Creating Value Through Industrial Design

W. Yogi Widodo

Industrial design shall mean a creation on the shape, configuration, or the composition of lines or colours, or the combination thereof in a three or two dimensional form which gives aesthetic impression and can be realised in a three or two dimensional pattern and used to produce a product, goods or an industrial commodity and a handy craft (Article 1, Industrial Design Law No. 31 Year 2000).

In today’s world, where business competition is on the rise, it is becoming increasingly necessary to create, improve and maintain the image of a company. The recognition of the importance of brand value and brand awareness is increasing tremendously. It is undeniable that the value of a well-known trademark is sometimes greater than the value of the tangible assets of a company. However, customers of today are often attracted to the design of the product or its packaging before they decide to buy it. That is why, besides a trademark, a design can also be used as a tool in enhancing sales of a product, and subsequently, adding value of the company.

The industrial design comprises two categories, product design and packaging design. The concept of the design, both for product or packaging should represent the visual identity of the company. Ideally, the design should meet the following criteria: practical, distinctive, aesthetic, appropriate, ergonomical, simple and communicative. The creation of an excellent design is very much dependent on the quality of the product itself. It takes a lot of research and monetary resource to come up with a winning design. An ideal design would be one that is unique, eye-catching, easy to be remembered, easy to be related to or understood, is different and expresses the product characteristic well.

Take a look at your competitor’s design. Compared to yours, which one is more attractive? An attractive and interesting design together with a well-known trademark is a perfect combination. Bad faith competitors usually take advantage of the above combination. They use a similar or even identical design which is well recognised, but put their own trademark on the design. The customers will assume that they are about to buy the product they know and they want, but actually they purchase a different product with similar design. Does this act constitute trademark infringement? No, it does not. This act is what we call “passing-off”. In order to ensure that the product is completely protected, it is necessary to protect both trademark and industrial design.

There is no wonder why the world-class enterprises spend millions of dollars every year to develop their industrial designs. They completely realise that the design has a big impact to their sales revenue. So, get your industrial design protected as soon as possible!!!.

CAN A SIMPLE INVENTION BE PATENTED? WHY NOT..!!

W. Yogi Widodo

Should a patent be something related only to hi-tech and very complicated inventions?

To answer this question, please remember that the basic principle of patentability of an invention is to consider its novelty, inventive steps and industrial applicability.

As we are aware technology has developed rapidly, therefore there are only few patented inventions are still novel (except in the fields of bio-technology and bio-genetics). Recently, most patents have only covered the inventive step and the industrial applicability.

Note that the inventive step of an invention means that other people have invented it before (so called prior arts), but the new inventor did some modifications or developments on it so that the new invention is able to solve the problems that cannot be solved by the prior arts. And it can be a very simple invention..!

For an example showing that the inventive step does not need to be hi-tech and complicated, here we will look at US Patent No. 6,415,530 to H. Kevin Coplon (Indonesian), entitled “Method, system and shoe enabling the determination of fit from outside of the shoe”.

Many types of shoes are already well known. Some known shoes provide means for determining whether they fit. However, none of the prior art provides a way to determine whether a shoe will fit from outside the shoe. For example, a person may be in a hurry and not want to take the time to try on a shoe. Also, room to try on a shoe may not be available where the shoe is sold. Also, a shoe may be sold where there is insufficient experienced staff to help a person choose the correct size. In addition, a person buying a shoe for a child may not be able to determine the room within the shoe for growth of a child's foot.

For example, U.S. Patent No. 5,014,041 to Rosen and U.S. Patent No. 5,084,988 to Berger disclose shoes that have transparent soles through to the interior of the shoe to show when a foot has outgrowing a shoe. These patents require that a person wear the shoe before being able to determine whether they fit. Additionally, Rosen and Berger suffer from the fact that over time the transparent soles may discolour and get scuffs so that a person could not look through them.

The uses of removable insoles or socks with printed length areas which are removable from the inside of the shoe are known in the industry. In addition, U.S. Patent No. 2,464,571 to Gardner discloses a removable shoe-fit indicator which indicates the fit of the shoe on the child on an insole. To use the Gardner indicator, a person must put colouring on the removable indicator which will colour a child's toes or socks to indicate the fit of the shoe. The interior piece would make the process of making the shoe more expensive, and would impact upon the comfort of the shoe. The use of colouring makes Gardner messy and inconvenient. 

Patterns on the outsole of a shoe are also known. U.S. Patent No. 4,266,349 to Schmohl discloses a profile pattern on a sole that has a plurality of concentric circles. The profile pattern in Schmohl is irrelevant to the issue of fit; it used for the absorption and transfer of the forces acting upon the sole.

None of the devices in the above references solve the problem of determining whether a shoe will fit a person's foot without the person trying on the shoe. Furthermore, none of the devices solve the problem of determining the room for growth that a shoe may have without trying on the shoe. Each of the prior art references above require a person to try on a shoe at least once.

From the above illustration and brief description of related arts, we find that the principal object of this invention is to provide a shoe wherein a person can determine whether a shoe fits without trying it on. This invention is a system including a shoe or a shoe with an outsole having a reference gauge at the proximal end of the outsole for placing the heel of the foot; and a first reference mark at the distal end of the outsole corresponding to where the toes of the foot should extend when the heel is placed on the reference gauge to ensure a proper fit of the shoe on the foot.

Now we can conclude that a simple invention can be patented also. And furthermore, a patent need not be related to a hi-tech and very complicated invention. So, let’s invent and get your inventions patented..!

PATENT TIPS – How To File A Patent Application in Indonesia?

W. Yogi  Widodo

Is it difficult to file a patent application in Indonesia? No, it is not! It is as easy as 1-2-3, as you will see below:

Step 1:

Send copies of the description, abstract, claims and drawings of the invention to your patent attorney along with the original executed supporting documents, namely:

• Power of Attorney, executed by the applicant(s); and
• Assignment of Invention, executed by the inventor(s).

Please note that the above supporting documents do not need to be legalized and/or notarized.

If the patent application was filed claiming the Priority Right in the country of origin, please also send the Priority Document to your patent attorney. Remember that the patent application must be filed not later than 12 months as from the Filing Date.

Step 2:

Your patent attorney will need to translate the description, abstract, claims and drawings into Indonesian language. It is essential that they are properly translated.

Step 3:

Your patent attorney will fill in and then execute the application form. Once the translations of the description, abstract, claims and drawings have been completed and the original supporting documents have been provided, the patent application is ready to be filed at the Indonesian Patent Office.

The filing procedure has been simplified recently in order to more easily allow foreigners to file their patents applications in Indonesia, since the Patent Office has released a Notification Letter notifying that certain documents do not need to be submitted as part of a foreign patent application utilizing the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). These documents will be sent directly by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) to the Patent Office.

The relevant documents are:

1. The International Search Report (ISR) form
2. International Preliminary Examination Report (IPER) form
3. Copy of the International Application as originally filed
4. Copy of International Search Report and English Translation
5. Copy of any Amendments to the Claims under Article 19
6. Copy of Priority Documents, and
7. Any other document related to the International Phase.

Because these documents will no longer need to be submitted, it is anticipated that the patent application submission process for individuals and organizations will be simplified while ensuring that the relevant patent offices are not inundated with unnecessary paperwork related to an application.

Pengacara Jalanan - Yogi 'Jay' Widodo

W. Yogi Widodo (Yogi) is the Founding Partner and also the Managing Partner of Kantor DANOEWIRONO WIDODO & Partners (KDWP) Advocates & Legal Consultant.

He has been practicing for more than ten years, gained his experiences from joining one of state-owned enterprises in manufacturing industry and two reputable and prominent law firms in Jakarta, i.e. Lubis, Santosa Maulana; and Soemadipradja & Taher.

He obtained two bachelor’s degrees, i.e. Bachelor of Laws (Jakarta, Indonesia) and Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering (Jogjakarta, Indonesia); and two master’s degrees, i.e. Master of Laws (Florida, US) and Master of Accountancy (Jakarta, Indonesia).  

Yogi has strong knowledge of technology and understanding of Intellectual Property (IP). He is an expert in Patent drafting, prosecuting IP registrations and has first-rate competency in IP enforcements. 

He has acquired broad experiences in many litigation cases, arbitrations and alternative dispute resolutions. In order to support the quality of legal services, Yogi continuously maintains his excellent relationship with relevant government authorities.

Moreover, Yogi also has been providing many legal advices and handling cases on corporate commercial matters from multi-national companies, including employment, insurance, land & property, general corporate, merger & acquisition, energy, bankruptcy, banking & finance, investment, consumer protection, unfair competition, telecommunication, information technology, etc.

Yogi is an Advocate, as well as a registered IP Consultant. He is a member of PERADI (Indonesian Advocates Association), AKHKI (Indonesian IP Consultants Association) and IIPS (Indonesian IP Society). Recently, Yogi is the Chairperson of LBHKI (IP Aids Institution), a non-profit foundation focuses on IP education and socialization. On several occasions, Yogi has participated as a lecturer on the IP Training Course for Police Investigator.  He is also a permanent lecturer at a School of Management in Jakarta.

PERLINDUNGAN PATEN

W. Yogi Widodo

Paten ialah hak ekslusif yang diberikan oleh negara kepada inventor atas hasil invensinya di bidang teknologi, yang untuk selama waktu tertentu melaksanakan sendiri invensinya tersebut atau memberikan persetujuannya kepada pihak lain untuk melaksanakannya (UU Paten No. 14 Tahun 2001).

Perlindungan paten merupakan perlindungan Hak Kekayaan Intelektual (HKI) yang berkaitan erat dengan ilmu pengetahuan dan teknologi. Sayangnya, meskipun perlindungan paten sudah ada di Indonesia sejak dulu kala, masih banyak orang yang tidak mengenal apa sebetulnya perlindungan paten tersebut. Masih banyak kita mendengar orang berkata, “Wah, itu dipatenkan saja…”. Padahal  perlindungan yang dimaksud adalah untuk melindungi karya-karya ciptaan, benda-benda seni, atau bahkan kadang-kadang ditujukan untuk merek dagang!

Kekeliruan-kekeliruan atau kesalahpahaman tentang hal-hal yang mendasar semacam itu agak menggelikan, mengingat pemerintah melalui Ditjen HKI telah berupaya untuk terus mempublikasikan perlindungan HKI kepada masyarakat luas melalui berbagai macam seminar, pelatihan, workshop dan lain sebagainya. Selain itu, dalam kurun waktu empat tahun terakhir ini dapat kita lihat begitu banyak kebijakan dan peraturan yang telah dibuat untuk lebih memantapkan sistem HKI di Indonesia, antara lain dengan telah diundangkannya beberapa undang-undang baru, termasuk UU Paten No. 14 Tahun 2001. Kenapa paten tidak begitu populer? Apakah langkah-langkah yang diambil pemerintah belum efektif?

Satu hal yang harus diakui, bahwa memang dibutuhkan proses pembelajaran yang tidak sebentar untuk mengubah pola pikir masyarakat dan meningkatkan kesadaran akan pentingnya perlindungan HKI. Mungkin pemerintah perlu untuk lebih fokus pada peningkatan sumber daya manusia  sedini mungkin. Kita sama-sama tahu bahwa pengetahuan tentang HKI baru dikenalkan pada tingkat Perguruan Tinggi, itupun terbatas hanya pada Fakultas Hukum.

Sementara hanya sebagian kecil masyarakat Indonesia yang beruntung dapat menikmati bangku pendidikan tinggi, karena biaya pendidikan yang sangat tinggi sedangkan pendapatan rata-rata rakyat Indonesia sangat minim. Alangkah baiknya jika Ditjen HKI dapat berkoordinasi dengan Ditjen Pendidikan Dasar & Menengah Depdiknas untuk mulai mengenalkan HKI sejak di bangku Sekolah Dasar.

Konsep pengenalan yang sederhana dan menarik yang dapat dimengerti oleh anak-anak, seperti dalam bentuk komik, contoh-contoh sederhana dan rangsangan untuk berkreasi mungkin dapat diambil sebagai salah satu alternatif. Bekerja sama dengan rumah produksi atau media elektronik untuk menayangkan film animasi yang mendidik dengan menyelipkan pengenalan HKI bagi anak-anak juga sangat efektif, mengingat layar kaca sudah menjadi bagian yang tak terpisahkan dari kehidupan anak-anak dalam mencari hiburan, informasi maupun tambahan pengetahuan.

Di Jepang pengetahuan tentang HKI telah diajarkan mulai pendidikan dasar. Bahkan murid-murid sekolah menengah di Jepang setiap tahun dirangsang untuk berkompetisi menciptakan invensi-invensi (istilah yang dibakukan dalam UU Paten baru untuk menggantikan istilah ‘penemuan’, diadopsi dari ‘invention’) yang sifatnya sederhana.

Bagi mereka yang dianggap berprestasi akan diberikan kemudahan untuk memasuki jenjang perguruan tinggi. Apa yang bisa kita ambil dari informasi tersebut? Dengan mengenalkan HKI sejak dini, maka tidak hanya system perlindungan HKI maju sedemikian pesat di Jepang, tapi juga minat untuk berkarya menjadi sangat tinggi (dapat ditandai dengan tingginya permohonan paten yang berasal dari Jepang di Indonesia).

Ada korelasi yang positif antara pengenalan HKI dengan tingginya karya intelektual, karena apabila inventor (istilah yang dibakukan dalam UU Paten baru untuk menggantikan istilah ‘penemu’) menyadari betul manfaat perlindungan HKI atas invensinya tersebut dapat memberikan keuntungan baik bagi dirinya sendiri, bagi orang lain, masyarakat luas maupun bagi bangsanya, maka hal tersebut dapat menjadi suatu insentif bagi dirinya untuk terus berkarya.

Ironisnya, proses pemasyarakatan HKI di kalangan ilmuwan di bidang teknik sangat tidak optimal, kalau tidak bisa dibilang sangat kurang. Mahasiswa teknik yang merupakan calon inventor-inventor potensial tersebut tidak dibekali pengetahuan HKI di bangku perkuliahan.

Memang sejauh ini banyak terdapat Sentra HKI di berbagai universitas maupun institut teknologi. Tetapi apakah hal tersebut membuat HKI populer di kalangan mahasiswa teknik? Tidak juga. Kebanyakan Sentra HKI di universitas tidak melibatkan mahasiswa dalam melaksanakan aktivitasnya, kalaupun ada mahasiswa yang terlibat, jumlahnya pun sangat sedikit.

Menurut data statistik yang diambil dari Ditjen HKI, pada tahun 2002 belum tercatat adanya peningkatan persentase yang signifikan untuk permohonan paten domestik, yaitu masih sekitar  9,96% dari total permohonan paten, baik yang berasal dari dalam negeri maupun asing. Malah jika dilihat  secara kuantitatif, sebetulnya jumlah permohonan paten domestik justru mengalami penurunan, dari 409 aplikasi (termasuk paten biasa, PCT dan paten sederhana) pada tahun 2001 menjadi hanya 403 aplikasi pada tahun 2002.

Hal ini mengundang tanda tanya, mengapa minat inventor dari dalam negeri untuk terus berkarya cenderung mandeg? Kesadaran untuk melindungi hasil karya intelektual yang masih rendah harus sesegera mungkin ditingkatkan. Pemerintah harus lebih cerdik untuk melancarkan proses alih teknologi dari bangsa asing, sehingga bangsa kita tidak lagi tertinggal cukup jauh. Syukur-syukur bisa mengejar ketinggalan tersebut, sehingga mimpi indah untuk menjadi knowledge-based country dan sejajar dengan bangsa-bangsa lain di dunia dapat tercapai suatu saat nanti. Siapa tahu?