ANALISIS PERSAINGAN USAHA DI BIDANG IMPORTASI DAN DISTRIBUSI FILM DALAM MENUMBUHKEMBANGKAN PERFILMAN NASIONAL
CITA YUSTISIA SERFIYANI, S.H.
MetadataShow full item record
Creative industries is one of the most potential sources of GDP. Creative industries consisting of fourteen categories, which one is film. Film is a commodity that not only bring financial benefits but also serves as a national identity that was delivered to the world. Indonesian film industry has a long history and had reached its peak in the early 1980, then it had declined in 1990 and move upward over the year 2000 as a result of the freedom and openness of information in Reformation era. There are many factors and obstacles encountered in the effort to develop the national film industry, one of the most important issues is the monopolistic practices in the areas of importation and distribution and monopoly in the field of exhibition. Monopoly of cinema theaters in one corporate network can caused a stiff competition on film distribution, especially if the distributor company also belongs to the corporate network cinema. Monopoly law enforcement needs to be strengthened to reinforce the formulation of monopoly in Undang – Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 since there are often differences between the Commission's interpretation and parties. Therefore, it is necessary to formulate the element of fair competition, include : (1) the guarantee of equal business opportunities for everyone, (2) competition based on the principles of balance and proportionality, (3) de-concentration of economic power from one or a group of businessmen. Grup 21 is charged with a monopoly on importation and distribution. Monopoly Watch reported Group 21 to KPPU in 2002 on charges of vertical integration (Article 14), covered agreements (Article 15), monopolies (Article 17), monopsony (Article 18), market share (Article 19), the dominant position ( Article 25), another position (Article 26) and the majority ownership (Article 27). From eight chapters, only Article 27 convicted. Commissions freed 21 groups of seven other chapters because there are not found evidence of monopolistic practices and or unfair business competition as referred to Undang – Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. This caused reactions from the litigants, legal observers and film, as well as the public because the Commission considered not appropriate to interpret the provisions in Undang – Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 on this case. Commission’s Decision on Case Number 05/KPPU - L/2002 judged not fully provide certainty about how to interpret the article - the article that takes a rule of reason approach and per se illegal approach because they only hold formal verification. This decision also proved to be able to equalize the unbalanced relationship between the Group 21 competition as well as businesses can not negate the deed monopoly by Group 21, which is still repeated today. Therefore, this decision does not fully contain the assessed value of certainty, fairness and expediency. This thesis is not only discusses the impact of the commission’s decision in 2002, but also examines issues of national film until this time, which in 2009 and 2011 Grup 21 repeated it but Commission freed them at preliminary examination. To observe problems should be studied from the national film importation and distribution stages, production, and exhibition. There needs a concept that can be applied to develop the national film industry by improving the terms of legal structure, substantive law and legal culture and legal information in each phase, starting from the phase of production, importation and distribution, and exhibition. That phases should be improved continuously because one phase could give effects to the other phases.
- MT-Science of Law