Mochammad Tanzil Multazam
Program Studi Hukum, Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

Legal Implications of Broadcasting Rights for Indonesian Esports Competitions: Implikasi Hukum Hak Siar Kompetisi Esport Indonesia Alfito Angger Dwiyono; Mochammad Tanzil Multazam
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1666

Abstract

General Background: The development of esports in Indonesia has increased the economic value of broadcasting rights and created new legal issues within the digital media environment. Specific Background: Esports competitions differ from conventional broadcasting because their distribution relies heavily on digital platforms, streaming services, and video game intellectual property. Knowledge Gap: Existing legal frameworks provide several bases for protecting broadcasting rights, but their application to esports remains unclear, particularly concerning the status of rights holders, digital platforms, enforcement mechanisms, and the legal relationship between game developers and tournament organizers. Aims: This study examines the regulation of esports broadcasting rights in Indonesia, identifies weaknesses in the available legal protection, and analyzes the legal implications and need for regulatory development. Results: Using normative legal research with statute and conceptual approaches, the study finds that esports broadcasting rights are addressed through the Copyright Law, Broadcasting Law, Electronic Information and Transactions Law, and Civil Code. However, these regulations remain fragmented and do not specifically accommodate the digital characteristics of esports. Legal protection is available through preventive and repressive mechanisms, but illegal restreaming, cross-jurisdictional violations, overlapping legal regimes, unclear platform responsibilities, and limited legal literacy remain challenges. Novelty: This study focuses on the specific legal characteristics of esports broadcasting and the interaction between intellectual property, broadcasting, contracts, and digital platforms. Implications: Harmonization and clarification of existing legal norms, technical regulatory guidance, licensing standards, and stronger cooperation among relevant stakeholders are needed to provide greater legal certainty. Key Findings Highlights Existing Indonesian legal instruments address several aspects of competition broadcasting, but their application remains fragmented. Unlicensed restreaming, cross-border violations, and unclear platform responsibilities complicate legal enforcement. Regulatory clarification, licensing standards, and stakeholder cooperation are identified as necessary measures for greater legal certainty. Keywords : Broadcasting Rights, Esports Competitions, Digital Platforms, Legal Protection, Regulatory Harmonization
Liability of Online Loan Application Providers to Third Parties for Misuse of Personal Data: Tanggung Jawab Penyelenggara Aplikasi Pinjaman Online kepada Pihak Ketiga atas Penyalahgunaan Data Pribadi Rio Hendrawan; Mochammad Tanzil Multazam
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 1 (2026): February
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i1.1678

Abstract

Abstract. General Background: The growth of online lending services has created new challenges in personal data protection, particularly during debt collection. Specific Background: Personal data obtained through online lending applications may be used to contact third parties who have no legal relationship with the loan agreement. Knowledge Gap: Previous studies have largely focused on debtors and have not systematically examined non-emergency contacts as third parties whose privacy rights may be violated during online lending collection practices. Aims: This study analyzes the forms and methods of personal data misuse involving non-emergency contacts and examines the legal responsibility of online lending application providers for such misuse. Results: Using normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches, the study identifies contact injection, spamming and blast messages, robocalls, and false claims that third parties are guarantors as forms of personal data misuse. These practices violate personal data protection principles and third-party privacy rights. Online lending providers may bear administrative, civil, and criminal liability under the Personal Data Protection Law, Electronic Information and Transactions Law, Financial Services Authority regulations, and the AFPI Code of Conduct. Novelty: The study places non-emergency contacts as third-party legal subjects whose personal data and privacy rights require specific legal protection in online lending collection practices. Implications: The findings highlight the need for stronger supervision, compliance with personal data protection principles, and ethical debt collection practices to protect third-party privacy rights. Key Findings Highlights Non-emergency contacts can become secondary victims of collection practices. Multiple collection methods involve unauthorized third-party data processing. Providers may face administrative, civil, and criminal liability. Keywords : Online Lending, Personal Data Protection, Third Parties, Legal Responsibility, Debt Collection
Comparative Analysis of ChatGPT Contracts with ChatGPT Enterprise Users and Companies: Analisis Perbandingan Kontrak ChatGPT dengan Pengguna dan Perusahaan ChatGPT Enterprise Muhammad Zidane Baihaqie; Mochammad Tanzil Multazam
Indonesian Journal of Law and Economics Review Vol. 21 No. 2 (2026): May
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/ijler.v21i2.1695

Abstract

General Background: Artificial Intelligence has expanded digital contractual relationships, including the use of ChatGPT by individual and corporate users. Specific Background: General users enter standard electronic contracts through Terms of Use, while ChatGPT Enterprise involves broader contractual arrangements concerning corporate data, information security, output ownership, liability, and organizational interests. Knowledge Gap: Previous studies have mainly examined the validity of AI-generated contracts, the legal position of AI, and AI use in commercial contracts, while specific comparisons between general ChatGPT users and corporate Enterprise users remain limited. Aims: This study examines differences in standard clauses, legal relationships, and legal protection between the two services within the Indonesian legal framework. Results: Using normative juridical research with statutory and conceptual approaches, the study finds that general users have more limited bargaining positions and are more subject to provider-determined clauses, whereas Enterprise users receive broader contractual arrangements concerning data protection, information security, organizational control, and business interests. The analysis also identifies regulatory gaps, vague norms, and potential conflicts between platform policies and Indonesian law. Novelty: The study provides a comparative legal analysis of individual and corporate contractual relationships in AI-based digital services, focusing on standard clauses and the resulting legal position of the parties. Implications: The findings highlight the need for clearer legal regulation and adaptive contractual interpretation to provide legal certainty, balanced rights and obligations, and protection in AI-based electronic contracts. Key Findings Highlights General users have limited bargaining space under standardized service terms. Corporate arrangements provide broader controls over data, security, and organizational interests. AI-based contractual relationships raise regulatory gaps, vague responsibilities, and potential normative conflicts. Keywords : Standard Clauses, ChatGPT Enterprise, Electronic Contracts, Contract Law, Artificial Intelligence