<![CDATA[The growth of Indonesia's music industry has increased the number of music concerts, often seen as a commercial way to exploit songs. However, royalty management at these concerts still faces legal challenges, especially in identifying who is responsible for paying royalties. This issue is exemplified by the copyright dispute between Agnez Mo and Ari Bias, which led to Supreme Court Decision Number 825 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2025. The ruling reversed a prior commercial court decision and has sparked discussions about the roles of singers, event organizers, and Collective Management Organizations in the royalty payment process. Based on this background, this study delineates two principal issues: first, the manner in which legislation governs royalties for the commercial use of songs and/or music during concerts in Indonesia; and second, the legal considerations of the Supreme Court in Decision Number 825 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2025 concerning the attribution of responsibility for royalty payments. The research employs a normative juridical approach, incorporating legislative and case study methods. Primary legal sources include Law Number 28 of 2014 on Copyright, Government Regulation Number 56 of 2021, and Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number 27 of 2025. Secondary sources were gathered from literature, scientific journals, and other relevant documents. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive qualitative methods. The study's findings indicate that the normative regulation governing music concert royalties in Indonesia designates event organizers as economic operators accountable for royalty payments via the National Collective Management Organization. Supreme Court Decision Number 825 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2025 affirms that vocalists cannot be automatically obligated to pay royalties unless it is demonstrated that they have received direct economic benefits. This ruling offers legal clarity and establishes a significant precedent in the enforcement of copyright law concerning music performances.]]>
