Publication Search

This study examines the regulation of copyright royalties as joint property in Indonesia, the United States, and Europe, aiming to provide recommendations for better legal implementation. The research employs a normative juridical method with a comparative legal approach, utilizing library research and qualitative analysis of primary and secondary legal materials. The findings indicate that Indonesia, the United States, and Europe share common ground in recognizing royalties derived from copyright as joint property when such economic benefits are obtained during marriage. However, significant differences exist in their approaches. European countries, particularly Spain and the Republic of Moldova, clearly distinguish between exclusive rights and economic rights, where copyright remains the creator's personal property while royalties are classified as joint property. The United States demonstrates considerable flexibility through state-level regulations, adopting either community property systems or equitable distribution systems. Indonesia, through Decision No. 1622/PDT.G/2023/PA.JB, has begun recognizing royalties as joint property. Nevertheless, Indonesia still requires clearer and more comprehensive regulations to ensure legal certainty regarding the status of royalties as joint property and their distribution following divorce. This study contributes to developing legal frameworks that balance protecting creators' personal rights with the principle of fairness in family law.

Copyright royalties as an economic object in intellectual property are of particular concern in family law, especially when associated with their status as joint property in marriage. This study aims to examine and compare how the Indonesian and Malaysian legal systems regulate the distribution of copyright royalties in the context of divorce. In Indonesia, the concept of joint property is regulated in Law Number 1 of 1974, which was updated by Law Number 16 of 2019, as well as in the Compilation of Islamic Law. Meanwhile, in Malaysia, different Islamic family laws between states provide a basis for the division of joint property, including royalties, by considering the contribution of the spouse. This study uses a normative-comparative approach through literature study and analysis of legal documents. It was found that despite the differences in legal systems, both countries in principle recognize copyright royalties as part of joint property if they meet certain requirements, especially regarding the time of acquisition and the contribution of the spouse. This study emphasizes the importance of the principle of justice in the division of intangible assets in the context of a household.

This research aims to determine the position of copyright as joint property in marriage and to find out whether copyright can be used as an object of joint property dispute in divorce. The method used in this research is doctrinal legal research in the form of prescriptive legal research. The approaches used are a conceptual approach, a case approach and a statutory approach. The data collection technique used is in the form of library research. The results of this research show that basically copyright can be classified as immovable property based on the provisions of Article 499 of the Civil Code and Article 506 of the Civil Code. The status of copyright as property can give copyright the status of joint property if the copyright is registered during marriage. Copyright can become joint property in marriage because Article 199 of the Civil Code stipulates that all assets acquired during marriage will automatically become joint property. The use of economic rights in the form of copyright royalties must be used for mutual benefit as long as the husband and wife are still married. Copyright can also be used as an object of joint property dispute in a divorce if a husband and wife decide to divorce because joint property must be divided fairly if a divorce occurs as regulated in Article 37 of the Marriage Law. So that the position of copyright as an object of joint property in a divorce can be justified and considered valid because it has been regulated in law.