You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

October 17, 2016

Indonesia: Annuity Payments for Existing Patents Must Be Made by December 30, 2016

The Indonesian Directorate General of Intellectual Property has issued a new circular that clarifies how the authorities will handle annuity payments for patents that were granted before the enactment of the Law No. 13 of 2016 on Patent (the new patent law). As explained below, all owners of existing Indonesian patents will need to make additional annuity payments before the end of this year to ensure compliance.

The new patent law, enacted on August 26, 2016, introduced changes in how annuity payments are calculated, moving to a system where an annuity payment is due at the beginning of the protection period in order to receive protection for the following period. This change from the past system, under which annuity payments were previously due at the end of each protection period, left patent owners wondering how their payments would be impacted under the new law.

The circular answers this question, and the impact is significant for all owners of existing patents. Under the circular, any unpaid annuities for patents registered before August 26, 2016, must be paid according to the rules set out in the new patent law. The circular sets up a transition period for payment to be made between August 26 and December 30, 2016. Failure to submit the annuity payment by December 30, 2016, will result in the patent being canceled.

This means that all patent owners who wish to maintain their patents must pay an annuity before December 30, 2016. Every owner of an Indonesian patent should therefore urgently review their patent portfolio to assess the annuity payments that need to be made, so as to ensure that their granted patents are not cancelled under the new law.

This requirement is set out in Circular HKI-3-08.OT.02.02 of 2016, dated September 30, 2016, and made available to the public on October 12, 2016. In the November issue of our Informed Counsel newsletter, we will provide expanded details and analysis on annuity fee calculation in Indonesia under the new patent law.

If you have any questions on payment of patent annuity fees in Indonesia, please contact us at [email protected].

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

March 6, 2025
Vietnam’s government is currently undergoing a significant restructuring, consolidating and eliminating various agencies with the aim of streamlining operations and increasing efficiency. The restructuring will bring notable changes to the country’s intellectual property (IP) landscape. We discuss below key developments that may influence IP protection and enforcement in Vietnam in the coming years. Mergers of Ministries One of the most notable changes in the restructuring is the merger of several ministries, including the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) and the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST). Vietnam’s Intellectual Property Office is a unit under MOST; therefore, this merger is expected to impact various aspects of IP administration and enforcement. With the newly merged ministry—which is expected to retain the name of MOST—actively supporting the development of the digital economy, further advancements in digital tools for IP administration and prosecution are anticipated. This could include enhancements in e-filing, online procedures, and digital payment systems, contributing to greater accessibility and efficiency in IP-related services. Domain name disputes can also expect to see a more coordinated approach under the new ministry. Previously, jurisdiction over domain name disputes was divided between MIC and MOST, sometimes leading to procedural complexities. With both areas now under a single ministry, these matters are expected to be handled more seamlessly, potentially with a model aligned with the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). Structural Changes in Inspection Authorities The restructuring also affects inspection authorities responsible for IP enforcement, particularly those under MOST and the Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism (MOCST). These changes may cause temporary delays in administrative enforcement actions: The MOST Inspectorate, which handles industrial property violations, may experience slower enforcement during the transition. The MOCST Inspectorate, responsible for copyright enforcement, may face similar disruptions. However, these delays are expected to be temporary,
February 3, 2025
Thailand’s aim of hosting entertainment complexes that include casinos is moving forward with the cabinet’s approval in principle of the draft Entertainment Complex Business Act on January 13, 2025. In fact, Thailand has studied the pros and cons of allowing the operation of entertainment complexes since March 2019. Though the initial surge of global interest died down during the COVID-19 pandemic, the country renewed its efforts with the recent draft law. This is part of the government’s aim of bringing parts of the informal economy (or shadow economy) and the underground economy—estimated to be more than 50% of Thailand’s GDP—into the revenue system. While many authors have provided analyses of the bill’s contents, this article explores how the enforcement of the Entertainment Complex Bill after its passage would relate to various aspects of intellectual property (IP) in the casino business in the context of Thai law. Below are some examples of the potential effects of the draft legislation on IP rights in Thailand. Public Order and Public Policy Under Thai law, contradiction of public order, good morality, or public policy is grounds for denying IP protection. With the eventual passage and enforcement of the Entertainment Complex Bill, IP rights related to gaming that used to be regarded as contrary to the public order and received no protection under the current law would become eligible for legal protection and considered registrable under the law. This is similar to what happened recently with cannabis in Thailand. Legalization of cannabis opened up pathways for trademark and patent protection in this industry. IP in the casino industry encompasses a wide range of assets, including patents, trademarks, copyrights, and trade secrets. These IP rights protect the unique features of casino games, gaming machines, software, and branding elements. For instance, in Thailand patents can cover
January 29, 2025
The fourth round of negotiations of the EU-Thailand Free Trade Agreement (FTA) wrapped up in Bangkok in November 2024. Now that the latest summary report is out, it is worth highlighting some of the intellectual property (IP)-related changes we might see once the chapter is complete. Copyright If Thailand were to agree to follow the EU proposal, we would see the term of protection for copyright extended. Currently under Thai law, protection is the life of the author plus fifty years. This is twenty years less than the EU proposal. It seems that copyright is one area the two sides have yet to agree on, and it is no wonder as agreeing to follow Thai law would deprive authors from the EU of an additional twenty years of protection post-death. On the other hand, Thailand agreeing to the EU proposal would likely result in legislative change in the country to align domestic law with the FTA. We may also see more robust and streamlined collective management organizations (CMOs) in Thailand. The current proposal calls for each party to promote cooperation between their CMOs, which would extend to transparency over their running, including revenue and representation agreements. Thailand does currently have CMOs within the territory, and the Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) has a voluntary CMO code. However, it is unclear whether existing practice will be sufficient for EU rightsholders. CMOs have been an area that is difficult to regulate as there has been a balancing act between tightening the examination of reporting and not wanting to limit the freedom of rightsholders and how they commercialize their IP. Trademarks There is a fair amount of overlap between the Trademark Act in Thailand and the EU proposals. However, it is unclear to what degree the existing laws would satisfy the requests