Indonesia Simple Patent (Paten Sederhana): The Utility-Model Alternative

Indonesia's simple patent, known in Bahasa Indonesia as paten sederhana (literally "simple patent"), is a registered right designed for incremental inventions: a new product or process that involves a practical development rather than the larger inventive leap a standard patent demands. It is Indonesia's answer to what many other countries call a utility model or petty patent. For a company shipping a useful but modest hardware improvement into the Indonesian market, it can be a faster and lighter route to a registered right than a full patent, on the understanding that you accept a shorter term and a narrower kind of protection in return.

This page explains what the simple patent covers, how its lighter examination differs from a standard patent, the strategic trade-offs in choosing it, and how it sits against utility models in other jurisdictions. It is general information about the system administered by Indonesia's Directorate General of Intellectual Property (the DGIP, or Direktorat Jenderal Kekayaan Intelektual, which sits under the relevant Indonesian government ministry, historically the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, though the precise ministry title has been reorganised recently so confirm it against the DGIP's current site), not advice on any particular filing. The governing framework is Indonesia's patent law, most recently amended in 2024, and several specifics below changed under that amendment, so treat the exact current rules as confirm-with-counsel. Indonesia is a first-to-file country, and applications are made in Bahasa Indonesia through a registered local IP consultant, so the practical mechanics of any filing belong with that consultant. For the wider picture, see our overview of patents in Indonesia and the practical steps in how to file a patent in Indonesia.

What the simple patent protects

The simple patent is aimed at inventions that are new and have a practical use but are incremental in nature. The usual framing is that the invention must be a new product or process that involves a development, language that deliberately sets a lower bar than the inventive-step requirement of a standard patent. In practice this means a structural or functional improvement to an existing thing: a refinement to a tool, a better arrangement of components, a more practical version of a known product. If your contribution is genuinely useful and new but you doubt it would clear the higher inventiveness threshold of a full patent, the simple patent is the instrument designed for exactly that situation.

The scope has limits that are worth settling early with counsel. The long-standing feature of the Indonesian simple patent has been that it is confined to a single claim (one invention, one claim), rather than the broader claim sets a standard patent can carry, which constrains how widely the protection reaches. The 2024 amendment is reported to have relaxed some procedural and claim-related rules, so do not assume the single-claim position is necessarily the current one; treat the exact rules on claim scope, on what counts as a registrable development, and on which subject matter is eligible as confirm-with-counsel against the law as amended. The firm point is the one that drives the strategy: the simple patent is built for incremental, practical inventions, not for the kind of broad, pioneering invention you would want a standard patent to cover.

Lighter examination, shorter term

The defining bargain of the simple patent is procedural. It is examined more lightly than a standard patent, which is what makes it faster and cheaper to obtain. A standard Indonesian patent goes through substantive examination against novelty and inventive step on the higher standard; the simple patent is assessed on the lower "involves a development" standard and, in general terms, moves through to grant on a quicker path. That speed is the point of the right: you can hold a registered right comparatively soon, which matters most for products with a short commercial life or where you want something on the register before a launch. Note that the rules on when substantive examination must be requested changed under the 2024 amendment, so do not rely on any older timing you may have seen; confirm the current examination-request mechanism and any window with the DGIP or local counsel.

The other half of the bargain is the term. The simple patent runs for a markedly shorter, non-renewable protection period than a standard patent, after which the invention falls into the public domain. As a directional steer the simple patent's life is roughly half that of a standard patent, but this is the single most important factor in the decision, so it deserves to be checked precisely: treat the exact term as confirm-with-counsel and verify the current period against the DGIP's official guidance rather than relying on a general figure, because statutory terms change. As with all filings in Indonesia, official fees apply across filing, examination and maintenance; confirm the current amounts with the DGIP or local counsel, since fees change and vary by route.

A lighter examination does not mean no requirements. The statutory conditions still apply as a matter of law (broadly novelty, practical use, industrial applicability, and that the invention is a development of an existing product or process), and a granted simple patent that fails them is vulnerable to invalidation. The scrutiny is lighter and the threshold lower, but the substantive conditions are not waived; confirm the precise current criteria with counsel, since the 2024 amendment addressed the registrability requirements.

The annuity-arrears risk

One distinctive Indonesian point deserves its own flag, and it concerns the annual maintenance fees, known as annuities. Historically, Indonesia operated an unusual and much-discussed regime in which unpaid annuities could remain owed to the state as an accrued debt even after a patent was deemed withdrawn or had lapsed, so a holder who stopped paying did not cleanly walk away and could be left carrying a liability. This was a real and notorious trap for foreign filers. The position is understood to have been changed materially by the 2024 amendment, which reportedly reworked the grace, penalty and reinstatement arrangements, so the old regime should not be assumed to be current. The practical lesson survives the reform: annuity obligations and the consequences of stopping payment are jurisdiction-specific and have shifted, so before you file or abandon a simple patent in Indonesia, confirm exactly how annuities accrue and what happens on non-payment with the DGIP's official guidance and an Indonesian patent consultant.

The strategic trade-offs

Choosing a simple patent over a standard patent is a trade between speed and cost on one side and term and breadth on the other. The simple patent gives you a registered right more quickly and generally more cheaply, on a lower threshold, suited to incremental improvements and shorter product lives. In exchange you accept a shorter term, typically narrower claim scope, and a right that, because the examination was lighter and the bar lower, may be more readily challenged than a fully prosecuted patent. None of that makes it a weaker choice in the abstract; it makes it the right choice for a particular kind of invention and the wrong one for another.

The decision tends to come down to the nature of the contribution and its commercial horizon. If the invention is a modest, practical improvement with a short market life, a simple patent alone may be enough. If it is something you expect to monetise over a long horizon, or that could support broad claims, a standard patent is usually the better home despite the slower and costlier path. Where you are genuinely unsure whether the contribution will clear the inventive-step bar of a standard patent, the simple patent can serve as a pragmatic fallback that still secures a registered right. Indonesian law also contains rules on the relationship between the two rights, including limits on protecting the same invention twice and on any conversion between them; the precise mechanics and time limits are detailed and were touched by the 2024 amendment, so plan them with an Indonesian patent consultant rather than from a general summary. The practical sequence for either route is set out in how to file a patent in Indonesia.

How it compares with utility models elsewhere

The simple patent is Indonesia's member of a family of rights that go by different names worldwide: utility models in Germany, China and many other civil-law countries, petty patents or innovation patents in some jurisdictions, and similar second-tier rights elsewhere. The shared logic is consistent across the family. Each protects incremental inventions on a lower threshold than a full patent, each tends to grant faster and at lower cost, and each runs for a shorter term. They exist because not every useful, novel invention is inventive enough to merit a full-term standard patent, and a second tier fills that gap.

The differences between national versions are where care is needed, and they are real. Some utility-model systems are confined to the shape or structure of a physical article and exclude processes altogether; Indonesia's simple patent, by contrast, is generally understood to extend to a new process as well as a new product, which is a broader subject matter than the article-only models found in some countries. Examination practice varies too: some systems register with almost no substantive check and defer validity entirely to later challenge, while others apply a lighter examination at grant. Because these distinctions decide whether a given invention is protectable at all, do not assume that experience with a utility model in one country maps onto the Indonesian simple patent. The right approach when filing across borders is to treat each jurisdiction's second-tier right on its own terms and confirm the Indonesian position with local counsel.

A note on using this

IPEnvoy is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. The above is general information about Indonesia's simple patent (paten sederhana) as administered by the DGIP under the patent law as most recently amended in 2024, written to help you frame the right questions, not to decide your filing. The scope of the right, its term, the examination practice, the annuity rules and any rules on the relationship with standard patents are jurisdiction-specific and change over time, so confirm the current position with the DGIP's official website and a qualified local IP professional before you file or rely on it. If it would help, IPEnvoy can route you to vetted local IP firms in Indonesia.