Traces Of Music Royalty Dispute: When Musicians Question LMK And LMKN's Transparency

Portrait of the atmosphere at the music store. (ANTARA)

JAKARTA - No one doubts the difficulty of managing music royalties in Indonesia. The presence of the Collective Management Institute (LMK) and the National Collective Management Institute (LMKN) is considered not very helpful. The two institutions often get criticism.

Royalties collected are often not transparent. There is no definite report on how much royalties were collected. There are also details of royalty payments handed over to musicians. Instead of bringing many benefits, LMK and LMKN are actually considered to bring harm.

The presence of LMK and LMKN has been considered to have brought progress in the Indonesian music world since 2014. The two institutions are believed to be able to spearhead the life of musicians creators, copyright holders, or owners of the right to collect royalties.

LMK itself is a non-profit institution that is entitled to collect royalties. LMK can vary. It could also be formed by anyone. As long as they are able to have 200 members of the creator, 50 related rights, and obtain permission from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Kemenkumham).

LMK can only collect limited royalties for its members. The presence of LMKN is different again. LMKN is an institution formed by the government whose duty is relatively the same as a wider coverage. They are the coordinator of LMK. They can also collect royalties for musicians who do not give power to LMK.

The presence of the two institutions does not facilitate royalty collection. The collection of royalties is increasingly complicated. Both can attract royalties. This means that royalty payments are not one door.

This condition is increasingly confusing for musicians. They are confused about which authority to rely on. Not to mention that the two institutions are considered not to be present for musicians, but other interests such as profit seeking.

The existence of these two institutions can also be confusing because both of them can attract royalties and LMKN can delegate their authority to similar LMKs. There should be enough one institution (in the law there is only LMK).

Satu institusi itu dengan kewenangan dan pengawasan yang jelas dari kementerian. Apalagi royalties adalah hak milik pembuat. Mengapa negara (LMKN) dapat menarik langsung penggunaan ekonomi atas hak milik itu?," ungkap Pengamat Hukum Dunia Entertainment, Kemala Atmojo dalam koluminya di laman tempo.co, 14 Juni 2019.

LMK and LMKN's existence continues to be questioned. The question was not only present from business actors, but from the musicians themselves. They are often confused about the dualism of the roles of LMK and LMKN. They are also disturbed by the way the two institutions collect royalties.

Ahmad Dhani, for example. The frontman of the band Dewa 19 considers LMK Wahana Musik Indonesia (WAMI) not transparent in matters of collecting royalties from his songs and music. Dhani admitted that he did routinely get royalties from WAMI.

The problem is that Dhani did not get details of the report from the royalties collected by WAMI. There are no details of the use of music. Dhani's peak chose to withdraw from WAMI on March 18, 2022.

He withdrew all of his power of attorney for his work in WAMI because there is a potential for royalty deviation. Dhani mostly has royalty management independently. Another criticism also emerged from musicians, Erdian Aji Prihartanto or better known as Anji Drive. Anji tried to juxtapose his criticism from reports from business actors -- cafes, restaurants, to karaoke.

Anji considers business actors often less paid for music royalties. The association boils down to business actors not sure the money given can reach musicians. Anji also suspects that in LMK and LMKN there is a very possible deviation of funds. Moreover, from songwriters who never took royalties.

Anji was surprised. The era is far modern. Transparency matters cannot still be done by the two institutions. Anji also does not want to be blamed if his thoughts consider LMK and LMKN to be happy with other community fundraising institutions. The chairman is lucky first, not musicians.

Faktor itu yang membuat mereka jadi lazi atau kurang sereg membayar. Karena tidak jelas apakah dibagikan dengan benar atau tidak. Apakah Pempuan atau LMK-nya yang dapat uang. Apalagi banyak terjadi organisasi pengumpulan dana sosial untuk masyarakat.

Just a member of his rich organization. It just happened, they were imprisoned. So, back to classic issues and questions. Can the distribution of detailed and transparent royalties be? Musicians and industry players are getting smarter. The information system is already very developed. It's time to work more neatly with information that can be accessed by industry players," said Anji as written via his Instagram account @duniamanji, August 6, 2022.