The systematic review of the functionality of intellectual property rights in Indonesia

• Published date: 01 May 2022
• Author: Fitri Rini Ariyesti,Muhammad Ghufran,Sumran Ali, Mardawani
• Date: 01 May 2022
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2482

ACADEMIC PAPER

The systematic review of the functionality of intellectual

property rights in Indonesia

Fitri Rini Ariyesti

1

| Muhammad Ghufran

2

| Sumran Ali

1

| Mardawani

3

1

School of Public Affairs, University of Science

and Technology of China, Hefei, China

2

School of Economics, Sapienza University of

Rome, Rome, Italy

3

School of Education, College of Teacher

Training and Education Persada Khatulistiwa

Sintang, Sintang, Indonesia

Correspondence

Sumran Ali, School of Public Affairs, University

of Science and Technology of China Jinzhai

Road 96, Hefei, Anhui Province, 230026,

China.

Email: sumranali@mail.ustc.edu.cn

This study focuses on the functionality of intellectual property right in Indonesia in

both legislative and administrative functions. For this purpose, we considered three

main kinds of intellectual property rights (IPRs) such as trademark, patent and copy-

right which are vital components for development of any country. After carefully

review the three type legislatively and administratively we found that trademark leg-

islation could be reconsidered for facilitation of Indonesian such as legislation of 21 A

and B 2016, which explain about protection of famous international trademark but

74 (1) 2016 legislation only allow to use the international trademark for three succes-

sive years after registration. If they are failing to renew the registration someone can

use these trademarks without the permission of parent company, legally and Indone-

sian government will also protect them. Administratively, in Indonesia, IPRs compli-

ance frameworks leading to loss of trust among businesses and other parties

involved in innovation and inventions because of restricted risk capital; poor investor

and research development networks. In addition that, National legislation related to

IPRs with its kinds has been found incomplete and not sufficient to cover all the

aspects to meet the international standard such as recognition of IPRs on interna-

tional level, Criminal and civil law implementation and border protection system.

1|INTRODUCTION

Protecting intellectual property (IP) rights have become a vital agenda

in many countries, especially developing countries. Intellectual prop-

erty rights (IPRs) are a power weapon that are not yet utilized for inte-

grated results in all countries, in particular developing nations, for

economic growth and the production of capital (Idris, 2003). IPR is a

vital aspect in the profitability of firms in the international economy

(Karius, 2016). As many countries applying free trade areas like the

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to increase the trade

and also increase foreign direct investment (FDI) (Jusoh, Ramli, &

Damuri, 2019) within the counties, here the role of IP is essential. This

is because infringements of IP vary from widespread to commonly

happening in developing countries (Bird, 2006), such as Indonesia.

Mostly, developing countries have not been fully developed yet

regarding IP issues. Although Indonesia is a part of the World Intellec-

tual Property Organization (WIPO) since 1979 (See Table 1), there are

still many cases regarding IP infringement in the country. According to

the Directorate-General of Intellectual Property, from 2016 till 2018,

there were 93 cases of IP infringement reported. Among them,

17 cases consist of 7 (seven) trademark cases, 5 (five) copyright cases,

and 5 (five) industrial design cases. Whereas usually the foreign or

domestic corporations have licensed the brand/logo/character before

the original owner, does not matter how important and famous it is,

Indonesian legal framework would generally be consistent with the

prior for instance superman case, most of times these cases involving

mark disputes occurring in court such as, IKEA Sweden versus IKEA

local.

In 2015, Jokowi, as the president of Indonesia, founded an auton-

omous government department called Creative Economy Agency

“Badan Ekonomy Kreatif: BEKRAF.”The Creative Economy Agency

investigates 16 fields of artistic industries, including literature, archi-

tecture, crafts and decor design, visual art, illustration, production of

noticeable media and television as well as radio and advertising mar-

keting, which provides a wide range of knowledge which content

(Barthos & Sara, 2019). Prior research in ASEAN countries reveals that

Received: 31 August 2020 Revised: 10 September 2020 Accepted: 11 September 2020

DOI: 10.1002/pa.2482

J Public Affairs. 2022;22:e2482. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa © 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 1of5

https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2482