Copyright Protection of The Protection of
In contrast, the Copyright Act 1968 Cth
31
states that copyright arises immediately the creator gives his or her object expression by committing it to writing, image or some other
form capable of reproduction. It is important to the artist that to get the IPR, they sould make their idea real in a
tangible form that can be sense, seen, and hear. LJ Taylor Rachmadi Usman was quoted as saying in his book Law of Intellectual Property Rights Protection and Legal Dimensions in
Indonesia that protected Copyright is the expression of an idea, so not protect the idea itself. Where this means that protected Copyright is already in a tangible form as a
creation, not still an idea.
32
TRIPs Agreement also said that Copyright protection include expressions and not to ideas, procedures, methods of operation or mathematical concepts
as such. It can be seen from the wording of Article 9, Paragraph 2 TRIPS Agreement said: Copyright protection shall extend to expressions and not to ideas, procedures,
methods of operation or mathematical concepts as such. Moreover, the Berne Convention also implies similar things that work in the fields of science, art and culture are protected
when it is already in the form of expression is through the provision of Article 2 Paragraph 1 of its namely: The expression literary and artistic works .......
Wayang kulit
as the cultural heritage, both has material tangible and immaterial intangible artistic values. The tangible part can be seen in its material tools that use in the
performance like
wayang
the puppets, screen, the music instrument, and others. The intangible part can be seen in its component based on the artist act that include the
dalang
improvisations in
Kawi Dalang
acts, the story of the performance, the poetry, the song, the music melody which accompany the performance, the jokes, and many others. Folklore or
Traditional Cultural Expression TCE is anything that is considered common property or a community or a society, and the creation of anonymous. UNESCO has included
wayang
as a
Master Piece of Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity
as a world cultural heritage from Indonesia, and it was declared after
Convention ForThe Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage
on November 7
th
, 2003
33
, that valid in entry force of 2006. Cultures or folklore which previously entered into the convention, including
wayang kulit
as the
Master Piece of Oral and Intangible Heritage of Humanity
incorporated into the
International Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage
.
Wayang Kulit
registered as a representative list in Intangible Cultural Heritage ICH. This convention has been ratified by Indonesia in the form of Presidents Decree
Peraturan Presiden
No. 78 of 2007
34
. Actually part of
wayang kulit
that is categorized as intangible folklore
intangible cultural heritage
35
by the UNESCO is fall within the scope of Article 38 1 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014 concerning Traditional Cultural Expression. This Article
basically states that the copyright of this creation is held by the country. Folklore is closely
31
Laws passed by the Commonwealth of Australia are denoted by the abbreviation Cth. State and Territory laws are denoted by the relevant abbreviations in the title such as NT for the Northern Territory.
32
Rachmadi Usman,
La w on Intellectual Property Rights: The Protection and Its La w Dimension in Indonesia
Hukum Hak Atas Kekayaan Intelektual: Perlindungan dan Dimensi Hukumnya di Indonesia,Bandung: Alumni, 2003 p.121.
33
UNESCO,
Intangible Culture Heritage
, www.unesco.orgcultureichenconvention, Accessed on 5 December 2015.
34
It is About Ratification of Convention For Safeguarding Of The Intagible Cultural Heritage.
35
According to Article 2 paragraph 1 ICH, the characteristics of the object preservation of intangible heritages are: 1 Transmitted or passed from generation to generation; 2 Constantly updated by a
community or group as they respond to their environment, their interaction with nature and history; and 3 Give them a sense of identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity as well and human
creativity. All of the characteristics mentioned above are exist in the traditional
wa yang kulit
, therefore fulfill the requirement of ICH when nominated it.
related to indigenous peoples such as the creation of literary and artistic works such as legends, dances, ceremonies, and so is the legacy of intergenerational an indigenous
community. However, for the new innovation and creation of a
wayang kulit
character tangible part, it is fall under the protection of Article 40 1 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of
2014. Article 40 of Law No. 28 of 2014 is basically regulates types of creations protected under Indonesian copyright law. Furthermore, the protection of
wayang kulit
can be seen specifically under Article 40 1 letter e where it states
pewayangan
or puppet or
wayang kulit
in this case is one of the creations protected under this Law. The main difference between
wayang kulit
protected under Article 38 and 40 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014 is that for
wayang kulit
that is fall under Article 38, the copyright is held by the country Indonesia meanwhile for the new creation of
wayang kulit
character that fall under Article 40 1 e, the copyright is held by individual. This article deals with
wayang kulit
that fall under the protection of Article 40 1 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014, which is the new
wayang kulit
character. With regard to the creativity process, a source of inspiration in the creation of works
of art is very broad and free, almost anything that can be seen and thought to have the potential and charm to been turned into works of art. Some artists want to be recognized
existence and his works, by displaying the character, different styles in his work reveals.
Dalangs
usually get inspirations from the works of the earlier artists. For example the inspiration in
Wayang Arja
that inspiration comes from one kind of performace that exist in Bali, the
Arja
drama, transforming into wayang form by
dalang
Made Sija in 1976. It has an intelectual values that must be the right for the creator as an appreciation both in
economic and social values for their masterpiece. But sometimes the
dalang
like indifference to its own intellectual rights. They are promoting a sense of kinship and mutual support between artists. They assume that the art
belongs to the people. Custom base background is inherent in traditional Balinese as an communal live. They believe that community shape them into neighborhood artists who
live, grow, and evolve from the community, by the community and for the community. They assume that all they have and create not merely his own, but belongs to the
community. So that the people of Bali is famous for their arts and community bound that are closely intertwined with each other. It is a tradition concept that has been inheritable
across generation and time which construct the Balinese Arts. Beside it is a good concept, but
it‟s also invite problems when connected to both economic and business interest. For example, if other people copying a new
wayang kulit
character without permission from the creator for economic purposes by using it in their performances or selling it as
souvenir. For Examples of new
wayang kulit
character, we can assess from one performance of
Pedalangan
Department at the Faculty of Performing Art of ISI Denpasar. It is a
Wayang Sejarah Kamardikan
36
that created by I Putu Rekayasa, the bachelor student which just graduate from his study in ISI Denpasar on July 28
th
, 2015. He makes a new kind of
wayang
performance that the focus of the story is the heroic fighters in the nation gained independence against colonialism occupation. On this performance, he used the story of
Banjar War in 1868 in Buleng Regency. On that time, the Banjar Recident was lead by Ida Made Rai. As a retainer of Banjar, he was strongly oppose oppression that carried out by
the Netherlands. Backed by people of Banjar, he was joining forces to defend Banjar District from attacks that would be carried out by the Netherlands to Banjar. Dutch did not
36
It base from his vision to make
wayang
performances as media to learn about the nation independents patriotic history
Sejarah Kema rdikan
. See also: Putu Rekayasa, “Scripts of
Kemardikan Pakeliran
History: Banjar War”[
Skrip Karya Pakeliran Seja rah Kemardikan: P erang Banjar
], Denpasar: Fakultas Seni Pertunjukan, ISI Denpasar, 2015.
remain silent, with the help of Regent I Gusti Ngurah Ketut Jelantik, Banjar District in an all-out attacking that time. In the performance, Putu Rekayasa tried to combine the
wayang kulit
and human theater in one concept of performance. He also used the
wayang
puppets based on the characters that were on the story. He used more than 15 puppets on his
performance. What made it so unique and different from other wayang is, he used the
Dutch
regents character based on the story. They are Major Heemskerk and Lieutenant Wig Steigman characters as the
Dutch employers
in Buleleng
.
Picture 1. Major Heemskerk and Lieutenant Wig Steigman characters as the
dutch employers
in Buleleng in a meeting with Patih
adviser of the king
Liarta and Regent I Gusti Ngurah Ketut Jelantik, the King of Buleleng.
From this example, the creation of
wayang
can be protected under Article 40 1 e of the Indonesian Law No.28 of 2014. According to Article 1, Paragraph 1, the
wayang Belanda
Dutch puppets of Major Heemskerk and Lieutenant Wig Steigman are exclusive creations of their creator,
Dalang
Putu Rekayasa, that arise automatically based on the declarative principle following creation of the object. The
wayang Belanda
Dutch puppets created by
Dalang
Putu Rekayasas are automatically protected by this law. The puppets have been embodied in a tangible form
– a video recording of the last exam in Faculty of Performing Art of ISI Denpasar. Furthermore, Copyright protection regime
generally knows the automatically protection system. Where the system confirms that since the fixation process is completed, since that time the Creator enjoys legal protection,
without the need for formalities such as registration or enrollment.
37
This protection
system can be seen from the provisions of Article 1 Paragraph 1 Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014 specifies that
Copyright is the exclusive right of an Author
or the Copyright Holder to publish or reproduce his work,
which arises automatically after a creation born
without reducing restrictions according to the applicable laws and regulations. Thus, the creation of creative works of
pedalangan
as well as automatic protection after such a work is born within the meaning of the idea already set forth in the obvious form, was
announced, and original. Therefore, if one copying those new creations of
wayang kulit
character for business purposes without any permission from the creator, it can be seen as copyright infringement under Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014. It should be noted that the
creator has what so called as moral right and economic right
38
. However, there are
37
Agus Sardjono,
Copyright La w in Graphic Design
Hak Cipta Dalam desain Grafis
,
Jakarta: Yelow Dot Publishing, 2008 p. 19.
38
Article 4 of Indonesian Law No 28 of 2014.
provisions that deal with the limitation of what is called as a copyright infringement under Article 43-50 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014.
Although the Copyright protection system in Indonesia is Automatic protection system as described previously in Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014, however this law
provides provision concerning registration of a creation. It can be found in Article 64 1 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014 where it states that the Directorate-General administer
the registration Creation and recorded in the Register of Directorate General of Intellectual Property
Dirjen HAKI
. Basically towards Creation, although registration is not mandatory, for the sake of proving that there is a dispute later on should Copyright
registered to the
Dirjen HAKI
.
39
Thus registration here is as a way to facilitate future verification process if there is a dispute one day. Registration is not a requirement, but it
becomes important when there is a dispute in one day. This is in line with the provisions of Article 642 of Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014
40
and Article 31 Indonesian Law No. 28 of 2014.
Regarding the validity of copyright and related rights on works of
pedalangan
artistic works, it is explained in Chapter IX about Duration of Copyright an Related Rights,
Expiration Copyright, paragraph One, Article 57 in Paragraph 1 said that the moral rights of the Creator as referred to in Article 5 paragraph 1 letter a, b, and e included
wayang
valid indefinitely. In Article 58 Paragraph 1 explained that validity period of Economic Rights of
wayang
in point e, valid for the life of the Creator and continued for 70 seventy years after his death, starting from January 1 next year. In Paragraph 2
explained that when an application is referred to in subsection 1 is owned by two 2 or more persons, protection of Copyright is valid for life Creator who died most recently and
lasts for 70 seventy years thereafter, commencing 1 January next year. In Paragraph 3 explained that the Protection copyright to a work referred to in paragraph 1 and
paragraph 2 which are owned or held by the legal entity shall be valid for 50 fifty years since the announcement was first made. For that time, the Copy Rights of
wayang Belanda
are belongs to Putu Rekayasa. Any kind of rights include economic and social rights are belongs to Putu Rekayasa.
While there is no direct Australian equivalent of the protections of
wayang kulit,
there are a number of significant similarities between the respective copyright regimes of
Indonesia and Australia. In Australia, the legal protection of intellectual property is grounded in the intangible personal right to be recognized for, and gain for a finite period,
the commercial advantage arising from „products of the human intellect‟.
41
The statutory intellectual property frameworks supporting this principle are designed to encourage and
protect the product of individual or joint labour and endeavor, not necessarily creativity. Copyright in Australia is considered to be a bundle of economic and moral rights
conferring on their owner, the exclusive right to act and to deal with the object protected by the copyright. As with Indonesian copyright, the creation of an object automatically
confers the protection of copyright; there is no requirement to formally register the object. Subject to Section 31 of the
Copyright Act
1968, copyright in original works is generally the exclusive right of the copyright owner to deal with the object in any way that is legally
permissible. The copyright owner is the creator of the original work, or is any other person or entity legally entitled to exercise the rights vesting in the copyright owner. An
39
Sudaryat, Sudjana, and Rika Ratna Permata
Intellectual Property Rights
Hak Kekayaan Intelectual, Bandung: Oase, 2010 p.46.
40
This article states that the registration of a creation is not a requirement to get protection under Indonesian Copyright system.
41
Black‟s Law Dictionary.
agreement assigning or licensing the ownership or rights in copyright to a third party must be in writing if it is to be enforceable
– Section 35. Section 32 of the
Copyright Act 1968
, provides protections to the creators of original subject-
matter or “subject-matter other than works. Eight categories specify the “subject-matter” and “works” eligible for protection. These include literary works,
dramatic works, musical works, and artistic works, also including performances and works of artistic craftsmanship. Any work falling within a specified category will enjoy the
protection of copyright; works outside these categories are not protected.
Protected “subject-matter” or “works” must be the identifiable product of individual or collective human intellect and effort. The respective contributions of multiple contributors
to original work must be identifiable if they are to be adequately protected. Copyright does not apply to intangible concepts, thoughts or ideas; to gain the protection of copyright
under Australian law, the subject-matter or subject matter other than works that is to be protected by copyright, must be given tangibility; it must be written, drawn, photographed
or crystallized in a recognizable medium.
From the perspective of Australian copyright legislation, S32 has considerable relevance to
wayang kulit
when conceptualized against the Australian Aboriginal creative culture. As with
wayang kulit
, Aboriginal works are of a dramatic, musical, performance or artistic nature. Their works are generally created over extended periods of time and
draw on the collaborative hierarchies of status, knowledge, skill and capacity. These works embody the spirituality and beliefs of the culture, depict significant events, features and
relationships; they deal with formative cultural and historical matters. In Aboriginal community settings, communal activity and endeavor commonly involves groups of
people, either consistently or periodically, contributing to a body of artistic work. Under the law, unless each of these people can be identified and their contributions quantified,
copyright protection will not be afforded to the work. It is common for Aboriginal people to forfeit their copyright protection because they are not aware of the laws, do know
understand the use and misuse of their work or are unable to identify the contributors to original work. And much important Aboriginal art is not reduced to a tangible form
because it takes the form of drawings in the sand, structures made of leaves, sticks and other material.
An example of how significant, but fragile copyright protection can be is to be found in the creation of Aboriginal works of art by Aboriginal artist Mandy Davis. In
2005, Mandy Davis saw her painting „Emu‟ the Work copied onto a commercial vehicle; she had not consented to this use and had no prior knowledge of its use. The unauthorized
use of the work had distorted the image, making it unreflective of the original work.
The key issue in this matter was the infringement of the artist‟s copyright in the Work, together with the infringement of her moral rights of attribution
– recognition of her human intellect, and of artistic integrity. The company distorted the Work when
reproducing it on the commercial vehicle, the colours were changed and its creation was not attributed to Mandy Davis as the original creator. The designs and artworks illustrate
Mandy Davis‟ cultural values, beliefs and connection to her ancestors. A settlement resulted in the work being removed from the vehicle and the economic value of the
copyright paid for the unauthorized use of the work. Copyright is a significant right of protection; it ensures access to the rightful economic and moral value for the original
creator and survives for 70 years following the death of the creator s33
Copyright Act
.