Ari Bias's Legal Counsel States That Song License Permits for Concerts Are Not Solely the Responsibility of the Event Organizer

Kapanlagi.com - The Central Jakarta Commercial Court recently ruled that Agnez Mo was guilty of copyright infringement and is required to pay compensation of Rp1.5 billion to Ari Bias, the creator of the song "Bilang Saja".

This decision has sparked various reactions from Indonesian musicians, including Armand Maulana and Melly Goeslaw, who expressed their concerns about potential policy changes that may not align with the Copyright Law.

Melly Goeslaw, for instance, expressed her astonishment at the ruling. She pointed out that according to the Copyright Law, the party responsible for paying music royalties is the event organizer or promoter, not the singer. This raises questions about the application of the law in this case.

In response to these concerns, Minola Sebayang, Ari Bias's legal counsel, explained the legal basis used in this lawsuit. He emphasized that the court's ruling was in accordance with the provisions set forth in Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright.

"So if it is said that there has been a shift that is not in accordance with the law, then what we discussed, what we presented in court, and what the judge decided, what is the basis if not the law?" said Minola Sebayang in the Tendean area, South Jakarta, Wednesday (5/2/2025).

1. Emphasize the Importance of Complying with Regulations

He added that Article 9 paragraph 1 of the law states that the economic rights of creators include the right to display their creations. Anyone who wants to use a creation commercially must obtain permission from the creator.

"This is the issue because there are legal sanctions when someone who wants to use that work commercially, especially in live concerts, does not seek permission from the creator beforehand," explained Minola.

He also highlighted the sanctions outlined in Article 113, which include a fine of Rp500 million in addition to criminal sanctions. Therefore, Minola emphasized the importance of adhering to the existing regulations by asking for permission from the creator before performing a song at a concert.

"If we already know who the creator is before singing, because it’s impossible not to know who the creator of the song we are singing is. Just call, 'excuse me, I would like to sing this at one of my concerts, this song, may I have your permission?' That’s possible. Or for example, asking for permission through LMK, 'I am going to have a concert tomorrow and I want to bring this song, asking for permission or license' that’s also possible," he said.

2. Not Just the EO's Obligation

Minola also emphasized that although event organizers (EO) often assist in handling permits, the main responsibility remains with the singer as the performer.

"What happens is that because EO often helps, they think it becomes the obligation of the EO, but it’s not. Because in the law, what is referred to as the performer is the singer; is it possible for the EO to be the performer? No," he asserted.

He added that the EO is a professional party that assists or organizes an event, but the performer who presents the work is the singer. Therefore, the obligation remains with the singer, although it can be delegated to the EO.

"But it can be delegated to the EO, but it is not solely the obligation of the EO," concluded Minola.

Stay updated with Ari Bias only on KapanLagi.com, if not now, when else?

(kpl/far/phi)