is often overlooked: Patent Annuity, namely the maintenance of Patent rights through the payment of annual fees.   No matter how strong an invention is or how great its commercial potential may be, Patent rights can lapse solely due to administrative negligence.   Patent Protection Is Not Automatically Protected for the Protection Duration Many Patent owners assume that once a Patent certificate is issued, the exclusive rights will automatically remain in force until the end of the protection period. In reality, Patent protection in Indonesia is conditional. This means that the validity of a Patent depends on the fulfillment of legal obligations, one of which is the payment of annual maintenance fees.   This obligation applies to both Patents (with a protection term of 20 years) and Simple Patents/ Utility Models (with a protection term of 10 years), both calculated from the filing date of the application.   What Is a Patent Annual Fee? A Patent Annual Fee—also commonly referred to as a Patent Maintenance Fee (Patent Annuity)—is a fee that the Patent holder MUST pay up to the final year of the protection term. This annual fee constitutes Non-Tax State Revenue (PNBP). It is imposed in accordance with Government Regulation No. 28 of 2019 on the Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law and Human Rights.   The fee consists of a Basic Fee, plus an additional Fee per Claim. If the fee is not paid within the prescribed time limit, the Patent will be declared revoked.   To prevent such revocation, Indonesian Patent Law provides the following rules:   Payment of the First-Year Patent Maintenance Fee The first maintenance fee must be paid no later than 6 (six) months from the date the Patent certificate is issued. This payment covers the annual fees calculated from the filing date up to the year the Patent is granted, plus the annual fee for the following year.   Payment of Subsequent Annual Maintenance Fees Subsequent annual maintenance fees must be paid no later than 1 (one) month before the anniversary date of the filing date for the next protection year. For example, if your Patent application was filed on 9 November, the annual maintenance fee will fall due every 9 October.   Options in Case of Late Payment If, for any reason, you are unable to pay the maintenance fee on time, you can still pay the annuity to the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) through a registered and reliable Patent Consultant, but there will be a penalty on the official fees of 100% and it can only be paid up to 6 months from the deadline.     Consequences of Failure to Pay If you fail to pay the maintenance fee—either by the original due date or after the granted extension—the DGIP will invalidate or cancel your Patent registration. This means that you will lose all official legal protection for your invention in Indonesia.   Why Is the End of the Year the Right Time for Evaluation? The year-end period is a strategic moment to: Inventory all Patents owned; Confirm the payment status of annual fees; and Align Patent management with the budget for the coming year.   For Patent portfolio owners, this evaluation also helps determine: Which Patents remain commercially relevant; and Which Patents should be maintained or deliberately allowed to lapse.   A Simple Checklist for Patent Owners As a practical guide, the following points should be reviewed toward the end of the year: The active status of each Patent; Annual fee due dates; The amount payable based on the protection year; The use or licensing status of the Patent; and The accuracy of Patent holder data (name, address, legal entity).   These simple steps often make the difference between a Patent that remains protected and one that lapses unnoticed. By staying informed and complying with the applicable rules, you can ensure that your Patent remains valid and fully protected in Indonesia for its entire 20-year term (or 10-year term for Simple Patent or Utility Model).   Should you need further information regarding the payment of Patent Annuity fees in Indonesia, please contact us directly through the following channels and get a FREE 15-minute consultation:   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889

One Product with Multiple Trademarks: A Smart Protection Strategy or Simply Overkill? - AFFA IPR

One Product with Multiple Trademarks: A Smart Protection Strategy or Simply Overkill?

Intellectual Property, Trademark1 Comment

In business practice, it is not uncommon to find a single product displaying more than one Trademark. This may include not only the primary logo, but also series names, sub-brands, flavor variants, mascots, and other visual elements—each of which may have been registered as a separate Trademark.   This phenomenon is commonly found in snacks, beverages including syrups, sports shoes, apparel, and even professional jerseys.   The question is: is the “one product, multiple Trademarks” strategy truly effective, or is it excessive?   Understanding the Concept: House Mark vs. Sub-Brand vs. Product Variants From a branding perspective, not every sign appearing on a product serves the same function. In general, Trademarks as a branding strategy can be broken down into three layers:   House Mark The core identity of the company or brand (for example, the main logo). Sub-Brand or Line Name The name of a specific product line (such as running shoes, basketball shoes, or lifestyle collections). Product Variants Flavor names, special editions, or distinctive names that are developed and used consistently.   If each of these layers is used consistently, functions to distinguish products, and is recognized by consumers as an indicator of origin, then each may legally be registered as a Trademark.   When Do Multiple Trademarks Become a Good Strategy? From a Trademark protection perspective, this approach can be considered appropriate and high-value when:   Each Trademark Has Independent Commercial Value Example: Flavor variant names for certain beverages that are more widely recognized than the corporate brand itself. Shoe series that have their own dedicated fan base, independent of the house mark. In such cases, separate registrations help secure future business assets, including for licensing, collaborations, and product spin-offs. High Risk of Imitation in the Market The more famous an element of a product becomes, the higher the risk of imitation. If only the main logo is registered: Imitators may avoid using the logo, but still replicate popular series names or product variants. Registering multiple Trademarks narrows legal loopholes and broadens the basis for enforcement. Long-Term Brand Architecture Strategy For large companies, multiple Trademarks are not merely about protection—they form part of a structured brand architecture. With a well-organized system, each element can be independently developed, sold, or licensed.   When Does This Strategy Become Overkill? That said, not every “multiple Trademark” approach reflects a sound strategic decision. It may become overkill when:   The Trademark Is Not Genuinely Used If a name appears only once, is used inconsistently, or is not recognized by the market, its registration risks cancellation for non-use and may become a renewal cost with no real business value.  Costs Are Disproportionate to Value Each Trademark registration entails filing fees, maintenance costs, and renewal fees. Without proper portfolio analysis, a company may end up merely “collecting certificates” without achieving effective protection.  Consumer Confusion Too many logos and names on a single product can weaken the core brand identity, blur brand messaging, and even dilute differentiation.   Case Example: Sports Jerseys and Sponsor Logos Sports jerseys provide an interesting example of one product bearing multiple Trademarks, as they typically display the club’s Trademark, the apparel brand’s Trademark, the main sponsor’s logo, and additional sponsor logos.   This multi-logo product raises several legal implications: Each logo represents a separate Trademark owned by a different party. Replica or counterfeit jerseys may simultaneously infringe: the club’s Trademark, the apparel brand’s Trademark, and the sponsor’s Trademark(s).   In other words, a single counterfeit product can result in multiple Trademark infringements within one object. However, not all sponsors register their Trademarks in apparel-related classes. Counterfeit manufacturers often exploit this gap to evade enforcement actions.   Ultimately, Strategy Matters More Than Quantity Therefore, the question of whether this approach is “smart or wasteful” is not determined by the number of Trademarks, but by their business function, consistency of use, and long-term protection strategy.   One product with multiple Trademarks can be a very powerful strategy—but without proper planning, it can also become a cost without value. This is why Trademark portfolio audits, imitation risk mapping, and proportional registration strategies are essential.   Should you need further information regarding Trademark protection strategies domestically or internationally, please contact us through the following channels and get a FREE 15-minute consultation:   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889

A Complete Guide to Filing a Patent Appeal in Indonesia - AFFA IPR

A Complete Guide to Filing a Patent Appeal in Indonesia

Patent, Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

In the practice of Patent registration in Indonesia, not all applications result in the grant of a Patent. It is not uncommon for applicants to face rejections, corrections to the description and claims, or even objections to Patent grant decisions. To ensure fairness, accuracy, accountability, and public trust in the Patent protection system, the law provides a legal mechanism in the form of a Patent Appeal Application through the Patent Appeal Commission.   The Patent Appeal Commission serves as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism outside of litigation, allowing applicants or interested parties to obtain an independent and objective reassessment of the previous examination results. This mechanism also ensures consistency and technical specialization, as the examination is conducted by a panel consisting of Senior Patent Examiners and subject-matter experts.   The Patent Appeal Commission as a Dispute Resolution Option The Patent Appeal Commission provides a mechanism for: Independent review Non-litigation dispute resolution before escalation to court Assessment based on the principles of: Fairness and accuracy Accountability and trust Consistency and specialization Accordingly, the Patent Appeal Commission acts as a guardian of the quality of national Patent decisions.   Legal Basis for Filing a Patent Appeal Pursuant to Article 67 of Law Number 65 of 2024, a Patent Appeal must be submitted in writing to the Patent Appeal Commission and is subject to a fee for appeals against: Rejection of a Patent Application Corrections to the description, claims, and/or drawings after the Patent has been granted Patent grant decisions   The parties entitled to file a Patent Appeal are the Applicant or their Authorized Representative, as well as any other interested party or their Authorized Representative.   Types of Patent Appeal Applications Appeal Against Rejection of a Patent Application Rejection of an application includes situations where: The invention fails to meet the requirements of Articles 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, Article 24 paragraph (3), Article 25 paragraphs (3) and (4), Article 26, Article 39 paragraph (2), Articles 40 and 41 of Law No. 13 of 2016; or In the case of a Simple Patent (Utility Model), the invention fails to meet the requirements of Articles 121 and 122 paragraph (1). Appeal Against Corrections Corrections after a Patent has been granted are limited to: Restriction of claim scope Correction of translation errors in the description Clarification of ambiguous or unclear descriptions Appeal Against Patent Grant Decisions Patent grant decisions include cases where: The invention is deemed to have complied with Article 54 and Article 24 paragraph (3) of Law No. 13 of 2016; or In the case of a Simple Patent (Utility Model), the invention is deemed to have complied with Articles 121 and 122 paragraph (1).   Time Limits for Filing a Patent Appeal (As regulated under Articles 68–70 of Law No. 65 of 2024) Appeal against rejection of the application: Must be filed within 3 months from the date the rejection notice is issued. Appeal against corrections after Patent grant: Must be filed within 3 months from the date the Patent Approval Notice is issued. Appeal against Patent Grant: Must be filed within 9 months from the date the Patent is officially granted.   Appeal Forms and Required Documents The appeal form can be downloaded from the official Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) website and must be accompanied by the following mandatory documents: A detailed written explanation of the appeal reasons Supporting evidence and legal arguments Proof of payment Copies of the disputed Description, Claims, and Drawings Rejection or Patent grant notification letter Copies of the originally submitted Description, Claims, and Drawings Copies of all substantive examination correspondence Power of Attorney (if filed through an Attorney/Representative)   Permissible Grounds for Filing a Patent Appeal The appeal must not contain new inventions or broaden the scope of protection, and must be presented in: A clear correction matrix A complete explanation of objections to the Patent grant decision   Examination by the Patent Appeal Commission Every Patent Appeal Application must undergo: Administrative examination Substantive examination   For this purpose, the Chairperson of the Patent Appeal Commission forms an odd-numbered Appeal Panel, consisting of: Senior Patent Examiners with the rank of ‘Pembina Utama Muda.’ Subject-matter experts in accordance with technical requirements.   Authority of the Patent Appeal Commission The Commission has the authority to: Summon the Applicant, Patent Holder, and Examiner Summon witnesses and experts Conduct further and on-site examinations Request additional evidence Issue decisions on Patent appeal applications   Decision of the Patent Appeal Commission Is determined based on the results of substantive examination Is pronounced in an open court session for the public Is recorded and announced by the Minister Is officially delivered to the parties or their Authorized Representatives   Legal Actions After the Patent Appeal Commission Decision After the Patent Appeal Commission decision is pronounced and delivered to the parties, two legal consequences may arise: If the appeal is granted, the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP) is obligated to implement the decision in accordance with its ruling, whether by continuing the patent grant process, conducting the ordered corrections, or validating the disputed Patent. In this case, the Patent dispute is deemed administratively resolved. If the appeal is rejected, the interested party retains the right to pursue further legal remedies through a lawsuit before the Commercial Court. This constitutes the litigation stage, which may be pursued if the applicant believes the Appeal Commission’s decision still infringes upon their legal rights. Accordingly, the Patent Appeal Commission functions as the final administrative safeguard before a patent dispute proceeds to judicial litigation.   Should you need further information regarding Patent Appeal Applications in Indonesia, please contact us through the channels below and get a FREE 15-minute consultation:   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889

Latest WIPO Indicators 2025: Indonesia’s Rising! - AFFA IPR

Latest WIPO Indicators 2025: Indonesia’s Rising!

Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

Indonesia demonstrated notable activity and substantial growth across various Intellectual Property (IP) domains in 2024, particularly in Utility Models (UM), Industrial Designs, and Trademarks, according to the World Intellectual Property Indicators 2025 report.   Indonesia is classified as an upper-middle-income economy. Its IP performance often reflects a surge in filings, especially when compared to other countries in similar income brackets or neighboring regions.   Patent Activity   Source: World Intellectual Property Indicators 2025 Indonesia’s IP Office significantly advanced its global standing in Patent Applications in 2024: Office Ranking: Indonesia rose one place to 17th among the world’s top 20 IP Offices. Application Volume and Growth: The Indonesian IP Office received 10,902 patent applications in 2024. This total represented a 3.3% growth rate from 2023. Growth Drivers: The overall growth was primarily driven by Non-Resident Applications, which contributed 2.9 percentage points to the total growth, while Resident Applications contributed 0.4 percentage points. Non-Resident Dependence: Applications filed by Non-Resident Applicants accounted for a significant share of activity, making up 79.0% of total applications received by Indonesia’s IP Office. Origin of Non-Resident Filings: Applicants residing in Japan held the largest share of Non-Resident Filings in Indonesia, accounting for 23.6% of those applications. Patent Grants: In 2024, Indonesia granted 5,812 Patents. Similar to applications, Non-Resident Grants dominated, representing 89.3% of all Patents Granted.   Simple Patents or Utility Models (UM) Performance   Source: World Intellectual Property Indicators 2025 Indonesia stands out globally as a major source of utility model filings: Origin Rank and Volume: Applicants residing in Indonesia filed 4,842 UM applications in 2024, ranking Indonesia as the 4th largest origin worldwide! Growth Rate: Indonesia recorded a double-digit growth rate of +10.9% for UM applications by origin in 2024 compared to 2023. Trend: As a middle-income country, Indonesia saw a substantial increase in the volume of UM filings over the recent decade.   Trademark Activity   Source: World Intellectual Property Indicators 2025 In Trademark filings, Indonesia showed strong domestic growth but displayed comparatively low intensity relative to its population size: Office Ranking and Volume: Indonesia ranked 15th among the top 20 offices for Trademark Application class counts in 2024, receiving 166,118 counts. Growth Driver (Office): The Indonesian office experienced a total growth rate of 9.0% in Trademark application class counts (2023–2024), overwhelmingly driven by resident applications, which accounted for 8.6 percentage points of the increase. Origin Growth: As an origin, Indonesia recorded a considerable Trademark filing increase of +8.4% in 2024, which was driven by growth in both resident filing and applications filed abroad. Filing Intensity (Per Capita): Indonesia recorded one of the lowest ratios of resident Trademark application class counts per million population, ranging between approximately 350 and 730 classes per million population in 2024 (specifically, 353 per million population). Industry Focus: The Indonesian IP Office, along with those in China, India, and Viet Nam, reported the lowest share of applications related to service classes (ranging between 28% and 32%), indicating a focus on goods. Specifically, the share of services classes in Indonesia was 28.3%. Source: World Intellectual Property Indicators 2025   Registration Class Counts: The Indonesian office recorded 154,751 registration class counts in 2024. Trademarks in Force: A total of 897,580 trademark registrations were actively in force in Indonesia in 2024.   Industrial Design Activity   Source: World Intellectual Property Indicators 2025   Indonesia was a leader in application design growth in 2024: Office Growth: Indonesia’s office reported one of the largest growth rates among the top 20 offices, posting an increase of 25.3% in Application Design counts in 2024. This increase was primarily driven by resident applicants, who contributed 15.5 percentage points to the growth. Indonesia ranked 18th in total Application Design counts, receiving 7,926 counts. Origin Growth: Applicants residing in Indonesia recorded a pronounced increase in Industrial Design counts by origin, growing by +18.9% in 2024. Filing Intensity (Per GDP): Indonesia had a notably low ratio of resident design count per USD 100 billion of GDP, standing at 141. Designs in Force: The average age of design registrations in force in Indonesia was 4.5 years in 2024, the lowest reported among selected offices. Development Level: Indonesia was situated close to the typical trend line when comparing resident application design count per capita against GDP per capita (2020–2024), suggesting its design activity level is consistent with its economic development level.   Geographical Indications (GI)   Indonesia reported 182 Geographical Indications in force in 2024. All of these GIs were protected through a national sui-generis system, meaning 100% of the GIs in force were designated as National GIs.   Comparison of Indonesia’s IP Performance with Selected Peers (2024) To better understand Indonesia’s performance, the table below compares its key metrics with other major upper-middle-income economies (Brazil, Türkiye) and regional neighbours (Thailand, Viet Nam, Philippines), focusing on application volumes and growth across Patents, Utility Models (UM), Trademarks, and Industrial Designs, as well as IP filing intensity relative to GDP.   IP Indicator Indonesia Brazil Türkiye Thailand Viet Nam Philippines Income Classification Upper Middle Upper Middle Upper Middle Lower Middle Lower Middle Upper Middle Patent Apps (Office Total) 10,902 (Rank 17th) 25,597 (Rank 11th) 10,351 (Rank 18th) 8,727 9,904 4,571 Patent Apps Growth (Office) 3.3% 0.9% 18.4% 1.4% 4.7% –6.5% UM Apps (Origin Rank/Volume) 4th (4,842) 10th (3,047) 9th (3,126) 5th (4,227) 19th (675) 13th (1,659) UM Apps Growth (Origin) 10.9% 27.1% –7.0% 10.2% 12.1% –15.7% Trademark Apps (Office Class Count) 166,118 (Rank 15th) 468,667 (Rank 5th) 399,023 (Rank 7th) 73,552 126,733 (Rank 18th) 67,868 Trademark Apps Growth (Office) 9.0% 9.7% 0.1% 12.8% 8.6% 4.1% Design Apps Growth (Office) 25.3% 27.3% –16.6% 19.4% 20.2% 40.1% Resident Design Count per $100B GDP 141 142 1,387 340 N/A N/A   Key Comparative Insights   Patent Focus: Indonesia demonstrated resilience in its overall Patent Application growth (3.3%) and achieved a higher office ranking (17th). However, Indonesia remains highly dependent on non-resident filings (79.0% non-resident share), particularly from Japan (23.6%). In contrast, Viet Nam (9,904 applications) achieved faster overall Patent growth (4.7%), while Türkiye saw the highest…

Mediation as a Strategic Solution: Transforming the Way Indonesia Resolves Intellectual Property Disputes - AFFA IPR

Mediation as a Strategic Solution: Transforming the Way Indonesia Resolves Intellectual Property Disputes

Intellectual PropertyLeave a comment

Indonesia is increasingly positioning Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), particularly mediation, as a leading strategy for resolving Intellectual Property (IP) disputes. This approach prioritises faster, more efficient, and non-confrontational solutions—aligning with a restorative justice philosophy that focuses on preserving business relationships and safeguarding the commercial value of a brand or creative work.   The Institutional Framework: DGIP’s Role   The primary governmental body facilitating IP mediation in Indonesia is the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP), which operates under the Ministry of Law. Within the DGIP’s Directorate of Law Enforcement, the Subdirectorate of Prevention and Alternative Dispute plays a central role in managing these non-litigious processes.   The Working Team for Alternative Dispute Resolution (Tim Kerja Penyelesaian Sengketa Alternatif) within this Subdirectorate is responsible for receiving and processing requests for mediation or facilitation. This team organises the mediation proceedings, including scheduling and communication, and its members act as neutral mediators. The sources note that the DGIP currently has 7 mediators within the Subdirectorate of Prevention and Alternative Dispute, alongside 29 mediators specialising in IP across the 29 Regional Offices of the Ministry of Law.   Data from 2021 to 2025 indicates that the team handles disputes involving various IP types, including Copyright, Trademarks, Patents, and Industrial Designs.   Legal Basis: Mandatory vs. Voluntary Mediation   The resolution of IP disputes in Indonesia can generally be pursued through ADR, arbitration, or the Commercial Court (Pengadilan Niaga). However, specific IP laws dictate whether mediation is mandatory or optional before pursuing other legal avenues.   When Mediation is Mandatory   For certain types of disputes, mediation must be pursued first: Copyright: Except for disputes involving piracy, if the parties are known and located within the territory of the Republic of Indonesia, they must first attempt to resolve the dispute through mediation before proceeding with a criminal lawsuit. Patents: In cases involving criminal prosecution for infringement of a Patent or Simple Patent, the parties must first resolve the issue through mediation.   When Mediation is Optional   For several other IP types, mediation is an option alongside arbitration or other forms of ADR: Integrated Circuit Layout Designs (Law No. 32/2000) Trademarks and Geographical Indications (Law No. 20/2016) Industrial Designs (Law No. 31/2000) Trade Secrets (Law No. 30/2000)   The Mediation Process and Requirements   The process is managed by the Working Team for Alternative Dispute Resolution. Mediation can be conducted either Offline or Online. To initiate the process, the applicant for mediation is required to submit several administrative documents: A formal letter of application for Mediation. The identities of the Parties and/or their legal proxies. The addresses of the Parties. A brief summary description of the Intellectual Property dispute. Any other necessary supporting documents. Crucially, if the applicant is the party allegedly committing the IP infringement, they are not required to attach proof of Intellectual Property ownership.   Core Principles Guiding IP Mediation   The effectiveness of mediation rests on several key principles designed to ensure fairness, trust, and autonomy:   Principle Description Voluntary  The parties must agree voluntarily to mediation, with no coercion to attend, negotiate, or reach a settlement. The outcome should genuinely reflect the will of the parties. Confidentiality All information, documents, and statements shared during mediation are confidential. They cannot be used as evidence in court without the explicit agreement of the parties, which encourages honest dialogue. Mediator Neutrality The mediator must remain impartial and cannot hold any personal interest in the outcome of the dispute. This is vital for maintaining the trust of both sides. Equality of Parties All parties are considered equal, regardless of perceived strength. They possess the same right to be heard, and the mediator must ensure no party is dominated or pressured. Openness and Good Faith  Parties are expected to be open in presenting facts and demonstrate a sincere intention to seek a resolution (good faith). Good faith is essential for achieving a sincere and lasting agreement. Justice and Benefit The settlement reached should be fair and provide benefits to both parties. The aim is a “win-win solution,” ensuring no party is disproportionately harmed. Party Autonomy  The mediator’s role is strictly facilitative; they do not issue a ruling. The ultimate decision to agree, reject, or postpone a settlement rests entirely with the parties themselves.   Advantages of Choosing Mediation   Mediation is highly encouraged as an ADR mechanism due to the significant advantages it offers compared to traditional litigation: It achieves a fast and efficient resolution. It is cost-effective. It helps maintain good relationships between the disputing parties. It inherently seeks a Win–Win Solution. It allows for flexibility in solutions, accommodating unique needs. It helps preserve reputation and public image. It encourages legal awareness and compliance. It reduces the burden on law enforcement agencies and the courts.   Challenges and the Restorative Approach   Despite its benefits, the mediation process can face practical difficulties. Parties may be hindered by geographical distance or difficulties in arranging a common time to meet. For Online Mediation specifically, a key challenge is the lack of technological infrastructure to facilitate the signing of settlement documents by parties located far apart.   The DGIP views mediation not merely as a procedural alternative, but as a mechanism rooted in restorative justice. The underlying philosophy suggests that many IP disputes arise from lack of understanding rather than malicious intent. By providing a structured, neutral platform, mediation serves as “a bridge to restore, not punish,” and aims to “build back trust, not destroy it,” thereby supporting effective and efficient IP law enforcement.   Should you need more information on Alternative Dispute Resolution for Intellectual Property Disputes in Indonesia, contact us through the channels below and get a FREE 15-minute consultation!   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889   Source: Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP)

Maldives Adopts Its First Trademark Act: 12-Month Transition Period for Brand Owners - AFFA IPR

Maldives Adopts Its First Trademark Act: 12-Month Transition Period for Brand Owners

Intellectual Property, TrademarkLeave a comment

On 11 November 2025, the President of the Maldives, Dr. Mohamed Muizzu, ratified the Trademark Bill, which has now been promulgated as the Trademark Act (Law No. 19/2025) through publication in the Government Gazette.   The Act will enter into force on 11 November 2026, followed by a 12-month transition period for existing Trademark owners who have been relying on cautionary notices. This milestone marks the establishment of the country’s first comprehensive, registration-based Trademark protection system, replacing the long-standing practice of relying on cautionary notice publications.   Key Features of the New Trademark Act First-to-File System Trademark rights will be determined based on the filing date, with examination on both absolute and relative grounds. Additional safeguards are provided for well-known marks. Term of Protection and Renewal Registered Trademarks will be valid for 10 years from the filing or registration date and may be renewed indefinitely in successive 10-year periods. Transition Requirements for Existing Owners Brand owners currently relying on cautionary notices must file formal Trademark applications within 12 months from 11 November 2026 to maintain uninterrupted protection. Strengthened Enforcement Mechanisms The Act equips rights holders with a full suite of enforcement tools, including: Civil actions (injunctions, damages, and destruction or removal of infringing goods); Criminal penalties for counterfeiting; and Customs border measures to block the importation of infringing products. Issuance of Implementing Regulations Competent authorities are required to publish implementing regulations and guidelines in the Government Gazette within 6 months of the Act taking effect.   What Should Businesses Do Now? Businesses operating in or entering the Maldivian market are advised to: Review Your Trademark Portfolio Identify Trademarks currently protected only through cautionary notices. Prepare for Re-Registration Prepare documentation for filing once the 12-month transition window opens on 11 November 2026 to ensure continuity of protection. Update Internal IP Processes Align brand protection and enforcement strategies with the upcoming registration-based regime.   Should you need more information on Trademark registration in the Maldives or other international jurisdictions, contact us through the channels below and get a FREE 15-minute consultation!   📩 E-Mail : [email protected] 📞 Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 💬 WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889

Expediting Your Patent Application in Indonesia: The DGIP–JPO Patent Prosecution Highway

Patent, Intellectual Property

In the race for innovation, speed is everything. According to statistical data published by the Japan Patent Office (JPO), among the ASEAN6 Patent Offices (the six ASEAN countries with the highest Patent rankings), the Directorate General of Intellectual Property of Indonesia (DGIP) is recorded as the office with the shortest total pendency—meaning the duration from filing to grant—at only around 3.4 years. In contrast, other ASEAN Patent Offices generally remain in the range of 4.5 to 7 years. This figure aligns with Indonesia’s ongoing efforts to accelerate examination, including through the utilization of the Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) scheme.   What is even more interesting is that, as the only office implementing PPH with all ASEAN6 Patent Offices, the JPO serves as a strategic gateway for Applicants seeking protection across the ASEAN region. The JPO reports the following statistics: The time to obtain a patent grant in Japan through the fast-track route can be achieved in approximately 4.9 months; and Patent grants in ASEAN Offices through the PPH scheme can be achieved in around 1 year, with grant rates exceeding 90%.     In addition to illustrating examination performance, JPO’s data also shows that the PPH route with DGIP as the Office of Later Examination (OLE) has been actively utilized by international Applicants. Since the program’s initiation in 2013, the number of PPH requests designating DGIP as the OLE has consistently remained in the hundreds per year, reaching a peak in 2019. Although the numbers later declined, they have re-emerged significantly in 2024. This indicates that the DGIP–JPO PPH scheme is not merely a procedural option on paper, but a pathway genuinely used by global businesses when entering the Indonesian and ASEAN markets.   Given this background and the fact that DGIP records the fastest total pendency among the ASEAN6, Applicants can structure the following two-step strategy: Designate Japan as the primary examination hub, either as the first filing country or as the International Searching Authority (ISA/JP) under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT); and Utilize the PPH scheme for accelerated access to ASEAN, with Indonesia as a key destination given its comparatively shorter time to grant.   This combination creates a highly compelling narrative for businesses and technology owners. The JPO provides fast and high-quality examination at the “upstream” stage, while DGIP offers one of the fastest routes to grant in the “downstream” ASEAN region. For companies that view ASEAN as a growth market, this combination can significantly reduce risks and shorten timelines in the patent application process.   Number of PPH requests with DGIP as the Office of Later Examination (OLE) per PPH application year. Source: Japan Patent Office (JPO), “PPH Statistics.”   How Does the DGIP–JPO PPH Actually Work?   In simple terms, the PPH is a cooperative framework between Patent Offices that allows one Office to rely on the search and examination results produced by another. In essence, patent examination under the PPH can be accelerated at DGIP by leveraging the examination work products issued by the JPO.   Institutionally, the DGIP–JPO PPH scheme did not emerge overnight. The trial phase of the DGIP–JPO PPH program was first launched in 2013 as an effort to test the use of JPO examination results to expedite the process in Indonesia. As utilization increased and positive responses were received from Applicants, the cooperation was extended multiple times. Under the latest agreement, the DGIP–JPO PPH program has been renewed once again and will continue until 2026. These periodic extensions indicate that the PPH is considered successful by both Offices—reducing examination burdens on one side while providing a stable acceleration route for Applicants on the other.   According to DGIP’s official guidelines, the DGIP–JPO PPH scheme is divided into two categories:   1. PPH Based on JPO National Work Products Under this scheme, a PPH request is filed for a patent application that has already entered DGIP, by referring to its corresponding application at the JPO. The main requirements for filing a PPH request under this scheme include: The application at DGIP and the corresponding application at the JPO that forms the basis of the PPH must share the same earliest date (whether a priority date or filing date), either through the Paris Route or the PCT Route. The earliest application in the patent family must have been filed at either DGIP or the JPO as a national office. At least one JPO application must have claims that have been determined to be patentable/allowable, as reflected in a Decision to Grant, Notification of Reasons for Refusal, Decision of Refusal, or Appeal Decision. All claims submitted for examination under the PPH at DGIP must “sufficiently correspond” to the claims considered patentable/allowable at the JPO—that is, the claim scope must be identical, similar, or narrower through the addition of limiting features supported by the specification. A PPH request can only be made if DGIP has not yet begun substantive examination of the application.   2. PCT-PPH Based on PCT International Work Products (WO/ISA, WO/IPEA, IPER) In this scheme, in addition to national work products, the guidelines also provide for PCT-PPH. Here, the basis for acceleration is no longer the JPO’s national office actions but the JPO’s international work products in its capacity as: WO/ISA – Written Opinion of the International Searching Authority WO/IPEA – Written Opinion of the International Preliminary Examining Authority IPER – International Preliminary Examination Report   The main requirements include: The latest International Work Product must indicate that at least one claim is patentable/allowable with respect to novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability. The DGIP application and the corresponding PCT international application must share the same earliest date (whether through national phase entry, priority basis, or as a derivative/divisional). All claims filed at DGIP must “sufficiently correspond” to the claims considered patentable/allowable in the relevant International Work Product.   PPH MOTTAINAI Beyond the two main pathways above, the JPO has also introduced the concept of PPH MOTTAINAI. In simple terms, “mottainai” in Japanese conveys a sense of regret when something…

[Reminder] Indonesia - Patent Working Statement to be Submitted Before 31 December 2025 - AFFA IPR

[Reminder] Indonesia – Patent Working Statement to be Submitted Before 31 December 2025

Patent, Intellectual Property

All Patent Owners in Indonesia are reminded to submit their Patent Working Statement or ‘Statement of Use’ no later than 31 December 2025 or before the date of the annuity deadline. This requirement applies to all Granted Patents and is mandated under the latest amendments to Indonesia’s Patent Law. Failure to comply may result in legal consequences, including compulsory licensing and/or invalidation.   Previously—and still applicable—Article 20 of the Patent Law has regulated the obligation to implement Patents in Indonesia as follows:   Product Patent: Obligated to manufacture, import, or license the product. Process Patent: Obligated to manufacture, license, or import the product resulting from the patented process. Method, System, & Use Patents: Obligated to manufacture, import, or license the product resulting from the method, system, or use.   Obligation to Implement Patents in Indonesia   In this third amendment, Article 20A has been added to the Patent Law, stipulating that every Patent holder is required to submit a declaration of Patent use in Indonesia and report it to the Minister through the Directorate General Intellectual Property (DGIP) at the end of each year, accompanied by proof of implementation. The implementation of the Patent may be carried out either by the Patent holder or by a third party under license from the Patent holder. The objective of this provision is to encourage technology transfer, investment, job creation, and tangible economic growth for Indonesia.   Forms of Patent implementation may include: Manufacturing the patented product but it has not been commercialized yet; Manufacturing the patented product and it has already been commercialized; Utilizing the patented process but it has not been commercialized yet; Utilizing the patented process and it has already been commercialized; Importation; and Licensing.   Consequences of Non-Implementation of Patents In this latest amendment, provisions regarding consequences such as compulsory licensing or Patent revocation, which were previously regulated under Articles 82 and 130 of the Patent Law, have been removed.   Instead, the annual reporting obligation as stipulated in Article 20A serves as an instrument for the government to monitor Patent utilization in Indonesia.   Although administrative sanctions for non-compliance with the reporting obligation are not explicitly regulated yet, this obligation opens the possibility for the government to issue further implementing regulations or administrative policies in the future.   Acceptable Reasons for Delayed Implementation Previously, the Patent Law allowed Patent holders to provide legitimate reasons for not yet implementing their Patent, such as:   Force majeure circumstances. Regulatory or licensing obstacles to production. Production is still in preparation stages.   In the amended Patent Law, although these reasons are no longer explicitly listed, Patent holders may still include such reasons in their annual reports as part of the explanation or justification in cases where implementation has not been optimal.   You might also want to read: 5 Stages of Patent Registration Process in Indonesia   Should you need further information regarding the submission of Patent Working Statement in Indonesia, please contact us through the channels below: ? 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.

MATCHAMAN’s Trademark Strategy: A Blueprint for Indonesian Brands Going Global through the Madrid Protocol - AFFA IPR

MATCHAMAN’s Trademark Strategy: A Blueprint for Indonesian Brands Going Global through the Madrid Protocol

Intellectual Property, Trademark

In an increasingly competitive global market, Trademark protection is no longer optional—it is a fundamental foundation for business growth. One Indonesian brand leading by example is MATCHAMAN, a matcha-based beverage brand owned by PT. Puyo Grup Indonesia, widely recognized for its silky pudding outlets across the country.   Today, MATCHAMAN has become a rising name among premium matcha enthusiasts, gaining attention through its two flagship locations in Melawai Blok M and Pacific Place SCBD, South Jakarta.   A Contemporary Matcha Experience   Matcha is not new in Jakarta. Yet, MATCHAMAN brought fresh excitement to the scene when it launched in Blok M. Drawing inspiration from contemporary matcha cafés in Bangkok, MATCHAMAN emphasizes a casual, on-the-go drinking experience supported by a striking interior—metallic grays, vibrant emerald tones, and warm wood elements that pay homage to Japanese design.   At its heart lies an open bar under a high ceiling, softly lit—yellow during the day, green after sunset—where matcharistas prepare every cup using traditional techniques learned from Tokyo and Kyoto tea houses: Hot water at exactly 80°C, whisked with bamboo tools in handmade chawan, producing silky, foamy perfection!   Building a Strong Brand Foundation   MATCHAMAN has taken exemplary steps to protect its business identity. In December 2024, the brand filed its Trademark in Indonesia under: Class 30: matcha-based beverages, matcha latte, green tea, powdered green tea, etc. Class 43: beverage service, hot and cold drink bars, boba service, and similar activities.   MATCHAMAN successfully obtained registration in June 2025, with protection valid until December 2034.   This careful and timely registration ensures that MATCHAMAN retains exclusive rights over its brand in Indonesia—preventing misuse, counterfeiting, and unfair competition.   Going Global with the Madrid Protocol   With a strong foundation at home, MATCHAMAN wasted no time in taking the next step. In September 2025, the brand filed an international application under the Madrid Protocol through WIPO, designating: Australia Japan Malaysia Singapore   AFFA supported the Trademark filing under the Madrid Protocol, streamlining the process for securing overseas protection.   Why the Madrid Protocol Matters?   The Madrid Protocol allows brand owners to: File once to cover multiple countries. Manage and renew registrations centrally. Save time and cost compared to filing country-by-country. Expand quickly with legal security.   This strategy exemplifies global best practice: Register in the home country first. Use the Madrid Protocol to efficiently reach new markets.   By securing its identity abroad, MATCHAMAN ensures its brand remains exclusive and protected wherever it intends to grow.   Fast Execution: MATCHAMAN Lands in Japan   Soon after filing its international Trademark application, MATCHAMAN moved swiftly to tap into overseas markets—starting at the very heart of matcha culture: Japan!   MATCHAMAN made its Japan debut through a collaboration with a local F&B player, attracting enthusiastic public response. The collaboration demonstrated strong market interest and validated MATCHAMAN’s positioning as a modern matcha brand with global appeal.   This early success signals promising opportunities for future development abroad—made possible by proactive Trademark protection.   As MATCHAMAN stands as a model for Indonesian businesses aiming to expand globally, its strategy demonstrates key lessons: Trademark first — expansion second. Protect at home, then secure key foreign markets. Use efficient international systems like the Madrid Protocol. Move fast once legal protection is in place.   By protecting its brand early, MATCHAMAN ensures that its creativity, identity, and business potential stay exclusively its own—allowing it to grow confidently and competitively worldwide.   With strong IP protection, businesses like MATCHAMAN can step boldly into the global arena—safe, confident, and ready to thrive.   Should you need more information on registering a Trademark in Indonesia and globally, contact us through the channels below and get a FREE 15-minute consultation!   ? E-Mail : [email protected] ? Book a Call : +62 21 83793812 ? WhatsApp : +62 812 87000 889