Intermediary Institute for Intellectual Property Rights and Creative Economy
The creative economy is become the government’s concern. This is happen because several reasons, first, the creative economy is expected to be able to absorb labor. In 2007 employment reached 5.4 million workers with a participation rate of 5.8%, second, the creative economy is expected to be able to encourage the development of economic. The average contribution GDP (Gross Product Domestic) of Creative Industries in 2002-2006 based on constant prices on 2000 was IDR 104.6 Trillion Rupiah, which is 6.3% of the total value of National GDP, and thirdly, now the government has also formed a special ministry called the Ministry of Finance. tourism and creative economy.
However, the positive implications of developing the creative economy are not yet optimal. This is due to several problems encountered. One of them relates to the issue of protecting intellectual property rights (IPR). The question is, why the problem of protecting intellectual property rights for the development of the creative economy and how to overcome these problems, so that IPR protection can be realized?
IPR Protection in Creative Economy Practices
Regarding the IPR protection in the practice of the creative economy, there are three realities that can be found. These realities are 1) the reality of IPR protection related to the development of creative and innovative products; 2). The reality of IPR protection related to the IPR registration system, and 3). The reality of IPR protection is related to the enforcement of IPR law.
The reality of IPR protection related to the development of creative and innovative products. A product that can be given IPR protection, then the product must be creative and innovative. A product can be said as creative and innovative in the IPR perspective, it should be able to meet the criteria of each IPR regime. For copyright, a product is said to be creative and innovative if it meets the criteria for originality, fixation and creativity, for a patent, a product is said to be creative and innovative if the product meets the criteria for novelty, inventive steps and can be applied in industrial activities, for industrial design, the criteria are must be new and not the same as previous disclosures, and for trade secrets the criteria that must be met are efforts to keep information of economic value from being known to the public. Now, by looking at these criteria, it is clear that the product requested by IPR should be creative and innovative. But unfortunately, at this time there are still creative economy actors who do not pay attention to these criteria. As a result, existing products are not new and even are imitations/pirates of those that already exist.
The reality of IPR protection related to the IPR registration system is in the form of a registration procedure that is considered complicated, expensive and time-consuming which tends to be uncertain, so that it is not registered. This of course weakens legal protection and has implications for the non-protection of creative economy products. Another reality of IPR protection relates to the enforcement of IPR law. Up to now, IPR law enforcement is still considered selective and lacks proper and professional handling. The lack of law enforcement officers who have a good understanding of IPR is also a real reality in the enforcement of IPR law. As a result, creative economy products that have registered IPR cannot be protected immediately, even though the legal process that should have been carried out has been carried out.
IPR Intermediary Institution
Observing the reality regarding lack of IPR protection for creative economy products, a solution should be sought. Based on author’s opinion, the solution that can be taken at this time in order to increase the effectiveness of IPR protection for creative economy products is through the establishment of an IPR intermediary institution between creative economy actors and the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights of the Republic of Indonesia, where this institution is independent and exists. under the District Head and able to work professionally. This institution also has a function as an institution of assistance, facilitation and advocacy.
The function of this institution as an assistance institution is related to providing assistance to creative economy actors to constantly search for information on plans for making products. Assistance will be carried out by professional technical personnel in their field. The information search itself is carried out to answer whether the product to be made is original or new? Or vice versa. If this can be done, then the opportunity for creative economy products to be protected will be great. In line with this, this institution will also provide understanding to creative economy actors not to divulge information related to their newly made products, if legal protection has not been carried out. With this function, IPR protection related to creative and innovative products can be carried out from the beginning before the product is registered.
Another function of this institution as a facilitation institution, this is related to the IPR registration process. As a facilitation institution for IPR registration, certainly there will be available technical personnel for IPR management who are truly professional. These technical personnel are from the fields of engineering, arts, information technology and law/IPR consultants. With the availability of technical personnel like this, the services in the management of IPR will be carried out effectively. Not only at the filing stage, such as; making patent drafting, design drafting, making legal documents (statements, filling out forms) but also the registration process at the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights, Ministry of Law and Human Rights, such as filing for registration, filing an opposition or filing an appeal to the trademark appeal commission. Operational costs for IPR management can also be regulated in such a way by local governments, so that the possibility of unreasonable IPR processing costs can be avoided. With this professional handling of IPR management and reasonable operational costs, IPR protection through IPR registration can be implemented.
The other function of this institution is as an advocacy agency. For supporting this institution to be able to play its function as an advocacy agency, this institution will also have advocates/lawyer who not only understand the procedures for legal practice in general, but also understand the procedures for practicing IPR law. Through this institution that has an advocacy function and is supported by professional advocates, if there are creative economic products that are violated by their IPR, then advocacy can be carried out properly and hopefully the protection of IPR can be realized.
In the end, it can be understood that IPR protection actually has a broad meaning. Actually, IPR protection is not only done through registration, but it should have started from the beginning of making creative and innovative products until they are marketed. With the establishment of an IPR intermediary institution, it is hoped that broad IPR protection can be realized, so that the creative economy can develop properly.
Wallahu’alam bis Shawab.
Prof. Dr. Budi Agus Riswandi, S.H., M.Hum.
Executive Director of Intellectual Property Rights Center
Faculty of Law UII Yogyakarta
