Protecting a Giant: Why Godzilla Needs Both 3D Mark and Industrial Design Status

Intellectual Property, Trademark, Industrial Design

This November, one of Japan’s oldest Intellectual Property (IP) assets celebrates its 70th anniversary. First introduced as a movie in 1954, Godzilla has since starred in over 40 films and animated series, and its Trademark is protected in more than 30 countries worldwide.   As a giant mutant lizard with many variations, its likeness has also been immortalized in various toys and merchandise, often registered as Industrial Designs to protect them from counterfeiting. However, since Industrial Design protection has a limited duration, Toho, the owner of Godzilla’s IP, has also registered it as a 3D Mark.   What’s the difference? What are the advantages compared to Industrial Designs? Here’s the answer…   Aesthetic Value vs. Distinctiveness   Based on its definition, Industrial Design protects the aesthetic aspects or appearance of a product, such as its shape, pattern, or configuration, which give it a distinctive impression. The focus is on visually appealing elements rather than brand identity. Therefore, Industrial Designs protect the unique design of vehicles, household appliances, and, of course, toys.   On the other hand, a 3D Mark is a mark that protects the three-dimensional shape of a product used to distinguish the goods or services of one party from another. Examples include the Coca-Cola bottle, Lego bricks, Ferrari’s prancing horse, and the PS5 console.   The differences, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of Industrial Designs and 3D Marks, can be summarized in the following table:   Industrial Design 3D Mark Focus of Protection Protects the aesthetics or visual appeal of a product. Protects the identity and function of a Trademark in commerce. Duration of Protection Limited duration, typically 10-15 years, depending on the regulations in a given country. Unlimited duration as long as it is renewed periodically every 10 years. Registration Process & Criteria Must be new and unique in its design. Requires evidence that the shape has a distinctive character and is recognized by consumers as a Trademark. A 3D Mark cannot be registered if the shape has functional value. Advantages The registration process is relatively simpler and quicker. Protection can last indefinitely with periodic renewals. Disadvantages Protection is limited to aesthetic aspects, and the duration cannot be extended. The registration process is more complex and requires significant evidence of use to demonstrate distinctiveness in the market.   Godzilla Needs Longer Protection   From the table above, we can understand why IP assets as old as Godzilla still seek longer protection. Especially considering the increasing hype surrounding Godzilla after winning the 2024 Academy Award/Oscar for Best Visual Effects. This success could lead to an increase in counterfeit products and toys by irresponsible parties.   According to Yahoo Japan and a decision by the Japanese court, Toho’s attempt to register one of Godzilla’s variants, Shin Godzilla, as a 3D Trademark began as early as October 2019. However, after a lengthy process, the Japan Patent Office (JPO) issued a final rejection in March 2024, stating that the registered Godzilla shape was too generic and lacked sufficient distinctiveness.   Toho subsequently filed an appeal in May, emphasizing that the Shin Godzilla design has a strong distinctive character and is widely recognized by the public. This was followed by a review of submitted evidence, including the popularity of Shin Godzilla as a character, its use in various products, and public recognition of the shape as a unique identity, by the court.   3D Mark Shin Godzilla – Application No.: 2020-120003   Finally, on October 30, 2024, the court overturned the JPO’s decision and declared that the 3D shape of Shin Godzilla possesses sufficient distinctiveness and is eligible to be registered as a 3D Mark. The court emphasized that the popularity and widespread recognition of the Shin Godzilla character added significant value to the assessment of its distinctiveness.   As a result, Shin Godzilla has successfully secured the opportunity to get unlimited protection.   This ruling sets an important precedent for 3D Mark protection in Japan, particularly for the entertainment industry and consumer products that rely on unique characters or designs as their brand identity. Previously, iconic characters were typically protected through copyright for creative works, and their names or logos as Trademarks. Now, these characters can also be protected as 3D Marks if proven to have distinctiveness and public recognition as a source identifier.   This strengthens Intellectual Property protection for iconic characters through a layered and complementary approach, depending on the context of their use. Should you need further information regarding trademark registration and protection in Indonesia or worldwide, please contact us via email: [email protected].

WIPO's 2024 Report: Indonesia Ranks Among Global Leaders in Trademarks and Design Growth - AFFA IPR

WIPO’s 2024 Report: Indonesia Ranks Among Global Leaders in Trademarks and Design Growth

Intellectual Property

The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) recently released the World Intellectual Property Indicators 2024 (WIPI) report, highlighting the growth performance of Intellectual Property (IP) in 2023. This report provides a comprehensive overview of global trends in IP, covering Patents, Trademarks, Geographical Indications, Industrial Designs, and Plant Variety Protection. It is a vital reference for governments, entrepreneurs, and innovators to understand their country’s position in the global IP landscape.   China, India, Russia, and Indonesia showcased remarkable growth in this report. China leads with 1.64 million Patent applications, accounting for 46% of all Patent applications worldwide. Regarding Trademark and industrial design applications, China also dominated with 7.4 million Trademark applications (approximately 49% of the total global market) and 58% of global industrial design filings. Similarly, China commanded a 54% share in plant variety protection applications.   How Did Indonesia Perform?   While the global average for Trademark applications declined by 2%, Indonesia bucked the trend with a 10% increase in 2023, trailing only Russia (30%) and Mexico (11%). For industrial designs, Indonesia recorded the highest global growth at 37.3%, far surpassing the global average of 2.8%. In absolute numbers, Trademark applications in Indonesia rose from 122,458 to 152,447, and industrial design filings increased from 4,795 to 6,326. These achievements place Indonesia as a Southeast Asian leader, far ahead of Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand.   Global Rankings: Where Does Indonesia Stand?   Trademark Applications Indonesia ranks 15th globally, behind: China (7,184,831) United States (739,395) Russia (546,455) India (520,862) EUIPO (436,720) Brazil (427,327) Turkey (398,763) United Kingdom (345,205) Japan (328,559) Iran (327,384) South Korea (314,284) France (263,550) Germany (229,793) Mexico (205,867)   Industrial Design Applications Indonesia ranks 19th globally, trailing: China (826,086) EUIPO (116,884) United Kingdom (81,543) United States (60,022) South Korea (59,454) Turkey (58,084) Italy (37,099) Japan (32,061) France (30,023) Germany (29,663) India (28,168) Spain (14,776) Switzerland (11,391) Russia (10,472) Canada (9,037) Australia (8,798) Iran (7,841) Brazil (7,679)   Creative Industries Drive Growth According to the WIPI 2024 report, Indonesia’s growth in Trademarks is largely fueled by MSMEs and the creative economy, while the textile, fashion, and handicraft sectors primarily drive the surge in industrial design filings The data further indicates that the primary purpose of registering Trademarks and industrial designs in Indonesia is to facilitate exports.   Future Potential and Opportunities As public awareness of IP registration continues to grow, Indonesia holds immense potential to become a hub for innovation and intellectual property in the ASEAN region. Strengthening regulations, increasing public education, and fostering collaboration with the private sector can help capitalize on this momentum.   Should you need more information about the registration and protection of Patents, Trademarks, or Industrial Designs, both domestically and internationally, please contact us via email: [email protected].

Indonesia - Adjustment to the IP Services Official Fees Under the Government Regulation No.24 Year 2024 - AFFA IPR

Indonesia – Adjustment to the Intellectual Property Services Official Fees Under the Government Regulation No. 45 Year 2024

Intellectual Property

The Government of the Republic of Indonesia has issued the latest update on the Non-Tax State Revenue for the Ministry of Law and Human Rights under the Government Regulation No. 45 Year 2024. The adjustments cover IP services pertaining Trademark, Geographical Indication Patent, Industrial Design, and Copyright. We herewith provide you the summary of the changes for your perusal and please bear in mind that anything not listed here is not affected.   Trademark and Geographical Indication The items that have been adjusted are as follows:   Type of Action Old Fees New Fees International Registration designating Indonesia CHF 144 CHF 125 International Registration renewal in Indonesia CHF 180 CHF 156 International Registration renewal in Indonesia (within 6-month grace period) CHF 360 CHF 313 Requesting substantive examination for a Geographical Indication application N/A IDR 1,000,000.00   Patent The items that have been adjusted are as follows:   Type of Action Old Fees New Fees Accelerated publication IDR 400,000.00 IDR 500,000.00 Patent substantive examination request IDR 3,000,000.00 IDR 3,500,000.00 Simple patent substantive examination request IDR 500,000.00 iDR 750,000.00 Priority rights document request IDR 300,000.00 IDR 500,000.00 Patent decision appeal request IDR 3,000,000.00 IDR 4,000,000.00 Post-grant correction of description, claim, and/or figures after the patent is granted IDR 3,000,000.00 IDR 4,000,000.00 Post-grant appeal against the decision to grant a patent IDR 3,000,000.00 IDR 4,000,000.00 Patent Board of Appeal decision request N/A IDR 20,000.00 per page   Industrial Design No changes or adjustments were introduced for Industrial Design matters.   Copyright The items that have been adjusted are as follows:   Type of Action Old Fees New Fees Application IDR 400,000.00 OR  IDR 600,000.00 (if software) per creation IDR 200,000.00   Should you have any further questions and queries about the adjustment of official fees, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected].  

Unraveling the Global Complexity of IP Crime: Money Laundering and More! AFFA IPR

Unraveling the Global Complexity of IP Crime: Money Laundering and More!

Patent, Intellectual Property, Trademark, Copyright, Industrial Design1 Comment

Intellectual Property (IP) Crime negatively impacts the economy and consumer safety and has become structurally more complex, posing a worldwide threat to economic and social security.   According to the recently released report “Uncovering the Ecosystem of Intellectual Property Crime,” published this October by the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), it is revealed that 6% of imported products entering the European Union are counterfeit, with a value exceeding 2 billion euros) annually. This figure represents only the seized products, mainly packaging materials, toys, cigarettes, and CDs/DVDs. Imagine if we could account for the undetected counterfeit goods distributed worldwide.   So, why is tackling IP crime so challenging? The report highlights that this form of crime is highly networked and involves corrupt officials, money laundering, and even tax officers. EUIPO labels these facilitators as IP Crime Enablers!   How significant is their role, and how do they perpetuate Intellectual Property crime? Here are the details.   Intellectual Property Crime – The Definition   In the document, “IP Crime” refers to illegal activities involving the theft, infringement, or unauthorized use of Intellectual Property (IP) rights, which include Copyrights, Industrial Designs, Trademarks, Patents, Geographical Indications, and Trade Secrets. The document categorizes IP crime primarily as:   Counterfeiting Manufacturing, importing, distributing, storing, or selling goods that bear the Trademark of a genuine brand without permission. Examples: Counterfeit Pharmaceuticals: Production and distribution of fake pharmaceutical products that can pose severe health risks to consumers. For instance, counterfeit Semaglutide injection pens falsely labeled as containing the active ingredient were found to contain other substances, leading to serious health incidents​. Counterfeit Automotive Parts: The production and distribution of fake automotive parts, like brake pads and wheel rims, infringe Trademarks and pose serious safety risks. Piracy Unauthorized copying, use, reproduction, and distribution of materials protected by IP rights, such as digital media, software, and entertainment. Example: Digital Piracy: Illicit streaming services that distribute copyrighted content (like movies and sports events) without authorization. In one case, a streaming service was operating across multiple countries, generating significant revenue through illegal broadcasts​.   The Mechanics of IP Crime   IP criminals exploit weaknesses in the global supply chain, legal loopholes, and infrastructure to operate with resilience and evade law enforcement efforts. This structured approach allows them to profit significantly while remaining difficult to prosecute due to their operations’ multi-jurisdictional and often hidden nature. The structured process criminal networks use to conduct IP crimes ranges from obtaining infringing items to laundering the proceeds. Here are the key phases:   Infringing IP Rights (Acquisition Phase) This is the initial stage where IP rights are intentionally violated. Criminals produce counterfeit goods by replicating brand logos, labels, or pirated content. This phase may involve either manufacturing counterfeit products directly or diverting legitimate products from the supply chain. Common sources for counterfeit goods include China, Hong Kong, and Türkiye. Transportation and Distribution Phase After acquiring the counterfeit items, networks transport them globally, often abusing the legal logistical and shipping sectors to move goods across borders. Criminals use sophisticated smuggling techniques, including splitting shipments and hiding counterfeit items within legitimate products to avoid detection. Marketing and Retail Phase Criminals use both online and offline methods to market and sell counterfeit products. Online marketplaces, social media platforms, and even the dark web provide anonymity and access to large audiences. Offline, counterfeit goods may also be sold through physical retail outlets or open markets. Dealing with Profits and Risks (Money-Laundering Phase) The final stage involves managing the profits from these illegal sales. Criminal networks employ money laundering techniques to disguise the origins of their profits. This includes investing in legal businesses, conducting physical cash transfers, or using complex digital financial systems to reintegrate funds into the economy.   Parties Also Involved in Intellectual Property Crimes In addition to the 4 (four) phases of crime above, Europol and EUIPO mapped the parties involved in IP crimes, making these crimes complex and challenging to eradicate.   Criminal Enablers These are illegal activities or crimes that help facilitate IP crime: Corruption: Bribery or manipulation within organizations to ease illegal processes. Forced Labour: Exploitation of labor, often under inhumane conditions, to produce counterfeit goods. Cybercrime: Digital crimes that support IP crime, such as phishing, malware, or data theft. Money Laundering: Concealing the profits from IP crime by converting illegal earnings into legitimate assets. Document Fraud: Creating fake documents to disguise the origin or legitimacy of counterfeit goods. Environmental Crime (Envicrime): Illegal activities that harm the environment, often associated with the improper disposal of waste from counterfeit production. Non-Criminal Enablers These are lawful activities or structures that criminals misuse to facilitate IP crime: Professional Expertise: Use of skills from professionals (e.g., lawyers, technicians) to support illegal IP activities. Use of Legal Business Structures (LBS): Legal businesses that provide a front for illegal IP activities, such as follows: Trading Companies or Factories These legitimate businesses can be set up or inserted into the supply chain to disguise the production or distribution of counterfeit goods. Factories or production sites can be used to produce counterfeit goods under the guise of legitimate products. Warehouses or Logistics Service Providers Legitimate warehouses or logistics companies can be used to store or transport counterfeit goods without raising suspicion. For example, counterfeit goods can be hidden among legitimate products in international shipments. Physical Retail Stores Appearing legitimate stores can be used to sell counterfeit goods to consumers without their knowledge. Counterfeit goods can be sold alongside legitimate products, making it difficult for consumers to tell the difference. Online Stores or Marketplace Platforms Many IP criminals use e-commerce websites or accounts on platforms like Amazon, eBay, or social media to sell counterfeit products. These platforms often give the impression of a legitimate business, making it easier for criminals to reach consumers at a wide range. Front or Shell Companies These companies are technically legitimate but serve only as a front for illegal activity. They are often used to launder money…

Indonesia Climbs 7 Spots in Global Innovation Index 2024: What's Fueling the Rise? - AFFA IPR

Indonesia Climbs 7 Spots in Global Innovation Index 2024: What’s Fueling the Rise?

Industrial Design

The Global Innovation Index (GII) is an annual report published by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), in collaboration with Cornell University, USA, and the Institut Européen d’Administration des Affaires (INSEAD), France. This index ranks countries based on innovation capacity and performance, using more than 80 indicators covering innovation inputs (such as institutions, human resources, and infrastructure) and outputs (such as research outcomes, technology, and creative products). This index is a crucial benchmark, as innovation is a primary driver of economic development, especially in knowledge-based economies. Intellectual Property (IP) is a critical component of this innovation ecosystem.   With effective IP protection and management, countries can create new technologies, enhance competitiveness in global markets, and provide incentives for inventors and creators to continue innovating. IP ensures that innovation results are protected from easy duplication or misuse while offering economic benefits to innovators through Copyright, Patents, Trademarks, and Industrial Designs.   Rising from Rank 61 to 54  This year (2024), Indonesia has experienced a significant improvement, climbing from rank 61 in 2023 to rank 54, closely trailing the Philippines at 53. Several key factors drove this rise:   Policy Stability for Doing Business Measures how the government ensures a stable policy environment for business activities. This indicator is based on perceptions of policy stability measured through surveys. Entrepreneurship Policies and Culture Assesses policies that support entrepreneurship and a culture that encourages domestic entrepreneurial activity. This indicator reflects support for the establishment and growth of new ventures. Finance for Startups and Scaleups Measures the availability of financial capital for startups and business development, including access to venture capital and other financial instruments that support startup growth and business expansion. Domestic Market Scale Measures the domestic market size based on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and National Income. This indicator highlights the domestic market’s potential for innovative products and services. University-Industry R&D Collaboration Assesses the level of research and development collaboration between universities and industries, reflecting the integration of academic and industrial sectors in generating innovation. State of Cluster Development Measures the level of development of industrial and technology clusters, including coordination between companies and institutions within clusters to enhance innovation and growth. Software Spending Measures total corporate spending on software, indicating investments in IT solutions that support operations and innovation.   However, Indonesia still lags in several indicators, including: Expenditure on Education Reflects government spending on education per student, indicating the priority of education in the national budget allocation. Government Funding per Pupil Measures government funds allocated per student, reflecting the nation’s investment in human capital development through education. Tertiary Inbound Mobility Measures the number of international students enrolled in domestic higher education institutions, indicating the global attractiveness of the nation’s universities. Firms Offering Formal Training Reflects the percentage of companies providing formal employee training, indicating corporate investment in employee skill development. Scientific and Technical Articles Measures the number of scientific and technical publications, reflecting a country’s research output and innovation capacity.   These factors still place Indonesia behind other ASEAN countries like Singapore (rank 4), Malaysia (33), Thailand (41), Vietnam (44), and the Philippines (53).   A significant difference between Indonesia and the Philippines lies in the strength of innovation output. The Philippines excels in High-Tech Manufacturing, Production and Export Complexity, High-Tech Exports, ICT Services Exports, and Creative Goods Exports. Compared to Malaysia, they outperform Indonesia in the number of Graduates in Science and Engineering, University Rankings, and Domestic Credit to the Private Sector.   Indonesia still needs to work on competing with these nations, mainly when its weaknesses lie in fundamental categories such as government spending and educational budgets, particularly at the primary level. However, Indonesia’s improved investment climate, marked by the growth of startups and solid indicators for stable government policies, reflects its commitment to creating a better business environment. Should you need further information related to innovation, Patents, or other Intellectual Property protection in Indonesia, feel free to contact us via email: [email protected].

Legal Implications of Couterfeit Drugs in Indonesia - AFFA IPR

Legal Implications of Counterfeit Drugs in Indonesia

Intellectual Property

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 890 million people worldwide suffer from obesity, driving high demand for weight-loss medications. One of the most popular drugs is Ozempic, produced by Novo Nordisk (NOVOb.CO), which generated nearly $19 billion in net sales last year. Ozempic’s active ingredient, semaglutide, leads to an average weight loss of 15% by reducing food cravings and slowing stomach emptying. However, this success comes with a steep price—over $1,000 for a month’s supply in the U.S.   Despite its effectiveness, the high price of Ozempic has opened the door to counterfeit versions. A fake Ozempic batch number MP5B060 has surfaced in at least 10 countries, from Azerbaijan to North Macedonia. The WHO issued a warning in July 2023 about products carrying this batch number, and Interpol also raised concerns about insulin pens being relabeled and repackaged to resemble Ozempic.   While some countries have banned the affected batch, others have not, leading to dangerous consequences. In at least four countries, fake Ozempic pens have resulted in hospitalizations. For instance, in Iraq, a man fell into a coma after using a counterfeit pen that caused his blood sugar to drop to dangerously low levels.   The Global Impact of Counterfeit Drugs   Since early last year, at least 18 different batch numbers have been found on fake Ozempic pens in 14 countries. Despite warnings, the issue persists because the solution is far from simple. Each legitimate batch of Ozempic contains 280,000 pens, and some countries are reluctant to withdraw entire batches due to the risk of exacerbating drug shortages.   Novo Nordisk has blamed international counterfeit drug syndicates, stating that they easily buy genuine products and replicate the codes to create fake ones. Rather than manufacturing packaging from scratch, these syndicates buy cheaper drugs with similar packaging and relabel them as Ozempic, making it difficult for consumers to identify the difference. This has led to severe health consequences, as unsuspecting buyers end up with insulin rather than semaglutide, leading to severe hypoglycemia.   No Packaging Change: The Ongoing Risk   Novo Nordisk has no immediate plans to change Ozempic’s packaging or register it as a new Industrial Design, stating that counterfeiters would simply find new ways to replicate the new design. This leaves consumers at risk and underscores the importance of being vigilant.   Finally, we must increase our vigilance by implementing the following steps: Only buy from authorized distributors. Always check the batch code to ensure you have a legitimate product. Don’t be tempted by low prices, especially for imported drugs.   If This Happens in Indonesia, What Are the Legal Sanctions?   This situation can be overcome with more decisive action from the supervisory authorities. In Indonesia, for example, there is Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM), which is proactive in conducting raids and monitoring updates related to counterfeit drug products from abroad; these drugs can be withdrawn from circulation before they harm consumers and damage the reputation of the original product.   BPOM has also been equipped with BPOM Regulation Number 16 of 2023 concerning Supervision of the Distribution of Traditional Medicines, Quasi Drugs, and Health Supplements, which gives them the authority to impose administrative sanctions in the form of cancellation/revocation of distribution permit numbers, Importer recommendations; and/or recommendations of business entities in the marketing sector if the business is proven to receive, store, and/or distribute illegal drugs including counterfeit drugs (Article 23b).   Meanwhile, if viewed from the perspective of the Trademark as regulated in Article 100 Paragraph (2) of Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Brands and Geographical Indications, anyone who violates another person’s registered Trademark, whose type of goods causes health problems, environmental problems, and/or human death, shall be punished with a maximum imprisonment of 10 (ten) years and/or a maximum fine of IDR 5,000,000,000.00 (five billion rupiah).   Viewed from the perspective of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection as regulated in Article 8, where this article expressly prohibits business actors from producing or trading goods that do not meet or violate the required standards, including the sale of counterfeit drugs. Violation of this article can be subject to a maximum imprisonment of 5 years or a maximum fine of IDR 2 billion. Article 19 also states that the seller is responsible for all losses experienced by consumers due to the use of counterfeit products. Consumers have the right to claim compensation, which can be filed through a civil lawsuit.   No less critical, Law Number 17 of 2023 concerning Health, specifically Article 435 states that anyone who produces or distributes Pharmaceutical Preparations and/or Medical Devices that do not meet the standards and/or requirements for safety, efficacy/benefit, and quality as referred to in Article 138 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of 12 (twelve) years or a maximum fine of IDR 5,000,000,000.00 (five billion rupiah).   You might also want to read: Anti-Counterfeiting Methods: Choose the Right Strategy to Get Additional Protection for Your Intellectual Property   Should you need more information on protecting Intellectual Property both domestically and internationally, feel free to contact us at [email protected]. Source: Reuters  

Recommended Representation of FIgures for Industrial Deisgn Applications in Indonesia - AFFA IPR

Recommended Representation of Figures for Industrial Design Applications in Indonesia

Intellectual Property, Industrial Design

Indonesian awareness of the importance of protecting Industrial Design has continued to increase in the last five years. This can be seen from the significantly increasing number of Industrial Design registrations. From 2,319 applications in 2017, it grew to 2,835 in 2019, jumped again to 2,957 in 2021, and peaked in 2022 with 3,533 applications.   The Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP), the Industrial Design Office in Indonesia, has also proposed changes to the Industrial Design Law to remain relevant to the latest creations and innovations. However, when submitting an Industrial Design application, at least 8 (eight) recommended representations of figures for Industrial stay the same, and you must follow them. Those recommendations are:   Do not combine different features or colors in the same design. The design must be represented on a neutral background. Do not include extra elements that are not part of the design. Each image must have only one view of the design, namely front, back, top, bottom, left, right and perspective view. Magnified views must be uploaded as separate images. To exclude unregistered elements, disclaim them identically in all views. Disassembled product views require a corresponding assembled view. To protect a 2D ornament/pattern, submit it alone, not on a product. Should you have further questions about registering for Industrial Design in Indonesia or abroad, do not hesitate to email us at [email protected].

IP Infringement Risks - Is Building Replicas of Classic Cars One of Them? AFFA IPR

IP Infringement Risks – Is Building Replicas of Classic Cars One of Them?

Patent, Intellectual Property, Trademark, Industrial Design

Owning a rare classic car, even at a high price, can be a source of pride. What’s unique is that several classic cars, such as the Porsche 911, Shelby Cobra 427, and Ford Mustang GT500, which are widely used by Indonesian celebrities, are local manufacturers, aka custom or modified results from different cars. How is this practice viewed from an Intellectual Property law perspective?   In the production of vehicles, or in this case specifically four-wheeled cars, there are at least three categories of Intellectual Property (IP) related to it, namely Trademarks, Industrial Designs, and Patents. Let’s describe the details one by one.   Car Name & Logo are the Exclusive Rights of the Trademark Owner   According to the Trademark Law, a Trademark is a sign in the form of an image, name, word, letters, numbers, color arrangement, or a combination of these elements, which has distinguishing power and is used in trading activities for goods or services. The names and logos of well-known cars such as Porche, Shelby Cobra, and Ford Mustang are the property of Porche AG, Carroll Hall Shelby Trust, and Ford Motor Company, respectively. These Trademarks have been registered and recognized as well-known marks and are protected in many countries, including Indonesia.   The trademark’s ownership and protection are valid for ten years and can be extended. Therefore, there is very little chance for you to own or commercialize this Trademark in Indonesia without establishing official cooperation with the Trademark owner or its official distributor in Indonesia.   Regarding the use of Trademarks without permission, Article 100, paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Trademark Law clearly states, “Every person who without right uses a Trademark which is completely the same as a registered Trademark belonging to another party for similar goods and/or services which produced and/or traded, shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of 5 years and/or a fine of a maximum of IDR 2 billion.”   Industrial Design – Aesthetic External Appearance Protection   Another IP that is closely related to cars is Industrial Design. According to its definition, Industrial Design is the creation of a form of configuration, or composition of lines or colors, or lines and colors, or a combination thereof in a three-dimensional or two-dimensional form which gives an aesthetic impression and can be realized in three-dimensional or two-dimensional patterns and can be used to produce a product, industrial commodity, or handicraft.   Industrial Design protects the appearance of the car’s external design, whether as a whole or just in part, such as the design of the front bumper, rear bumper, rim shape, or even the threads of the tires. Industrial design can also protect the appearance of the dashboard, steering wheel, chair shape, and even the design of the pedal brake clutch, as well as the gear shift lever. Several Industrial Designs registered by Porche AG Source: Word Intellectual Property Office (WIPO)   As an Intellectual Property, Industrial Designs have a protection period of 10 years and cannot be extended. So, legally, you can use an expired design without getting approval from the owner. However, suppose you use a design that is still protected. In that case, Article 54 of the Industrial Design Law states that a maximum prison sentence of four years and/or a maximum fine of IDR 300,000,000.00 (three hundred million rupiah) awaits you.   Patent & Cars Innovations   Patents are another category of IP that can be contained in a car. If Industrial Design concerns an aesthetic external appearance, then a Patent only covers certain parts that include innovations in the field of technology. For example, braking sensor systems, light automation, or airbag systems are all protected Patents, and anyone who wants to use them must pay royalties to the Patent owner.   And if there is a violation or use of a Patent without permission, Article 161 of the Patent Law states that each person can be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of four years and/or a fine of a maximum of IDR 1,000,000,000 (one billion rupiah). Meanwhile, criminal sanctions, as regulated in Article 162 of the Patent Law for violations of Simple Patents, are imprisonment for a maximum of 2 (two) years and/or a fine of a maximum of IDR 500,000,000 (five hundred million rupiah).   If we are talking about modified cars, most of the technology contained in the original car will not be available. Firstly, because it is technically incapable of adopting the technology; secondly, it does not obtain a license for the Patent. That’s where modified cars become technically unsafe products because of a technological imbalance in their manufacture.   Legal Solution: Original Car Modification   Although since 25 September 2023, the Minister of Transportation of the Republic of Indonesia has promulgated Ministerial Regulation Number PM-45 of 2023 concerning Vehicles Customization, this regulation only regulates technical requirements regarding how modifications can and cannot be carried out so that the car is roadworthy, and provides a sense of security to users, as well as the requirements for a modification workshop to apply for a certificate, without touching on the Intellectual Property side.   Article 1 of Ministerial Regulation No. PM-45 of 2023 clearly states that modification or customization of motorized vehicles includes changes to the axle distance, construction, and/or materials, as well as changing the engine brand and engine type of a motorized vehicle for one’s benefit or individual.   However, it should be noted that customization by order by a custom workshop for one’s own or individual interests, if there is an Intellectual Property violation in it, is still at risk of receiving a complaint from the owner of the Trademark, Industrial Design and/or Patent, and may be subject to criminal sanctions as stated in each article of Intellectual Property law applicable in Indonesia.   For this reason, several legal practices widely implemented worldwide focus on making their own modified cars. An example of this is done by Mitsuoka Motor, a Japanese modification company that changes Japanese-manufactured…

Various Intellectual Properties in Football - AFFA IPR

Various Intellectual Properties in Football

Intellectual Property1 Comment

At the beginning of May 2024, the United Nations (UN) General Assembly declared May 25 as the World Football Day. This date was chosen to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the first football competition at the 1924 Olympics held in Paris, France. The UN hopes this day will always be celebrated as a day of world unity, which can unite cultural differences and socio-economic barriers.   As the most widely played sport, Football also involves a lot of Intellectual Property, with a turnover of up to trillions of dollars. This includes Trademarks, Patents, Industrial Designs, Copyrights, Trade Secrets, Domain Names, and License Agreements. Below, we describe some of the Intellectual Property we most often encounter in Football.   Trademark   Every competition and tournament certainly has a name. We know the FIFA World Cup, UEFA Champions League, English Premier League (EPL), and Asian Football Confederation (AFC). These names are synonymous with quality and entertaining games. Most importantly, they are all registered Trademarks that unauthorized parties cannot use arbitrarily. You cannot just produce and sell t-shirts with the UEFA Champions League logo without permission from the Union des Associations Européennes de Football.    Trademarks in football are not only related to competition; several names of top players have also been registered as Trademarks. For example, “CR7” belongs to Cristiano Ronaldo, “Leo Messi” belongs to Lionel Messi, and even Mbappe’s celebration pose. You might also want to read: Kylian Mbappé Has Trademarked His Iconic Goal Celebration – Why Is It Possible?   Patent An innovation that cannot be separated from modern football is the Video Assistant Referee (VAR). With this technology, referee decisions on the field can be more accurate, not controversial. VAR, whose patent is owned by Hawk-Eye Innovations (part of Sony), was first used at the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia. With VAR, the referee can quickly check whether a goal is legal, a player is caught offside, or cameras from many sides cover other violations.   As a Patent, FIFA pays royalties to Hawk-Eye Innovations for its use. Hawk-Eye also maximizes its income by marketing this technology to 90 countries worldwide. However, with a cost per season of around USD 6.2 million, not all leagues worldwide can afford to use it.   The Patent for football also includes the ball itself. In almost every World Cup event, the ball is presented with more sophisticated technology than before, which is expected to increase the accuracy of the players’ shots.   Industrial Design   Like the ball in football, the shoes players use may contain patent-protected innovations. But if not, the shoes and all the clothes we see are registered as Industrial Design.   Football jerseys or costumes are one of a football club or team’s biggest sources of income. For diehard fans, wearing a jersey when watching a match or even going to the mall is a matter of pride and proof of their support for their favorite team.   However, jerseys are also among the Intellectual Property most often pirated. As true fans, of course, we can choose to only buy the original because only then is the money we spend commensurate with the quality we get, and most importantly, the income will go to the club we support.   Copyright   League and match materials, images, promotions, or other content related to football broadcasts fall into the Copyright category. Each match is owned by a different owner, who also sells broadcast rights to TV stations in each region.   These Copyright holders even opened a bidding scheme to give the highest buyers the opportunity to obtain the Broadcasting Rights. Because it costs a lot of money to get the rights, it is understandable that the Broadcasting Rights holders are very protective of the material they own. They don’t let other parties broadcast it in the regions they already cover, or prosecution will be carried out.   Trade Secret   Playing strategies, including technical details of formations and other confidential information, can be categorized as Trade Secrets. These secrets give each team a competitive advantage by not revealing certain important information to the public or rival teams. All team members, including the technical and health trainers, are bound by a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA).   Domain Name   The Domain Name associated with each league and competition is very important in maintaining its online presence and marketing. Fifa.com, uefa.com, and the-afc.com have been registered to prevent cybersquatting and Trademark misuse. The fifa.com domain, for example, is available in various languages to make it easier to access and search for the latest information and to disseminate official information to all media and football fans throughout the world.   License Agreement   Licensing Agreements may include Trademark Licenses to produce and sell merchandise, mobile phone applications, video games, and more. Game developers who want to present a team with the appropriate club name or accurate appearance of the players have to pay significant royalties to FIFA.   Finally, in organizing football, we must be aware of and involve all related Intellectual Properties (IPs). In fact, IP is the financial generator in every activity. Therefore, don’t forget to involve IPs in every tournament you run and reap the benefits. Should you need further information regarding Licensing Agreements, Trademark registration, Patents, Industrial Designs, Copyrights, or other Intellectual Property, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected].

International IP Index 2024: Indonesia to catch up on IP Commercialization - AFFA IPR

International IP Index 2024: Indonesia to Catch Up on IP Commercialization

Intellectual Property1 Comment

Every year, the United States Chamber of Commerce releases the “International Intellectual Property Index,” which ranks countries worldwide based on their growth in Intellectual Property, commercialization of Intellectual Property assets, law enforcement, system efficiency, and membership and ratification of international treaties. This year, Indonesia is ranked 49th out of 55 countries, or 7th from the bottom. What caused it?   The International Intellectual Property (IP) Index is a comprehensive assessment of the intellectual property framework of countries worldwide. It indirectly shows a country’s policies in encouraging innovation, creativity, economic growth, and wider investment opportunities.   Intellectual Property Becomes an Important Decision for Investment   Intellectual Property as an asset must be recognized. Today’s large companies are at the forefront thanks to their Intellectual Property assets. Technology companies such as Tesla, Apple, Microsoft, and even Walt Disney became rich thanks to the Copyrights, Patents, Trademarks, Industrial Designs, and Trade Secrets they owned. Therefore, when a country cannot provide a climate conducive to protecting Intellectual Property (IP), it is considered to have failed to protect the wealth of its citizens and its business ecosystem. If this is the case, it makes sense that investment in the lowest-rank countries will be smaller than in the upper-rank countries.   The International IP Index published by the United States Chamber of Commerce was first published in 2012. At that time, it only described the performance of 11 countries: the United States, Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, India, England, Canada, Malaysia, Mexico, and Russia. The 12th edition, released in February 2024, has experienced an increase from the previous year, covering 53 countries. This year’s 55 countries have covered over 90% of the world economy’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), so it is hoped to represent the condition of world IP.   From Southeast Asian countries, the IP Index maps the performance of Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, Thailand, and Indonesia as samples. Unfortunately, Indonesia is indeed the lowest in Southeast Asia.   The following is the overall ranking of the 2024 International IP Index:   1 United States 95,48% 29 Peru 49,82% 2 United Kingdom 94,12% 30 Chile 49,72% 3 France 93,12% 31 Colombia 48,84% 4 Germany 92,46% 32 Saudi Arabia 48,42% 5 Sweden 92,12% 33 Brazil 46,52% 6 Japan 91,26% 34 United Arab Emirates 46,00% 7 The Netherlands 91,24% 35 Jordan 44,70%  8 Ireland 89,38% 36 Honduras 42,16% 9 Spainl 86,44% 37 Philippines 41,58%  10 Switzerland 85,98% 38 Brunei 41,08%  11 South Korea 84,94% 39 Ghana 40,88%  12 Singapore 84,92%  40 Vietnam 40,76% 13 Italy 83,90% 41 Ukraine 40,30%  14 Australia 80,70% 42 India 38,64% 15 Hungary 76,90% 43 Thailand 38,28%  16 Canada 76,22% 44 Kenya 37,88% 17 Israel 72,74% 45 South Africa 37,28%  18 Greece 71,42% 46 Argentina 37,00% 19 Poland 70,74% 47 Nigeria 36,34%  20 New Zealand 69,36% 48 Egypt 33,86% 21 Taiwan 67,34% 49 Indonesia 30,40% 22 Morocco 62,76% 50 Ecuador 29,58% 23 Mexico 59,98% 51 Kuwait 28,42% 24 China 57,86% 52 Pakistan 27,42% 25 Dominican Republic 55,30% 53 Algeria 26,36% 26 Costa Rika 55,04% 54 Russia 25,00% 27 Malaysia 53,44% 55 Venezuela 14,10% 28 Turkiye 51,04%   Why is Indonesia’s Ranking Low?   Indonesia’s performance in the index fell 0.02% from the previous year but remained at the same rank.   Indonesia’s Performance based on Indicators Source: 2024 International IP Index – U.S. Chamber of Commerce   From the graph above, it can be seen that the number of Patents owned by Indonesia still needs to be stronger, unable to keep up with the growth of Copyrights, Trademarks, and Industrial Designs. Among all the IPs used as indicators, only Copyright is closest to the Asian average performance.   For other indicators, Indonesia is quite good regarding system efficiency but very low in IP asset commercialization. It is the country with the lowest score for this indicator, recorded at only 4.17%. It is below Ecuador, Venezuela, Ghana, Kenya, Russia, and even Vietnam.   Indonesia’s ranking based on the Commercialization of IP Asset Indicator Source: 2024 International IP Index – U.S. Chamber of Commerce   The commercialization of IP Assets is an indicator that measures the presence of barriers and incentives for the commercialization and licensing of IP assets. In more detail, this indicator includes barriers to technology transfer, registration and disclosure requirements of licensing agreements, direct government intervention in setting licensing terms, and the existence of tax incentives for the creation and commercialization of IP assets.   In particular, the United States Chamber of Commerce assesses that Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 77 of 2020 concerning Procedures for Implementing Patents by the Government has gone far beyond the stated goals and circumstances for the issuing of compulsory licenses under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement, minimum standards for the regulation by national governments of different forms of IP as applied to nationals of other World Trade Organization (WTO) member nations. This presidential regulation is considered to hinder the transfer of technology on Patents, and Biopharmaceutical patentability standards are outside international norms.   However, Indonesia is generally at the bottom of the ranking because its commercialization foundation still needs to be stronger. Public awareness of IP still needs to improve; the knowledge of IP as an asset is minimal. There are still many people who do not appreciate IPs, not because they cannot afford to buy, but because the tendency to enjoy the IPs without paying still exists. Copyright growth is high, but the market hopes these works can be enjoyed for free. As a result, creators scream, and their productivity decreases. This also causes the innovation climate in Indonesia is not good. Because the public still needs to consider innovation to be something that can be commercialized, the growth of Patents from Indonesia is low. dapat dikomersialisasikan, pertumbuhan Paten dari Indonesia pun rendah. To change this mentality, more than education is needed; concrete steps from the government and private sectors are needed to give the highest appreciation to every existing IPs from within and outside the…