An application for an interim injunction was recently heard by the Commercial Court, and is believed to be the first of its kind.
The Court’s decision in HJ. Rachmawti Soekarnoputri v. PT. Tripar Multivision Plus and Ram Jethmal Punjabi and Hanung Bramantyo (93/Pdt.Sus-Hak Cipta/2013/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst) is dated 7 January 2014. The case concerned a popular film, “Soekarno”, which has been screening in cinemas in Indonesia for the past few months - a historical drama about Indonesia’s first president Kusno Sosrodihardjo a.k.a. Sukarno. The Application for interim injunction was filed by Sukarno’s daughter Rachmawti Soekarnoputri.
The Court’s reasoning in the case is alarming. Particularly, rights holders will find the Court’s interpretation of the provisions of the Copyright Law governing interim injunctions (article 67 of Law 19 of 2002) overly restrictive. The Court decided that an interim injunction could only be granted in circumstances where infringing material had not already entered into the course of trade. Applying this to the facts of the case, the Court found that because the film “Soekarno” was already screening it had no power to grant an interim injunction and have it taken out of cinemas - rather, this would have to be the subject of separate proceedings (full litigation).
The Court partially accepted the application, and the Applicant walked away with a version (not the final) of the script for the film, that could be referred to in subsequent infringement proceedings (if the Applicant elects to file).
The Applicant appeared to be under the misunderstanding that two offensive (to her) scenes were in the movie being screened, whereas it was proven by the Respondent that they were not - they were removed before the final cut. This reveals a breakdown in communication between the parties that perhaps could have been resolved through mediation or negotiation.
We commented on problems we expect will arise in the prosecution of interim injunctions here.