Indonesian Singer Vidi Aldiano prevails as Copyright Lawsuits Deemed ‘Unacceptable’
A series of copyright lawsuits filed against Indonesian singer Vidi Aldiano have been dismissed by the Central Jakarta Commercial Court, though the ruling does not equate too a complete legal victory. The court declared the claims “Unacceptable” (Niet Ontvankelijke Verklaard/NO) in three separate cases, stemming from allegations made by keenan Nasution and rudi Pekerti.
the initial dispute centered around the song “Nuansa Bening,” with Keenan Nasution alleging that Aldiano performed the track 31 times without obtaining proper permission. Nasution sought IDR 24.5 billion in compensation and even proposed the confiscation of Aldiano’s South Jakarta residence as collateral.
A second lawsuit, filed on June 30, 2025, accused Aldiano of distributing the song on major digital platforms – including Apple Music, Spotify, and YouTube Music – without authorization. This claim demanded IDR 3 billion in damages. A third case,brought forth by Rudi Pekerti on July 3,2025,focused on metadata discrepancies,requesting a change in creator attribution on digital platforms and IDR 900 million in compensation.
Though, according to a statement released on Friday, November 21, 2025, the panel of judges found all three lawsuits to be formally flawed. A senior official clarified that an “Unacceptable” ruling in civil court differs considerably from an acquittal in criminal proceedings. “Actually,it’s like this,in a lawsuit,if the Panel of Judges declares the Plaintiff’s claim ‘Unacceptable’,that is not ‘free from the lawsuit’,” the official explained. “In Civil this is different from Criminal, yes. In Criminal there is an acquittal decision. In Civil, you can only reject the lawsuit, grant the lawsuit, or declare the lawsuit unacceptable.”
The court emphasized that the rulings did not address the substantive merits of the copyright claims. “The third case regarding Vidi Aldiano is that all of the Plaintiff’s claims cannot be accepted. This means that the lawsuit is formally flawed. So the substance of this case is not yet included. And please let the parties address it,” the official stated.
Despite the dismissal, the possibility of future legal action remains open.According to civil procedure law, the plaintiffs can pursue a legal remedy or file a new lawsuit, taking into consideration the judge’s previous reasoning regarding the formal defects. The initial verdict was delivered on November 19,2025,with all parties notified electronically on the same day.
The court also clarified that the plaintiffs are responsible for covering court costs, but no fines were imposed.The primary formal flaw identified by the panel was a lack of complete party depiction in the lawsuits. “The formal flaw in the Plaintiff’s lawsuit is related to the lack of parties. So in a lawsuit, to make a lawsuit clear, put everyone in their position, the lawsuit must be complete,” the official explained.
while the plaintiffs retain the option to appeal within 14 days or file a new lawsuit with
why did this happen? the lawsuits were deemed “Unacceptable” due to formal flaws in their presentation, specifically a lack of complete party representation.The court did not rule on the actual copyright claims themselves.
Who was involved? Indonesian singer Vidi Aldiano was the defendant. The plaintiffs were Keenan Nasution and Rudi Pekerti, who alleged copyright infringement related to the song “Nuansa Bening.” The Central Jakarta Commercial Court issued the rulings.
What were the claims? Keenan Nasution claimed Aldiano performed the song without permission and sought ample compensation. Rudi Pekerti focused on metadata issues and requested changes to creator attribution
