Music copyright cases are not uncommon in Indonesia, but high profile cases always make the news. This one shows how copyright licensing has become clearer and more organized, but also exposed a lack of role clarity between event organizers and musicians.
Ari Bias is an Indonesian songwriter. One of his songs, "Bilang Saja" was created in 2023. The Defendant singer Agnez Mo performed the song at her concerts Jakarta, Surabaya, and Bandung. These concerts were organized by the Co-Defendant HW Group, an entertainment business operating the HW Superclubs. Ari Bias and his manager asked the defendants about licensing, but had no response, so sued for copyright infringement. They had evidence from the event posters published by the Co-Defendant, and screenshots and video clips showing the Agnez Mo performing the song at all three venues.
Ari Bias won in the Central Jakarta District Court. Although the Commercial Court hears many IP cases, infringement cases are heard in courts depending on location factors. But this was Jakarta, so the courts are well versed in IP cases. The court gave a sizeable damages award of IDR 1,500,000,000 (USD 100,000) based on all 3 performances.
The Defendant argued that it was the wrong party. Firstly the organizer was a different entity and secondly now there is a National Collective Management Organization that should be collecting royalties. They also argued various procedural defects in the case. The royalty collection processes under the new Collective Management processes are causing confusion in Indonesia, but that doesn’t obviate the need for consent and royalty payment which clearly did not happen here. Infringement could not really be denied.
Agnez Mo’s non-response to claims for licensing and royalties may have contributed to this dispute. The new national collective management organization was formed to reorganize a confusing royalty collection system, but its purpose may not yet be well understood. And Agnez Mo was engaged by a large commercial group, possibly without clear agreement on the obligation to pay royalties. The case has opened up a debate, so should encourage clearer processes to be adopted alongside the recognition that royalties must be paid to creators.
Comentarios