Super-Mario-Bros-Huge-Success-affa-global

Super Mario Bros, Huge Success of a Video Game IP on the Big Screen

The Super Mario Bros. Movie is a 2023 American computer-animated comedy film produced by Illumination Entertainment and distributed by Universal Pictures. Based on a video game franchise of the same name that was first released in 1985. The film was directed by Aaron Horvath and Michael Jelenic, and stars Chris Pratt as Mario, Charlie Day as Luigi, Anya Taylor-Joy as Princess Peach, and Jack Black as Bowser. In the film, Mario and his brother Luigi team up to rescue Princess Peach from Bowser. The film was released in the United States on April 7, 2023. It received mixed reviews from critics, but was a true box office success, grossing over $1.21 billion worldwide while the budget was only $100 million. The film became the highest-grossing film of 2023, the highest-grossing film based on a video game, and the highest-grossing animated film of 2023. With those records, this movie has beaten ‘John Wick: Chapter 4,’ ‘Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania,’ ‘Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3,’ and all ‘Toy Story’ movies that are owned by Disney-Pixar. Since its first release, the Super Mario Bros franchise designed by Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka has become a cultural icon and a household name around the world. The Italian plumber Mario and Luigi have entertained gamers for over three decades, appearing in more than 200 games and generating billions of dollars in revenue, with more than 58 million copies sold worldwide. The decision to bring Super Mario Bros to the big screen once again is a smart move for Nintendo, the company behind the franchise. In recent years, the company has made a concerted effort to expand the reach of its IP beyond video games, with successful ventures into mobile games, merchandise, and theme parks. The upcoming park would be in Singapore and it is scheduled to open in 2025. With the popularity of the franchise showing no signs of waning, it seems that Mario and his friends will continue to be a beloved part of popular culture for years to come. In conclusion, having an established IP can provide a promising future for any individual or company in the entertainment industry. It offers a recognized brand and loyal fanbase that can increase revenue through various streams of merchandise, licensing, and media adaptations. With the rise of new technologies and platforms, the potential for growth and success is only expanding. However, do not forget to protect and manage the IP to maintain its value and integrity. With proper management and strategic planning, an established IP can continue to thrive and bring joy to audiences for years to come.   If you need more information about how to protect your IP(s) in Indonesia and other countries, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. Source: Boxofficemojo.com    

Protecting-Your-Food-Recipes-affa-global

Protecting Your Food Recipes: A Step-by-Step Guide

Your food recipes are a valuable asset. They represent your creativity, hard work, and passion. That’s why it’s important to protect them as a trade secret from being stolen or plagiarized. Here are some tips on how to protect your food recipes: Document Your Recipe. This means writing down the ingredients, measurements, and steps involved in making the recipe. Be as specific and detailed as possible. Keep Your Recipe Secret. Don’t share it with anyone, not even friends, family, or colleagues. If you do share it with someone, make sure they sign a non-disclosure agreement (NDA). Also, consider the following steps: a) Use a password-protected computer or file-sharing service to store your recipes. b) Don’t post your recipes on social media or other public forums. c) If you are considering selling your recipes, be sure to consult with an attorney to discuss your options. d) If the recipe is not documented in a digital document, please ensure to keep it in a restricted place (i.e. safe deposit box). Keep Your Recipe Documentation Updated As you continue to refine and improve your recipe, be sure to keep your documentation up to date. This will ensure that you always have an accurate and complete record of your recipe, which can be useful in the event of a legal dispute. By following these tips, you can help protect your food recipes and trade secret from being stolen or plagiarized. So, go ahead and share your culinary creations with the world, knowing that you have taken steps to protect your trade secret.   If you need more advice for protecting your trade secret in Indonesia and other countries, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. Sources: Nolo.com LegalVision.com

Ed-Sheeran-Found-Not-Liable-affa-global

Ed Sheeran Found Not Liable for Plagiarizing Marvin Gaye

A federal jury in New York City found on Thursday that Ed Sheeran did not copy Marvin Gaye’s classic “Let’s Get It On” for his own 2014 hit “Thinking Out Loud.” The verdict came after a two-week trial in which Sheeran and his co-writers testified that they came up with the song independently. The lawsuit was filed by the heirs of Ed Townsend, who co-wrote “Let’s Get It On.” They argued that “Thinking Out Loud” copied the structure, melody, and rhythm of their song. However, the jury found that the similarities between the two songs were not substantial enough to constitute copyright infringement. The verdict is a victory for Sheeran, who has been one of the most successful pop stars in the world in recent years. It is also a setback for the heirs of Townsend, who had hoped to win a large settlement from Sheeran. The case was closely watched by the music industry, as it could have set a precedent for future copyright infringement cases. The verdict suggests that courts will be reluctant to find copyright infringement when there are only superficial similarities between two songs. This is not the first time that Sheeran has been accused of plagiarism. In 2017, he settled a lawsuit with the songwriters of the song “Amazing” by Matt Cardle. The songwriters alleged that Sheeran had copied the melody of their song for his own song “Photograph.” Sheeran has denied all allegations of plagiarism. He has said that he writes his songs from scratch and that he does not intentionally copy other artists’ work. The verdict in the Marvin Gaye case is a relief for Sheeran and his fans. It is also a victory for the music industry, as it sends a message that courts will not be quick to find copyright infringement in cases where there are only superficial similarities between two songs.   If you need further information about copyright recordation in Indonesia and other countries, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. Source: The Guardian

Katy-Perry-v-Katie-Perry-affa

Battle of Trademark: Katy Perry v Katie Perry Unfortunately, the singer lost in Australia.

In a trademark dispute, having a big name sometimes guarantees a win, but only sometimes. When Katy Perry, the owner of five Billboard Music Awards and a judge on American Idol with 108 million followers on Twitter, held concerts in Australia in 2014 and 2018, she sold a lot of fashion products through retail and social media using the trademark “Katy Perry,” which is owned by her company, Killer Queen, LLC. However, it turned out that there was already a similar trademark in Australia with a similar pronunciation, namely “Katie Perry” (with ie), which had been registered by a designer named Katie Taylor in the fashion category (Nice Class 25) since 2008. In 2009, Katy Perry’s lawyers actually tried to cancel Katie’s trademark and sent a “Cease and Desist Order” letter so she wouldn’t use the trademark again, but this effort was not pursued. After Katy Perry’s 2018 concert, which once again sold fashion products, Katie decided to strike back by reporting “Katy Perry” for ignoring the existence of “Katie Perry,” which has homophonous and had already been officially registered in IP Australia Finally, on Thursday, April 27, 2023, Australian Federal Court Judge Brigitte Markovic ruled that Killer Queen, LLC. had been proven to have infringed on some of Katie Taylor’s trademarks and ordered them to compensate for the damages with a certain amount that will be decided later. In response to this victory, Katie Taylor made a statement on her website, “Not only have I fought [for] myself, but I fought for small businesses in this country, many of them started by women, who can find themselves up against overseas entities who have much more financial power than we do. This victory could not have been achieved if Katie had not registered her trademark first. By registering a trademark, the owner obtains their rights, and the state provides legal protection so that the trademark’s economic rights are not violated. In Indonesia, a trademark can only be protected if an application for registration is filed first, and prior use of the trademark cannot be used as a basis for protection. This is because the ‘First to File’ approach is adopted by Law No. 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications.   If you need further information about trademark registration in Indonesia and other countries, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. Sources: Reuters.com Nine.com.au WIPO Global Brand Database

Patent-Granted-2021-affa-global

China Dominates Patent Grants, Beating USA & Japan

Patent grants involve a comprehensive examination and review by the relevant government authority to ensure that the invention satisfies specific legal requirements such as novelty, non-obviousness, and industrial applicability.  The patent office conducts a search to determine if the invention has already been patented or disclosed by others and may request additional information or amendment of the application. The high volume of patent applications can also cause delays in the processing of the application. These measures are in place to ensure that only truly innovative and practical inventions are granted patent protection. That’s why it takes more than a year to be granted. The following chart was created based on Patent application data in 2021 that have been granted as of February 2023, where China dominates with 607,758 patents or about 38% of the total. In addition, China dominates in 29 categories: 1. Computer & Technology 2. Electrical, Machinery, Apparatus, & Energy 3. Digital Communication 4. Measurement 5. Transport 6. Civil Engineering 7. Other Special Machines 8. Audio Visual Technology 9. Machine Tools 10. Chemical Engineering 11. Handling 12. Pharmaceuticals 13. Materials & Metallurgy 14. Control 15. Mechanical Elements 16. Telecommunications 17. Basic Materials Chemistry 18. Biotechnology 19. Organic Fine Chemistry 20. IT Methods for Management 21. Macromolecular Chemistry & Polymers 22. Other Consumer Goods 23. Environmental Technology 24. Thermal Processes & Apparatus 25. Surface Technology Coating 26. Textile & Paper Machines 27. Food Chemistry 28. Analysis of Biological Material 29. Micro Structural & Nano Technology 30.  31. 32.  33.    Meanwhile, the United States only obtained 286,206 patents granted, only 18% or less than half of China’s total. The United States only dominates in the categories of Medical Technology, Engine Pumps & Turbines, Basic Communication Processes, and Other Unknown Inventions. Next, there is Japan with 256,890 patents granted, or about 16% of the composition. Japan leads in the categories of Semiconductors, Optics, as well as Furnitures & Games.     What about Indonesia? Data from WIPO (World Intellectual Property Organization) which can be accessed through www3.wipo.int/ipstats/ shows that Indonesia only had 756 patents granted in 2021. This number is lower than Singapore with 4,034 and Malaysia with 1,583. These Indonesian patents are dominated by inventions originating from state universities, such as Andalas University, Brawijaya University, Gadjah Mada University, Diponegoro University, and Bandung Institute of Technology. If you need further information about patent registration in Indonesia and other countries, please do not hesitate to contact us at [email protected]. Sources: OBIS: omnibisolutions.com WIPO IP Stats

[URGENT UPDATE] Key Changes to the Indonesian Patent and Trademark Laws after the Enactment of the Law No. 11 Year 2020 on Job Creations

The Law No. 11 Year 2020 on Job Creations (hereinafter referred to as “the Omnibus Law”) was finally signed by the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Joko Widodo, on November 2, 2020. The Omnibus Law is 1,187 pages long and it consists of numerous revisions to the existing laws that are aimed to spur job creations in Indonesia. While it puts a stronger emphasis on the Employment Law, the Omnibus Law – after several amendments – also impacted key provisions in the Law No. 13 Year 2016 on Patents (hereinafter referred to as “the Patent Law”) and the Law No. 20 Year 2016 on Marks and Geographical Indications (hereinafter referred to as “the Trademark Law”). We herewith list the changes and revisions for your perusal: Changes to the Patent Law Simple Patent Article 3 of the Patent law has been revised to the following: (1) A Patent is granted for a novel invention, which has inventive steps and can be applied industrially. (2) Whereas a Simple Patent for a novel invention, which is the development of a product or a process that already exists and can be applied industrially. (3) The development of an existing product or process can cover: Simple products: Simple processes; or Simple methods. In addition, Article 122 of the Patent Law also regulates the following requirements regarding the Substantive Examination Request for a Simple Patent: (1) A Simple Patent is only granted for one Invention. (2) The Request for the Substantive Examination for a Simple Patent shall be done at the same time as the time of the filing of the application with official fees. (3) If the Substantive Examination Request is not filed at the time of filing of the Simple Patent application or if the Official Fees are not paid, then the Simple Patent application is considered withdrawn. Whereas Article 123 of the Patent Law which regulates the publication period is amended as under: (1) The publication of a Simple Patent shall be done no later than 14 days from the date of filing of the Simple Patent Application. (2) The publication as referred to (1) shall be done for 14 working days. (3) The Substantive Examination is conducted after the publication has ended. (4) Except for the provisions in Article 48 Para (3) and (4), an opposition against a Simple Patent application is used as a determining factor during the Substantive Examination Stage. Article 124 of the Patent Law is also amended so that the Substantive Examination period is cut by half: (1) The Minister shall issue a decision to grant/reject a Simple Patent no later than 6 months from the date of the application date of the Simple Patent. (2) A Simple Patent which is granted by the Minister shall be recorded and published via electronic or non-electronic media. (3) The Minister issues a Simple Patent certificate to the Patent Owner as the proof of ownership. Use Requirements in Indonesia remain in place despite the initial plan and proposal to scrap it altogether The initial plan to scrap Article 20 of the Patent Law was scrapped at the very last minute. Nevertheless, the Use Requirements have become “more accommodating” since it lists importation and licensing as the definition of use. Article 20 has been reworded as under: (1) A Patent shall be used/performed in Indonesia. (2) The patent performance as referred to in (1) is as under: The use/performance of a Patented product by manufacturing, importing, or licensing the patented product; The use/performance of a Patented process by manufacturing, importing, or licensing the product which has been resulted from a patented process; or The use/performance of a Patented method, system, and use by manufacturing, importing or licensing a product which has been resulted from a method, system, and use which has been patented. Changes to the Compulsory-Licensing Article 82 which regulates Compulsory-Licensing has been reworded as under: (1) A Compulsory-License is a License to use/perform a Patent which has been granted by a Ministerial Decree or based on a request under the following conditions: A Patent has not been used/performed in Indonesia as per Article 20 for 36 months after it was granted; A Patent which has been used/performed by a Patent Holder or by the Licensee in a way that is detrimental to the public interest or A Patent resulting from the development of the existing Patents granted earlier could not be implemented without using the other party’s Patents which are still under protection. (2) The Compulsory-License request will be subject to the payment of official fees. Changes to the Trademark Law Some provisions in the Trademark Law have also been revised in the Omnibus Law. The most notable changes are as under: Functional 3D Mark is no longer registrable in Indonesia According to the revised Article 20 of the Trademark Law, a Mark cannot be registered if: It is contrary to the state ideology, prevailing laws, and regulations, religious values, decency, or public order: It is the same, related to, or simply states the goods and/or services covered in the application; It contains a misleading element concerning the origin, quality, type, size, option, the purpose of use of the goods and/or services covered in the application or if the application is a name of a plant variety that is registered for the same goods and/or services; It contains inaccurate information regarding the quality, benefit, or efficacy of the goods and/or services that are produced; It lacks distinguishing elements; It is a common name and/or public symbol; and/or It contains a shape that is functional. Shorter Substantive Examination period Article 23 of the Trademark Law circumvents the Substantive Examination period from 150 working days to 30 days if there is no opposition or 90 days if there is an opposition. The amended provision is as under: (1) A Substantive Examination is an examination that is conducted by an Examiner for every Trademark Application. (2) All oppositions and/or objections are considered in the Substantive Examination. (3) If there is no opposition filed…