Patent Protection for Artificial Intelligence as Computer-Implemented Inventions Between Indonesia and Japan
Abstract
The development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology has had a significant impact on various sectors, including industry, health, and education. AI not only improves operational efficiency but also creates innovations that change human interaction with technology. In this context, protecting intellectual property rights, especially patent rights, is very important to encourage innovation and investment. This study discusses the challenges and opportunities faced by Indonesia in formulating patent protection regulations for AI-based inventions and compares them with the more comprehensive legal framework in Japan. Although Law Number 13 of 2016 in Indonesia provides a legal basis for patent protection, there is still legal uncertainty and a lack of specific regulations regarding AI inventions. In contrast, Japan has developed clear guidelines from the Japan Patent Office (JPO) that support patent protection for AI technology. This study suggests that Indonesia needs to formulate more specific and comprehensive regulations to improve intellectual property rights protection in the AI sector. By adopting best practices from Japan, it is hoped that Indonesia can encourage more investment and innovation in the field of artificial intelligence, which in turn will contribute to economic growth and national competitiveness.
References
Alhidayah, M., Permata, R. R., & Muchtar, H. N. (2023). Analisis Yuridis Pelindungan Paten atas Produk Artificial Intelligence: Studi Komparatif antara Jepang dan Indonesia. COMSERVA: Jurnal Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat, 3(5), 1637-1649.
Amirulloh, M., & Muchtar, H. N. (2024). Problems and strategies to maintain the existence of domestic registered patents in Indonesia to promote the economic growth. The Journal of World Intellectual Property, 27(2), 296-313.
Blind, K., Krieger, B., & Pellens, M. (2022). The interplay between product innovation, publishing, patenting and developing standards. Research Policy, 51(7), 104556.
Casola, S., & Lavelli, A. (2022). Summarization, simplification, and generation: The case of patents. Expert Systems with Applications, 205, 117627.
Compagnucci, L., & Spigarelli, F. (2024). Improving knowledge transfer and innovation services: A roadmap for Knowledge Transfer Offices. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(4), 100577.
Danish, M. S., Ranjan, P., & Sharma, R. (2024). Analysis of patent mortality rate across different technology fields in India. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 32(1), 83-105.
De Almeida, P. G. R., dos Santos, C. D., & Farias, J. S. (2021). Artificial intelligence regulation: a framework for governance. Ethics and Information Technology, 23(3), 505-525.
De Rassenfosse, G., Grazzi, M., Moschella, D., & Pellegrino, G. (2022). International patent protection and trade: Transaction-level evidence. European Economic Review, 147, 104160.
Gagliani, G. (2021). Intellectual property-related local content requirements in international trade law: an evolving concept amid persisting questions. Global Trade and Customs Journal, 16(4).
Gorbatyuk, A., & Kovács, A. (2022). Patent notice (failure) in the era of Patent Monetization. IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 53(4), 506-542.
Japan Patent Office (JPO). (2023). Guidelines for Patent Examination in the Field of Artificial Intelligence.
Japan Patent Office (JPO). (2021). Guidelines for Patent Examination in AI Technologies.
Klincewicz, K., & Szumiał, S. (2022). Successful patenting—not only how, but with whom: the importance of patent attorneys. Scientometrics, 127(9), 5111-5137.
Nnawulezi, U., Pitaloka, E. D., Cahyani, I. F., & Putri, J. N. (2023). Protection of Patent Holders’ Rights in Indonesia: Between Theories and Practices. Journal of Private and Commercial Law, 7(1), 19-44.
Nugrahani, A. G. (2024). Pengaruh Teknologi Terhadap Kepemilikan Hak Kekayaan Intelektual. eJournal Trisakti, 11(2), 195–204.
Ouyang, X., Sun, Z., & Xu, X. (2022). Patent system in the digital era-Opportunities and new challenges. Journal of Digital Economy, 1(3), 166-179.
Polater, S., & Konertz, R. (2025). The Novelty and the Inventive Level that Utility Models Should Have According to Turkish Law–A Comparative Study of Turkish and German Law. IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 1-31.
Rahadianputri, M. A. (2024). Analisis Yuridis Invensi Artificial Intelligence Perspektif Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten. Civilia: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Dan Pendidikan Kewarganegaraan, 3(2), 179–188.
Ramadhan, G. D. (2022). Perlindungan Hukum Atas Invensi Artificial Intelligence di Era Revolusi Industri 4.0 & Society 5.0. (Thesis Universitas Islam Indonesia)
Republic of Indonesia Law Number 13 of 2016 concerning Patents/Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 13 Tahun 2016 tentang Paten
Sari, R. (2021). Tantangan Perlindungan Paten untuk Kecerdasan Buatan di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, 51(2), 123-145.
Schmitt, V. J., & Denter, N. M. (2024). Modeling an indicator for statutory patent novelty. World Patent Information, 78, 102283.
Stanková, E. (2021). Human inventorship in European patent law. The Cambridge Law Journal, 80(2), 338-365.
WIPO. (2020). Artificial Intelligence and Intellectual Property. World Intellectual Property Organization
Yasmon. (2024). Kecerdasan Buatan (AI) sebagai Objek Hukum vs Subjek Hukum dalam Pelindungan Kekayaan Intelektual. DJKI.
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Science and Society
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
.png)
.jpg)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
1.png)
.jpg)
-modified.png)
-modified.png)
-modified.png)
