| dc.description.abstract | The creative economy (hereinafter referred to as "Ekraf") is the manifestation of intellectual property. With the characteristics of IPR as a growth asset, ECRAF actors still find it difficult to get funding. After OJK issued POJK 57/2020 (POJK SCF), ECRAF players can have a new funding alternative by using SCF. However, SCF as a new investment instrument has many risks for its users, especially on the investor side. In addition, POJK SCF also does not adequately reward the IPR of the publisher. Therefore, this research carries three problem formulations. First, how is the legal protection of SCF users in Indonesia? Second, how does Indonesian law compare with that of the United States and the United Kingdom in regulating the legal protection of SCF? Third, what changes should Indonesia make to provide better legal protection for SCF users?
To answer the problem formulation in this research, a literature review is needed that covers important aspects of this research. The literature review included in this research is on crowdfunding, securities crowdfunfing, the creative economy, and intellectual property rights. The entire literature review is interrelated, which ultimately forms the framework of this research.
vulnerable position. In a risky climate, POJK SCF fails to provide legal protection in the form of security for investors due to the high risk of investment in SCF. The issuer's legal protection against the risk of failure of the organizer's technology also remains a blurry picture. Meanwhile, POJK SCF does not regulate well the risk mitigation in SCF. In terms of legal comparison, the United States provides strong legal protection by prioritizing a risk mitigation system, one of which is bad actor disqualification. Strong protection is also applied by the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom divides investors into several groups. This aims to make the risk and legal protection more measurable. Moreover, the UK is considered to have more established rules than the US and Indonesia in regulating SCF.
Going forward, Indonesia needs to implement stricter rules for the registration and supervision of issuers. Indonesia needs to adopt the American disqualification rules and categorize financiers as done by the United Kingdom. Furthermore, the government needs to provide an element of certainty to ECRAF actors as publishers that their IPRs can obtain real economic value on the SCF platform. Thus, the enforcement of the economic value of IPR has a real form, along with the widespread inclusiveness of access to capital for economic actors.
The conclusions obtained from this research are: (1) The form of legal protection for SCF users in Indonesia is still weak, both in terms of internal and external legal protection. This has an impact on the illiquidity of securities and high investment risks that hamper investors and issuers; (2) The United States (US) and the United Kingdom (UK) provide more comprehensive external legal protection with strict information disclosure regulations and rules that classify investors; (3) Indonesia needs to update its SCF law by adopting the concept of bad actor disqualification as in the US, improving investors' access to the secondary market, and providing incentives to issuers who use certified IPR as collateral in SCF. These efforts will encourage the use of SCF by ECRAF actors. The suggestions in this study are: (1) The Financial Services Authority, as an institution with authority in the financial services sector, needs to: a) stipulate regulations containing comprehensive risk mitigation provisions, especially those relating to the risk of technology failure and the risk of illiquid securities in SCF; b) stipulate regulations to increase the transparency of information provided by the issuer before conducting securities offerings in SCF; and c) stipulate an investor grouping system and bad actor disqualification regulations. (2) Investors must understand the standard clauses in the SCF service agreement, considering that the agreement is the basis of legal relations in the SCF. (3) The House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR RI) needs to issue a law regulating services such as securities-based crowdfunding, or SCF. This aims to strengthen the legal basis for the implementation of SCF in Indonesia. | en_US |
