<![CDATA[This study aims to analyze the interpretation of novelty in industrial design under Indonesian law, with a special focus on Supreme Court Decision Number 52 K / Pdt.Sus-HKI / 2015. Using the Normative Juridical method, this study explores relevant legal principles and doctrines, adopting a Statute and Doctrinal Approach. The main focus is on the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 31 of 2000 concerning Industrial Design, checking its suitability to its practice and application in real cases. The Doctrinal Approach explores expert views through literature, providing an in-depth perspective on the protection of industrial design. The results point to the need for clear and consistent definitions and interpretations of novelty in the Industrial Design Act. It also emphasized the importance of an effective novelty proof process, as reflected in the Supreme Court Decision. This research suggests the need for a "significantly differ" standard from TRIP's Agreement to strengthen industrial design protection, encourage creativity, and improve creative industry competence. In the registration process, an in-depth substantive examination is required, not as a formality, but as a comprehensive analysis of creativity and innovation. The study also emphasizes the need to clarify the definition of novelty in Indonesian law, increase the capacity of industrial design examiners, and strengthen international cooperation]]>
Copyrights © 2026
