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​ 

July 24, 2026
As food innovation continues to accelerate, manufacturers are increasingly introducing ingredients derived from new sources, produced using novel technologies, or lacking a significant history of human consumption. While these innovations create new opportunities for the food industry, they also raise important questions regarding consumer safety. For this reason, many jurisdictions, including Thailand, the European Union, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, and Singapore, require a premarket safety assessment for novel food ingredients before they can be placed on the market. The objective of this assessment is to ensure that each ingredient is safe for its intended use and level of consumption, does not present toxicological, allergenic, microbiological, or nutritional concerns, and will not mislead consumers. Scientific authorities typically evaluate the ingredient’s identity, manufacturing process, composition, specifications, anticipated dietary exposure, toxicological information, nutritional impact, and history of use before determining whether it can be marketed. Against this background, the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently took an important step toward improving regulatory transparency by publishing, for the first time, a consolidated public list of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process, including substances determined to be novel foods and those determined not to fall within the novel food category. The list identifies the approved substances, the corresponding manufacturers or importers, approval dates, and the approved conditions of use. Although the publication does not change the existing legal framework governing novel food approvals, it provides businesses with greater visibility into the Thai FDA’s regulatory precedents and the types of substances that have previously been accepted through the safety assessment process. The full announcement is available on the Thai FDA’s website. As the list is now publicly available, it also provides useful insight into the types of substances that have successfully completed the Thai FDA’s safety assessment process.
Read More
July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
Read More
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
Read More
July 15, 2026
Ambush marketing refers to a strategy in which a business associates itself with an event, campaign, or brand without paying for official sponsorship rights. The tactic is most visible in sports, concerts, and festivals, where official sponsors have invested substantially for exclusivity. Ambush marketers may use suggestive wording, event-themed imagery, athlete endorsements, venue-adjacent promotions, or social media campaigns implying a commercial connection with the event. Common Forms of Ambush Marketing Ambush marketing typically takes one of the following forms: Direct ambushing: using event names, logos, or mascots suggesting authorization Coattail ambushing: sponsoring an athlete or broadcaster connected with the event Subtle ambushing: themed advertising, venue-adjacent campaigns, or similar visual cues The legal analysis in each case turns on whether the marketing crosses from permissible event-based advertising into infringement, passing off, deception, or wrongful exploitation of goodwill, and the risk assessment is necessarily fact-specific. Thailand has no dedicated ambush marketing statute, so legality depends on execution. A campaign that merely comments on a public event may be permissible, but one that uses protected marks, creates consumer confusion, misrepresents sponsorship status, or makes unsubstantiated claims may trigger liability under various Thai laws, as laid out below. Ambush Marketing and Thailand’s Trademark Act The Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) is the primary tool for addressing campaigns that use registered trademarks, event names, logos, mascots, or confusingly similar signs. The law gives registered trademark owners the exclusive right to use their mark for registered goods, and infringement risk arises when a nonsponsor uses an event mark or a confusingly similar sign in advertising. Even referential or playful use may create liability if it causes public confusion as to sponsorship or commercial connection. The law also preserves passing-off claims for unregistered marks. This matters because event names, taglines, or mascots may not always be
Read More