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 16, 2014

Indonesia’s New Copyright Law: The Highlights

Subscribe to Updates
Informed Counsel

Indonesia’s House of Representatives passed the latest draft of the country’s Copyright Bill on September 16, 2014, and it will soon come into law. These latest revisions mark the third set of amendments made in the history of Indonesia’s copyright law.

The new copyright law seeks to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Indonesia’s copyright system, including its enforcement mechanisms, while ensuring compliance with the country’s ratified international conventions.

The changes introduced by the new copyright law are generally favorable to copyright owners. Of particular note is that the changes pave the way for a clearer understanding of the country’s copyright law—a law previously beset by ambiguity.

Clearer Definitions

The new copyright law defines many previously unclear terms including “royalty,” “copyright piracy,” “compensation,” “commercial use,” and “Collection Management Organization.” This will go far toward fostering understanding between copyright owners and law enforcement agencies, as well as between licensors and licensees in the context of license agreements.

Longer Periods of Copyright Protection

The period of protection for most types of copyright works is to be extended from 50 years to 70 years after the death of the author. In the case of a work owned by a legal entity, copyright will remain valid for 50 years from the date of first publication.

Landlord Liability

According to the new copyright law, the management of a trade venue, such as a shopping mall or retail center, is prohibited from allowing the sale and/or reproduction of counterfeit goods which infringe upon the copyright or related rights of others.  

If a landlord deliberately and knowingly allows the sale and/or reproduction of counterfeit goods at their trade venue, the landlord shall be liable to a maximum fine of approximately USD 9,000.

While the criminal sanction for landlord liability excludes imprisonment, the introduction of a fine actually represents a remarkable step for Indonesia’s system of IP law. As an offshoot effect, other pending bills, such as those related to Indonesia’s trademark and patent laws, will most likely introduce a similar provision. This will serve as a strong supporting force to tackle Indonesia’s rampant copyright piracy.

The success of the landlord liability provisions, however, very much relies on the cooperation of the authorities—especially the police and the investigation unit at the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DGIP). Another potentially complicating issue is whether landlords can include a waiver clause in the lease agreement to bypass the provisions and transfer all of the liabilities to the tenant.

Collective Management Organization

In order to assist copyright holders, including authors, to manage and collect a reasonable amount of compensation from users of their copyright works, the new law introduces the concept of Collective Management Organizations.

A Collective Management Organization can be established in the form of a nonprofit legal entity authorized by the copyright holder and/or the author and in possession of an operation permit, obtained from the Minister of Laws and Human Rights. In order to qualify for the operation permit, the Collective Management Organization must meet a requirement to represent a minimum number of copyright holders and/or authors. For example, the minimum number requirement for Collective Management Organizations in the field of songs and music is 200 authorizers of a shared interest.

The Collective Management Organizations should, in theory, be welcomed by all stakeholders, as this system sets out to standardize all of the royalty collection agencies through government control. It should also mitigate the problem posed by malicious, unauthorized collection agencies, which have manipulated copyright law to threaten copyright users such as owners of restaurants and karaoke clubs.

The law stipulates that further details on the procedures of application, issuance of an operation permit, and evaluation of the Collective Management Organizations will be further regulated under forthcoming implementing regulations.     

Prohibition on Recordal of Trademark Logos

As a general rule, a work automatically enjoys copyright protection when it is created, and it is not necessary to register this right. Although registration is not mandatory, the DGIP allows for copyright recordal to enable a copyright holder or author to record their work for purposes of prima facie evidence.

The new law, however, explicitly states that a painting or drawing in the form of a logo or other distinctive sign which is used as a trademark cannot be recorded. But the law does not state whether such trademark logo would be protected under the copyright law. Notably, a drawing of a logo being used as a trademark is not listed among the noncopyrightable works under Article 41.

Copyright of Drawings for Industrial Designs

Under the previous copyright law, an industrial design drawing was precluded from copyright protection, while this preclusion is not seen under the new law. This suggests that it may now be possible to claim copyright protection for an industrial design drawing.

E-Filing of Copyright Recordal

The new copyright law allows for copyright recordal to be made through an online filing system, introduced by the DGIP a few months ago and currently undergoing a trial period. Several more months may be needed for the DGIP to bridge an effective payment system with major local banks to allow for the online payment of official fees.  

The new e-filing system will likely be extended to other types of IP registrations, such as trademarks or patents, in the future.

Online Infringement

To tackle online infringement, the new copyright law empowers the Ministry of Information to block access to infringing material found on the Internet, although details about how this will occur in practice are not yet clear.

A Better IP Landscape for Indonesia

In summary, this new copyright law is a promising step toward improving Indonesia’s IP landscape, and hopefully, this momentum will carry over to other pending bills—notably the trademark and patent bills—as well. The key to successfully implementing this law lies heavily on the implemented regulations to be issued by the Ministry, which will ensure that all mechanisms introduced under the law can function properly.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Intellectual Property

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 14, 2026
Myanmar’s first-to-file trademark registration regime under the Trademark Law 2019—which became fully operational in April 2023—provides mark owners with enhanced legal protection compared with the country’s former system. Correspondingly, the current system imposes more rigorous statutory requirements for obtaining, maintaining, and enforcing rights in marks. In this first-to-file trademark registration system, however, evidence of use remains particularly significant, as it may establish acquired distinctiveness, support a claim that a mark is well-known, and strengthen the owner’s position in both registration and enforcement proceedings. Accordingly, it can be said that this framework is underpinned by three key concepts: distinctiveness, well-known status, and, importantly, use of the trademark. Trademark Distinctiveness Under the Trademark Law, signs that lack distinctiveness are generally ineligible for mark protection. These signs include generic terms, basic shapes, unstylized single letters or numerals, and signs that merely describe the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, production time, or other characteristics of the relevant goods or services. However, a mark that would otherwise be refused on distinctiveness or descriptiveness grounds may be registrable if it has acquired distinctiveness through its use prior to the filing date. To show this, the applicant must demonstrate that the mark became distinctive to relevant consumers through continuous, exclusive, and good-faith use in trade within Myanmar. The burden of proving acquired distinctiveness rests with the mark owner. Accordingly, sufficient evidence demonstrating both use of the mark and the level of consumer recognition attained should be prepared in advance. Well-Known Mark Criteria Myanmar’s Trademark Rules, which govern the substantive examination of mark registration applications, establish criteria for determining well-known marks, aligned with international standards. Where an applicant claims well-known status—whether to overcome a refusal on relative grounds or to oppose a third party’s registration—the registrar will assess the claim based on the following
Read More
September 14, 2026
On August 23, 2026, Vietnam’s National Assembly passed Law No. 11/2026/QH16, amending the country’s Customs Law with effect from March 1, 2027. The amendments represent a substantial reform of Vietnam’s customs-based intellectual property enforcement regime. The reforms come amid considerable external pressure. In its 2026 Special 301 review, the US Trade Representative (USTR) designated Vietnam a “priority foreign country,” citing widespread counterfeiting, weak border enforcement, limited ex officio customs powers, and the absence of controls over goods in transit. Vietnam’s legislative response signals a commitment to bringing its border enforcement practices into line with international expectations. For IP rights holders operating in or through Vietnam, the amended law introduces several tools that substantially strengthen enforcement options at the border. Closing the Transit Gap One of the most consequential amendments is the extension of IP-related customs enforcement to goods in transit. Previously, Vietnam’s customs regime applied IP controls only to goods being imported or exported, a gap the USTR had specifically identified as enabling infringing goods to pass through Vietnamese ports with impunity. Vietnam’s geographic position as a logistics hub for Southeast Asia means that substantial volumes of goods transit its ports and free-trade zones. Extending enforcement to cover these shipments brings Vietnam closer to the standard set by the EU’s customs enforcement regulation and addresses a longstanding concern of multinational brand owners whose goods are frequently counterfeited in the region. Strengthened Suspension and Ex Officio Powers The amended law introduces a dual-track suspension mechanism (Article 73(2)). Customs authorities will suspend clearance upon request by an IP rights holder (or authorized representative) who provides evidence of IP ownership, evidence of infringement, and a financial guarantee. Customs can now proactively suspend clearance on an ex officio basis if, during inspection and monitoring, they discover “clear grounds” to suspect that imported, exported,
Read More
September 7, 2026
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) has reinstated a key provision limiting pharmaceutical patent protection, signaling a renewed commitment to balancing patent rights with public access to medicines. In its ruling to Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, the court partially granted a petition for judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024, which had amended the country’s Patent Law, and ordered the restoration of a provision that had excluded certain pharmaceutical inventions from patentability. The decision took effect immediately upon its pronouncement at the court’s plenary session on August 28, 2026. Background The petition challenged the removal of article 4(f) from Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning Patents (Patent Law), as amended by Law No. 65 of 2024. Article 4(f) had excluded from patentability certain inventions relating to new uses of known substances. The petitioners argued that removing this provision would open the door to patent protection for second medical use inventions and facilitate patent evergreening—practices that can extend exclusivity periods, delay generic market entry, and reduce public access to affordable medicines. The petitioners included several patient advocacy and public-interest organizations: the Indonesian Dialysis Patients Community Association, the Indonesian Association of Drug Abuse Victims (PKNI), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI), the Rekat Peduli Indonesia Foundation, and the Indonesian Positive Women’s Association (IPPI), along with the Indonesia for Global Justice Association and four individual petitioners. The petitioners also challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “interested party” in article 70(1) of the Patent Law, arguing that it should be construed expressly to clarify who has standing to appeal a decision to grant a patent before the Board of Patent Appeal, and to allow a broader range of parties—such as patent holders, licensees, consumer organizations, prosecutors, aggrieved third parties, and others who may suffer direct or indirect harm from the grant of a patent—to
Read More
September 2, 2026
Thailand and China have a longstanding and significant trade relationship, which increasingly extends to e-commerce and digitally enabled supply chains. While these channels create new opportunities for businesses to reach consumers across borders, their growth also brings greater exposure to intellectual property (IP) infringement across jurisdictions and online platforms. Effective cooperation between the two countries’ enforcement authorities has therefore become increasingly important. To strengthen cooperation in this area, Thailand and China signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on IP enforcement in Beijing on July 20, 2026, during the Thai prime minister’s official visit to China. Officially titled “Memorandum of Understanding Between the State Administration for Market Regulation of the People’s Republic of China and the Ministry of Commerce of the Kingdom of Thailand on Cooperation in the Field of Intellectual Property Enforcement,” the MOU forms part of a broader bilateral agenda covering industrial and supply chains, participation by micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), cooperation associated with the ASEAN–China Free Trade Area 3.0, and progress on the registration of Thai geographical indications in China. The MOU establishes a bilateral framework for cooperation and coordination in five broad areas: Strengthening dialogue in IP enforcement; Enhancing information sharing; Facilitating the enforcement of IP rights in cases arising in the parties’ domestic markets and on online platforms, in accordance with their respective domestic laws; Promoting cooperation in IP enforcement training and human resource development; and Undertaking other cooperation activities agreed upon by both sides. The Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) will serve as the principal coordinating agency for Thailand, while the Bureau of Law Enforcement and Inspection in China’s State Administration for Market Regulation (SAMR) will serve in that role for China. The framework is particularly relevant to the growth of e-commerce, as it covers infringement in the domestic markets and on
Read More