THE EFFICACY OF THE KENYAN AND UGANDAN

COPYRIGHTS REGIME RELATIVE TO THE

PROTECTION OF WRITERS AND
ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY
CREATIVE WORKS

Submitted by:

MULALIRA FAISAL UMAR

REG NO: 2012/HD09/721U

SUPERVISOR: PROFESSOR D. J BAKIBINGA

RESEARCH PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF POST

GRADUATE STUDIES IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT

FOR THE AWARD OF A MASTER OF LAWS

DEGREE OF MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

2012
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS.........................................................................................ii
LIST OF ACRONYMS...........................................................................................iv
CHAPTER ONE.................................................................................................... 1
1.0 Introduction..................................................................................................1
1.2 Background of the Study.............................................................................1
1.2.1 Historical background..................................................................................1
1.2.2 Theoretical background...............................................................................3
1.2.3 Conceptual background...............................................................................4
1.2.4 Contextual background................................................................................5
1.3 Problem statement.......................................................................................9
1.4 Purpose of the study.................................................................................... 9
1.5 Research objectives...................................................................................10
1.5.1General objective........................................................................................ 10
1.5.2 Specific objective........................................................................................10
1.6 Research questions...................................................................................10
1.7 Scope of the study......................................................................................11
1.7.1 Geographical scope....................................................................................11
1.7.2 Theoretical Scope.......................................................................................11
1.7.3 Content Scope............................................................................................11
1.8 Significance of the study.............................................................................11
1.9 Literature Review....................................................................................... 12
1.9.1 Creative works protected under copyrights regimes...................................12
1.9.2 Applicability of the law in protecting creative works ...................................16
1.9.3 Challenges in enforcing copyrights for writers and artists........................19
1.9. 3 Conclusion................................................................................................25
1.10 Methodology.............................................................................................25
1.11 Synopsis of the chapters..........................................................................26
Bibliography
……………………………………………………………………………………………
27

i
Interview
Guide………………………………………………………………………………………..33

ii
LIST OF ACRONYMS

iii
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 Introduction
The research “efficacy of the Kenyan and Ugandan Copyright regime relative to the
protection of writers and entertainment industry creative works” seeks to explore the
applicability of copyright law in protecting creative works of writers and artists by
specifically establishing the scope of protection provided to the various natures of the
copyrightable works and how these have accommodated the existing development
policy frameworks in Uganda and Kenya. This is order to examine whether the principle
of fair use has provided a balance between the economic interest of the owners and
social interest of society in benefit from information use and whether the law has
appropriately apportioned ownership rights in jointly owned copyrighted works in order
to advise on the identified legal gaps therein. The study thus will be an investigation of
the intersection of the applicability of copyright law and protection of the creative works
of writers and artists.

It is a principle of many countries that inventors or creators may reap the fruits of their
intellectual creativity for a specified period of time. Therefore copyright regimes are
established to grant creators exclusive rights to protect their economic and social
interest in the work for promotion of further enhancements in creativity. However,
infringement of copyright remains a common practice. World over, as users continue to
use copyrighted work without permission.

1.2 Background of the study

1.2.1 Historical background
Prior to the industrial revolution, copyright did not exist and much of the publishing was
mainly manual.1 The regime evolved from the advent of movable type in 1436 causing a
proliferation of books across countries of Europe 2 as books were then produced en
masse. Economic opportunities increased with the Gutenberg’s printing press, a

1
Galtbach, (1995), Copyright and development: Inequality in the information age. Bellagio Publishing Network.
2
C Seville (2006), “The Internationalization of Copyright Law Books”, Buccaneers and the Black Flag in the
Nineteenth Century. Mc Millan Publishers.

1
development which worried publishers.3 During this time, an immediate need for
protection from literary piracy emerged.4

Publishers petitioned their governments to enact legislations to protect their creative

efforts,5 and England was among the first countries in the world to enact copyright
legislation.6 Authorship rights came to be protected by registering works in the
Stationer’s company register book as a condition for protection secured for 20 years,
from the day of publishing. In 1790, the American Congress also passed another law. 7
During this time, further advances were made in technology from movable print to
computer generations in Europe and North America.8

It became increasingly easy, faster and cheaper to produce and distribute books both
domestically and internationally.9 As books crossed borders, this saw an increased need
to develop uniform international copyright standards in authorship work, allegedly
leading to the implementation of the Berne Convention,10 and the Universal Copyright
Convention signed in Geneva in 1952. The Conventions set certain minimum standard
levels of copyright protection and their enforcement in member countries across Europe
and elsewhere in the world to;11 protect works from member states from unauthorized
reproduction in their countries; and to adopt uniform standards in enacting legislations
on copyright.

3
Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya” Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University
Eldoret.
4
Peter Drahos (2003), “Who owns the Knowledge economy” Information Feudalism, Earthscan, London.
5
Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya” Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University
Eldoret..
6
The Statute of Anne was enacted in England in 1710
7
First American copyright law
8
Ibid at 1
9
Ginsburg, J ‘From having copies to experiencing works: the development of an access right in US copyright law’
(2003) 50 Journal of Copyright Society of the USA.
10
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 1886 (Berne Convention)
11
Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya” Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University
Eldoret.

2
Today, the world experiences the most intense and most extensive technological
expansions recorded in history with a new dimension of creative rights claimed by
thinkers, writers, visionaries and performers requiring more secured copyrights. 12 The
emergency of new forms of knowledge embedded in advancing technologies has
brought enormous pressure to bear existing forms of ownership rights. Some of these
have fitted neatly in the dominant copyright regimes, but with problems concerning fair
use and appropriateness of ownership rights 13 generating constant reviews of the
copyright regime.

1.2.2 Theoretical background

Copyright is a restricted authority to protect the form of expression of an inventor of a
particular work against any form of copying 14 except upon permission and with specific
loyalties met. It is a legal right that authors, publishers and other producers of creative
works have, to protect their work from being reproduced without their permission. This
right subsists from the time the work is created in its fixed and tangible form.

For example, the copyright in the work of authorship immediately becomes the property
of the author who created the work, 15 although mere ownership of a book, paint or
musical composition does not constitute owning copyright. This is because transfer of
ownership of any material enclosed in a protected work does not portray interest in the
copyright.

The rationale for copyright protection is to enhance the economic and social rights of
inventors for their works.16 This is a form of legal empowerment to inventors to exclude

12
Ginsburg, J (2003), ‘From having copies to experiencing works: the development of an access right in US
copyright” Journal of Copyright Society of the USA.
13
Fujita, Anne K. “The Great Internet Panic: How Digitization is Deforming Copyright Law.” Updated 1996.
Retrieved 10 Feb. 2003 <http://journal.law.ufl.edu/~techlaw/2/fujita.html>.
14
Ginsburg, J (2003), ‘From having copies to experiencing works: the development of an access right in US
copyright” Journal of Copyright Society of the USA.
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade
Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford University.
15
Ibid at 10
16
Ginsburg, J (2003), ‘From having copies to experiencing works: the development of an access right in US
copyright” Journal of Copyright Society of the USA.

3
others from certain uses of their work. Monopoly right is given to inventors, which can
only be shared through permission. This eliminates unfair competition as inventors are
able to become more creative and innovative, consequently development is
accelerated17 with inventors having a say on the reproduction license depending on
how work has originally been created whether singly, jointly or associatively.

For jointly created work, co-ownership is assumed for the copyright in the work, unless
agreed otherwise. But, if work is copyrighted for distinct separate contributions,
copyright vests initially with the holder of each contribution as different from collective
work. If creation is by hiring, and work is created in a capacity of employee, the
employer is considered to be the copyright holder. For example, in Uganda when a
person creates work under the direction or control of the government, unless otherwise
agreed, the copyright in that work is vested with the government.18

1.2.3 Conceptual background

Conceptually, a copyright is vested in a work fixed in a tangible form of expression, but
not the creation of the mind in its intangible form, once expression can be
communicated with the aid of a machine or device, a copyright does not have to be
directly detectable or audible.19 The work may be literary, musical including any
accompanying words, dramatic works including accompanying music, pictorial, sound
recordings, architectural work, graphic and sculptural works, motion pictures and other
audiovisual works.20

In copyrightable work, the law does not protect ideas, procedures, methods, systems,
concepts, principles, discoveries, devices or processes, but the written or recorded
descriptions, explanations and illustrations. Any work that has not been fixed in a
tangible form of expression is not protected. Such intangible expressions include

17
Chege, John W. (1978) Copyright law and publishing in Kenya. KLB.
18
Section 8(2) of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act of 2006.
19
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade
Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford University.
20
Ibid.

4
impoverished speeches which have not been written down or recorded. 21 similarly no
protection is provided to works that comprise of information that is commonly available
without a specific origin.22

Copyright remains in the possession of the creator as distinct from the physical object
which embodies it, unless in situations where work is created through hiring 23 as seen in
Uganda Performing Rights Society v. MTN (U) Ltd. 24 Creators have exclusive rights
to perform or authorize others to reproduce, distribute, and, in the case of certain works,
publicly perform or display the work; to prepare derivative works; in the case of sound
recordings, to perform the work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission; or to
license others to engage in the same actions under specific terms and conditions as
founded on the original creation. Violation amounts to infringement, unless under
circumstances of specific exemptions such as fair use and compulsory license as seen
in Reed Elsevier, Inc. v Muchnick where rights could not be limited by scope, to
impose liability on user.25

1.2.4 Contextual background

In most European countries copyright law evolved from efforts of government to
regulate and control the output of printers on invention of technology of printing in the
15th and 16th centuries. All over Europe, governments established controls over
creativities giving owners exclusive rights.

In England, the first law was enacted in 1709 but was replaced in the 1730s when
changes had to be introduced to overcome the intense controversy and litigation for
those that had statutory rights to print in England and Scotland. In particular court
decisions it has been found that, there is no satisfaction was found in maintaining a

21
Sebaggala v MTN Civil Suit No. 287 of 2010,
22
Jeroline Akubu Balancing features in Uganda’s copyright law (2007) Collaborating on Copyright
Balance in Commonwealth Project.
23
Supra at note 17
24
Ibid at note 22
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade Organization’s
GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford University.
25
Mary Bellis, About.com Guide Inventors

5
copyright at common law in works which had been published and had enjoyed copyright
under the 1709 Act.26

In the United States, copyright protection existed from the 1790s when the Constitution
provided the Congress with power to enact laws which establish a copyright regime with
the first law enacted in May. Claims were originally recorded by clerks of US district
courts until the 1870s when copyright functions were centralized in the library of
congress. Today in the US, the Copyright Office is an important service unit of the
Library of Congress with the office yearly registering half a million claims to copyright. 27

In Australia copyright law is contained in the Copyright Act of 1968 and court decisions
and copyright notice is not necessary for protection, but does notify people that the work
is protected and identifies the person claiming the right.28

In Kenya, Copyright law originated from England when Kenya adopted the English
copyright law of 1911 at independence (1963) passing the first Kenyan law. 29 Copyright
law in Kenya had outlived its importance and purpose by the year 2000, given the
number of developments that took place since its establishment. The growing publishing
industry rendered the law totally inapplicable, leading to enactment of a new law. 30 An
official body (Kenya Copyright Board – KECOBO) was established to oversee all issues
that arise from copyright in Kenya.31

In Uganda Copyright32 is a relatively recent development which was first introduced by

the British in a bid to protect works of British authors and publishers. 33 For many years

26
Hinton v Donaldson and in Donald v Beckett C
27
Masciola, Amy. “Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States.” Updated 22 Nov. 2002. Retrieved 10
Feb. 2003 <http://arl.cni.org/info/frn/copy/timeline.html>.
28
INFORMATION SHEET G013v06 March 2012, Australian International Council
29
Copyright Act 1966.
30
Copyright Act (2001)
31
Galtbach, Phillip (ed) (1995) Copyright and development. Inequality in the information age. Bellagio Publishing
Network.
32
Copyright Act Cap. 215 of 1964
33
HF Morris ‘Sir Philip Mitchell and “Protected Rule” in Buganda’ (1972) 13 Journal of African History 2
at 305-323.

6
copyright has been a least concern for the vast majority of Ugandans especially in rural
areas, much as its appreciation remains low among the inventors. 34 Since its’
inception35 no effort was made to improve the law to suit the Ugandan context for a long
time, until recently in 2006,36 mounted by an external pressure environment and a few
internal claims from recording and performing artists to generate a copyright favorable
environment.37 But this environment is contravened by regional arrangements.

Worldwide, Regional Integration Arrangements (RIAs) constitute an increasingly

significant feature of the trade system 38 with more than half of the total world trade
occurring through regional trade blocs and agreements. In Africa, the increasing number
of trade agreements is a clear indicator that RIAs have become a popular vehicle for
promoting trade and growth.39 Kenya and Uganda are both members of various
Regional Integration Arrangements (RIAs). RIAs have been noted as vital instruments
for growth40 but present agreements and blocs which pose threats that offset
copyright.41 The multiplicity of national and regional standards and import procedures
alike has created obstacles to the export procedures42 affecting the implementation of
copyright law.

Uganda and Kenya are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and as
members are obliged to ensure compliance and conformity of their laws and regulations

34
Jeroline Akubu Balancing features in Uganda’s copyright law (2007) Collaborating on Copyright Balance in
Commonwealth Project at 1.
35
Copyright Act Cap. 215 of 1964
36
Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act (2006)
37
Jeroline Akubu Balancing features in Uganda’s copyright law (2007) Collaborating on Copyright
Balance in Commonwealth Project at 1.
38
Aryeetey, E. and A. Oduro (1996). ‘Regional Integration Efforts in Africa: An Overview’, in J. J. Teunissen (ed.),
Regionalism and the Global Economy: The Case of Africa, FONDAD, The Hague.
39
UNECA (2004). Assessing Regional Integration in Africa, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa,
Addis Ababa.
40
Colin Kirkpatrick and Watanabe Matsuo (2005). Regional Trade in Sub-Saharan Africa: An Analysis of East
African Trade Cooperation from 1970 to 2001, Manchester School, Vol. 73 No. 2 1463-6776.
41
Mukwaya, R. G. (2008), Trade Effect of a Single Currency in East Africa. Ph.D. Dissertation. Clemson
University, Clemson SC.
42
Soloaga, Isidro, and L. Alan Winters (2009) “How has Regionalism in the 1990s Affected Trade?”, Policy
Research Working Paper Series No. 2156, World Bank.

7
to member states’ obligations.43 The African Regional Intellectual Property (ARIPO) also
required that harmonizing intellectual property laws with other regional group members,
while the East African Community (EAC) integration compelled for an update of
intellectual property laws to protect creative industries in their integration. This required
Uganda and Kenya to make various adjustments in order to meet compliance.

In Kenya, various adjustments had to be met in the copyright regime which saw the
enactment of a new law in 200144 to suit current trade environment as member of
various integrations with a body introduced to govern copyright issues.45

In Uganda a bill was tabled in 2004 and the law enacted in 2006. 46 Indeed, in the Vision
2035 document, Uganda is considering the management of information and knowledge
as cornerstones of national development and thus recognizes the need to prepare for,
and take advantage of the information age with no effort spared in creating an
information- rich society.47

Copyright law is adopted to enhance respect and appreciation for the hard work done in
making creations which are found to be useful by those who make no contribution to the
original work.48 Broadly expressed, different nations have adopted copyright law to
promote and protect the economic and social rights of their inventors. Human beings
are by nature creative and able to come up with products from their creative activities, 49
which other people make use of. Therefore deserve intellectual protection for their
unique contributions and abilities. But this has not been sufficiently furnished.

43
Marrakesh Agreement (1994) Article XVI.
44
Copyright Act (2001)
45
Galtbach, Phillip (ed) (1995), Copyright and development: Inequality in the information age. Bellagio Publishing
Network.
46
Ibid
47
Jeroline Akubu Balancing features in Uganda’s copyright law (2007) Collaborating on Copyright
Balance in Commonwealth Project at 1.
48
Ibid at 49
49
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade
Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford University.

8
There is a consistently, unauthorized application of copyrightable materials by users in
Kenya and Uganda, with less being done to persecute violators. Following this
background and setting, the study will seek to explore the efficacy of the copyright
regime in protecting writers and the entertainment industry with particular consideration
of the Ugandan and Kenyan jurisdictions.

1.3 Problem statement

The relationship between copyright protection and copyright infringement remains
complex and therefore of great concern. In Uganda 50 and Kenya51 Copyright protection
is a contribution to development, much as it may be deterrence to development if
information access is blocked.52 The existing copyright regimes53 remain widely
circumstantial in protecting works of artists and writers in the two countries. This is
because the copyright regimes contravene constitutional provisions on access to
information.

The contradictions of the law, poor enforcement mechanisms, disorganization and

disunity of copyright holders all remain substantial factors in the poor observation of the
copyright law, an environment which impedes the success of copyright observation.
However, legal flaws need to be addressed and creating a stricter copyright regime
created. The research will therefore be an examination of the efficacy of the copyright
regime in protecting writers and artists to promote legal improvement.

1.4 Purpose of the study

This paper will attempt to address the inadequacies of the copyright law by raising
synthetic assumptions which question the underlying need to protect the creative works
of authors and artists in Uganda and Kenya in face of the recent developments where
access to information is considered a great factor in development, with exceptions
made in particular for fair use and joint ownership rights. This will be purposely done to
50
The Copyright and Neighbouring Act (2006) and The Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Regulation (2010)
51
The Copyright Act (2001)
52
Otike, Japhet (1996). The provision of legal information to rural populations in Anglophone Africa. Libri, Vol. 46,
pp. 228-31.
53
The Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act (2006) Laws of Uganda: The Copyright Act 2001 Laws of Kenya

9
 find out whether copyright law allows maximum protection to grant real benefits and
support to writers and artists for their different creations, the challenges therein to
determine what changes can be made.

1.5 Research objectives

1.5.1 General objective
The general objective of the study is to examine the applicability of the copyright regime
as measured with the need to meet new development demands in the face of protecting
writers and artists in Uganda and Kenya.

1.5.2 Specific objective

The study is objectively driven by the need to;
i) Examine the level of significance of the different copyright protections for artists and
writers in Uganda and Kenya in respect to obligations imposed by the EAC
arrangements.
ii) Examine the substantiality of the law in establishing appropriate indicators of
ownership in a joint contribution as subject to writers and entertainment industry in
Uganda and Kenya.
iii) To establish the composition of extracted work which amounts to fair use in
promoting access to information while protecting the interest of writers and artists in
Uganda and Kenya.

1.6 Research questions

The study is to be thematically guided by the following questions;
(i) What is the level of significance of the different copyright protections in meeting the
rights of artists and writers while fulfilling obligations imposed by the EAC
integration?
(ii) What is the substantiality of law in establishing appropriate standard indicators for
the contributions made by different owners in a copyright?
(iii) What component of extracted work amounts to fair use in the right to information
access while protecting the interest of artists and writers?

10
1.7 Scope of the study
1.7.1 Geographical scope
The study will be limited to examining the law of copyrights in protecting inventions of
writers and artists within the jurisdictions of Uganda and Kenya and shall be restricted to
the particular creative works protected by the law and challenges therein, to establish
how applicable and inapplicable the law has been in addressing copyright issues.

1.7.2 Theoretical Scope

Theoretically, the study is an intersection of the copyright regime and creations of
authors and artists in Uganda54 and Kenya55 where copyright regime broadly defines the
laws, policies, regulations, cases, practices, effects and court decisions taken in
protecting the different works of authors and artists.
1.7.3 Content Scope
For purposes of this study, the independent variable is perceived as the copyright law
which by nature is self-regulating and influential of the dependent variable (creations)
whose recognition depends on how the law has been enabled or disenabled. The study
will focus on the period 2006 to the present when the law was amended to suit the
Ugandan context, and the period 2001 to the present when the copyright law was
amended to suit the current situation.

1.8 Significance of the study

The study findings will contribute significantly to the identification of the factors which
introduce inadequacies in the copyright regime. The study will provide commendable
knowledge to the policy makers and implementers on copyright holdings and creative
works protected therein for effective policy action to be taken.

The study will be of contribution to legislators on specific guidelines which can be

considered in reviewing the law of copyright.

54
The Copyright Act (2006) Section 5.
55
The Copyright Act (2001).

11
Further, it will contribute awareness on issues embodied in copyrighted works to both
right holders and enforcers. Copyright holders will be guided on making proper
enhancements for their claims, just like enforcers will be able to promote effective
protection of copyrighted works.

The study is also expected to provide a base for future research which will help to
bridge the existing gaps on the subject. The recommendations made will contribute to
the debate on copyright for possible amendment of the law.

The study results will be an addition and update of the existing database on copyright
issues under the field of entertainment and authorship for referential purposes.

1.9 Literature Review

The principle component of this research is concerned with a wider and thoughtful
perception of the components of copyright law in relation to the legal requirements of
creative works of authors and artists protected under the copyright regime, applicability
of the copyright law in protecting tangible expressions of authors and artists and the in
light of the new policy developments and identified challenges therein in enforcing
copyrights to provide a concrete analysis of the policy and legal frameworks that
surround copyright decisions. This study will therefore rely on experiential knowledge
which will reflect upon, as well as discuss the various opinions, ideas and conclusions
from different authors, publications, magazines, websites, and all possible sources of
copyright law.

1.9.1 Significance of the different copyright protections of artists and writers in

light of EAC arrangements and obligations imposed
Copyright56 is an aspect of intellectual property which relates to people’s creative and
inventive activities. It is a spur to artistic creativity, a basis for the business of music, and
a way to let people who have a gift for writing, producing or singing make a living by

56
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade
Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford University.

12
doing what they and their fans enjoy.57 In one study from the US58 copyright is defined
as a legal concept which grants authors and artists control over certain uses of their
creations for defined periods of time to limit who may copy, change or share these
creations.59 Whether copyright law in Uganda and Kenya grants the same benefits to
artists and writers to regulate who copies, changes or shares these creations will be
explored under this study.

When one produces a piece of music in form of text, graphic, photo, a film or anything
there is a whole system of legal right obligations that comes into play. 60 Copyright rights
under particular circumstances have been assigned or licensed to other people to sell
and transfer rights to another. By licensing copyright, gives the licensee permission to
deal with the work in a manner contracted which can be limited to type of use, period of
time or territory on payment of loyalty.61

In Kenya, the eligible works for copyright protection include 62; literary works both printed
and non- printed materials such as books, journals, magazines, newspapers, computer
programmes; musical works; paintings; drawings; engraving, maps; plans; works of
sculpture; architectural drawings; audio- visual works; sound recordings and
broadcasts.

In Uganda the scope of copyright protection63 ranges from economic and social rights in
a work. Besides economic rights such as publication, distribution, broadcasting and
communication to the public, the law also recognizes and protects moral rights as non-

57
Copyright is the engine of progress: Copyright is the guardian of the most precious skill: imagination, Australian
Recording Industry Association Ltd.
58
Berkman Centre for Internet and Society (2009). Copyright for librarians. Harvard University
59
Attorney-General v Sanyu Television High Court Civil Suit No. 614 of 1998, reported in Uganda Commercial
Law Reports 1997-2001 (2005) 184-190 at 185, Blackhall Publishing, Dublin, Ireland
60
Copyright is the engine of progress: Copyright is the guardian of the most precious skill: imagination, Australian
Recording Industry Association Ltd.
61
Australian Book Contracts (4th ed): see the ASA website at www.asauthors.org
62
Otike, Japhet (1997). Legal information needs of the general public, with special reference to developing
countries. Library Review,Vol.46 ( 1&2), pp. 28-33.
63
Section 2 of the Copyright Act of 2006

13
assignable and these include the right to claim authorship of the work; the right to have
the author’s name or pseudonym mentioned or acknowledged each time the work is
used; the right to object to and seek relief in connection with any unauthorized
distortion, mutilation, modification or alteration of the work; and the right to withdraw the
work from circulation if the author so chooses.

In authorship work, public benefit works are not entitled to copyright protection, 64 and
these include government works and legal proceedings. Enactments, decrees, orders or
court decisions and reports made by committees or commissions of inquiry appointed
by government cannot be copyrighted, thus publicly accessible.

However, protection is given to literary, scientific and artistic works (including computer
programmes, illustrations and traditional folklore and knowledge 65), as well as derivative
works such as translations, transformations and collections.66 Limiting the usage of
information restricts the possibility of knowledge expansion and development in mutual
use. The study will explore whether copyright observation in Kenya and Uganda has
generated enough room for knowledge exploitation and expansion.

Many countries around the world which are signatories to international conventions
such as the Marrakesh Agreement,67 and Berne Convention68 provide exemptions and
exceptions for some copyright restrictions of which users are not required to seek
permission from the right-holder. The conventions compel member states to provide
these exemptions in their national copyright laws. 69 Kenya70 and Uganda71 have
provisions for these exemptions in their copyright legislation. According to Otike’s72

64
Section 7 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act of 2006.
65
Ibid Section 5 (1) (J)
66
Kawooya Dick, Ronald Kakungulu and Jeroline Akubu (2009), African Copyright and Access to Knowledge:
Country Report, ACA2K.
67
Marrakesh Agreement (1994)
68
Berne Convention (1887)
69
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade
Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Oxford, Chandos Publishing.:
70
The Copyright Act (2001)
71
The Copyright Act (2006)
72
Ibid at 45

14
exceptions under copyright law include;

Exceptions provided on restricted rights to promote access to information by users

including writers, authors and researchers to reduce the burden of seeking written
permission from the not so easily located authors, every time a work is cited. This also
reduces the flooding requests that authors may not be able to cope with exceptions
provided on some copyright restrictions also help in disseminating information to wider
audience through controlled reproduction and inter-library lending, yet writers and
publishers alike, stand to benefit from the exemptions in their official capacity as
consumers or users of information, else writers and authors would remain equally
handicapped.73

The copyright owner is generally the only person entitled to; undertake reproduction of a
work, publicize the material for the first time, recite or perform the material in public,
communicate the material to the public by use of technology in addition to making a
translation, or dramatized and picture version of the copyrighted work. 74 The study will
explore why all original publications and productions have not been made by the original
or licensed owners.

In authorship work, writer may take legal action against anyone who fails to
acknowledge his authorship or those that falsely attribute work to other persons, or alter
the writers work in a prejudicial manner. Copyright is considered infringed if copyrighted
work is used in ways reserved to owner without permission. But defenses can be raised
on moral rights if user received writers’ consent and if treatment is derogatory or failure
to respect moral right was legally acceptable and reasonable in all circumstances.75

However, besides the copyright law the East African Community (EAC) integration is
purposing in East Africa to accelerate economic development through liberalized trade

73
Ibid at 45
74
Galtbach, (1995) Copyright and development. Inequality in the information age. Bellagio Publishing Network.
75
Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the World Trade
Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford University.

15
and is one of the central drivers for economic integration. 76 Policies and programs have
been developed to widen and deepen cooperation among member states for mutual
benefits in the political, social and cultural arenas, in particular research and technology
for the case of this study77 with member countries working towards eliminating Non-Tariff
Barriers to accelerate development.78
The study will examine whether by restricting users in Kenya and Uganda to seek
permission from owners before applying copyrighted materials is not a limitation to
mutual benefits that can be derived, and whether by eliminating NTBs for member
countries does not affect the protection of copyright. This may be of help in formulating
ways to align individual rights with regional rights in ensuring compliance by member
states.

1.9.2 The substantiality of the law in establishing appropriate apportionment of

ownership in joint contribution of writers and artists
The law of copyright is engineered to promote development by protecting the economic
and social interest of the creators to promote their innovative and creative abilities.
Different countries establish different laws and policy frameworks through which
copyright advancement can be supported.

Copyright law provides exemptions which help to discourage censorship. Otherwise

right-holders would restrict the dissemination of certain information and librarians’
resource sharing work would be halted because of restricted dissemination. The
underlying fact is that exceptions help to increase the use of information resources and
supports needs of users in enhancing education. Exceptions and limitations thus help in
striking balance between the interest of original creators and the interests of users with
the public at large. This is because restrictions recognize the user’s right to access

76
East African Community (EAC) (2007). Treaty for the establishment of the East African Community. (A amended
on 14th December, 2006 and 20th August, 2007). http://www.eac.int/index.php/advisory-opinions/doc_details/158-
amended-treaty-for-the-establishment-of-east-african-community.html
77
IDS (2008). Study on Impact of the EAC Customs Union on Businesses. Consultancy study done for EABC,
Arusha, Tanzania.
78
Mattoo, Aaditya, Randeep Rathindran and Arvind Subramanian (2001). Measuring Services Trade Liberalization
and Its Impact on Economic Growth: An Illustration, of the EAC Experience, World Bank, Washington, D.C

16
information which is a great tool in promoting creation of new works which would
otherwise be impeded.79

Under the doctrine of fair use, copyright law allows for limited copying of copyrighted
works if this is done for purposes of education and research. Reproduction is also
allowed for copyrighted works for purposes of raising criticisms, teaching and news
reporting or research. To determine whether use of a copyrighted work is a permitted
fair use, or not court considers the purpose and character of the use of a copyrighted
work to establish whether; use was commercial or for non profit educational purposes;
the effect of use of a copyrighted work upon the potential market/value of a copyrighted
work to establish if this robs the creator of economic benefits that would be derived from
the work.80; how factual and less creative the nature of copyrighted work appears and;
to compare the substantiality of the portion used in the derivative in relation to a
copyrighted work. Court thus determines copyrighted cases by considering not just one
of the mentioned factors, but a balance of all to weigh in favor of fair use.
In Kenya, the Copyright Board is responsible for fostering compliance of laws and
international treaties and conventions which relate to copyright, of which Kenya is a
signatory. The same board licenses and supervises activities of collective management
organizations in addition to devising promotions, introduction and training programmes
on copyright and its related right as well as organizing legislations on copyright and
related rights by proposing other arrangements that will ensure its constant
improvement and continuing effectiveness. In Uganda copyrights are catered for by
collective societies.81

The policy framework create Reproductive Rights Organizations (RROs) to provide

linkages between copyright owners and users to prevent direct dealings of right-holders
with users for proper enhancement of copyright observation.82 Whereof Reproductive
Rights Organizations are organizations or societies appointed by copyright owners to
79
Ibid
80
Uganda Performing Rights Society Limited v Fred Mukubira (Misc.App.No.818 Of 2003)
Galtbach, Phillip (ed) (1995) Copyright and development. Inequality in the information age. Bellagio Publishing
Network.
81
Part VII of the Copyright and neighbouring Act, 2006

17
issue reproduction licence or receive reproduction fee on their behalf.83

The procedure is because of many copyright owners not having the time and resources
to issue licence to each and every person that requests to reproduce a copyrighted
work.84 In Tanzania for example, the Copyright Society of Tanzania 85
(COSOTA) is
established to create this linkage. In Kenya, the Reproduction Rights Society of Kenya
(KOPIKEN) is present to collect royalties for owners of literary works. 86 Such an agency
is not present in Uganda for literary works, much as there is a Collective Management
Organization (CMO) for the entertainment industry. 87 However in Uganda there is too
much self-marketing and self regulation despite the impossibility of individually
administering one’s work in a rapidly changing world of technology. Whether the
linkages created are helpful in balancing of interest between users and right holders in
the two countries, remains an issue of exploration for this study.

In musical and written texts, a copyright mostly constitutes joint contribution with each
individual contributor having an entitlement in the copyright. This requires establishing
the appropriateness of each individual contribution in the final composition, production
or authorship. Often times copyrighted materials, if jointly produced have a written
agreement. It is required to make a carefully ascertainment of the details to identify who
will own copyright in the material. If no agreement of the type is signed, then rules of
ownership may apply.88 The study will explore whether without express agreement

82
Japhet Otike, Copyright: The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya, School of Information Sciences, Moi University Eldoret,
Standing Conference of East, Central and Southern African Librarians (SCECSAL) June 4-8, 2012.
83
Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya” Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University
Eldoret.
84
Ibid
85
Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act No. 7, (1999) laws of Tanzania.
86
Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya” Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University
Eldoret.
87
Uganda Performing Rights Society
88
Galtbach, Phillip (ed) (1995) Copyright and development. Inequality in the information age. Bellagio Publishing
Network

18
 signed between contributors to a copyrighted work, rules of ownership automatically
apply in Kenya and Uganda.

If contribution is through employment, the employer usually owns copyright in works

made arising from the employment position and duties. Unless otherwise expressly
stated, can ownership be split while creating copyright material. 89 The study finds it
necessary to explore the rules applicable under the position of employment in a
copyrighted work in Kenya and Uganda.

1.9.3 Extracted component of a copyrighted work that amounts to fair use in light
of protecting the interest of owners while promoting information access at
the same time
Information has a potential value in use that can be assessed only after it has been
used and the results have become viable.90 In developing nations ignorance of the law
is very common91 that any linkages established under their policy and regulatory
frameworks to transfer information and knowledge from creators to users have been
criticized for taking advantage of the ignorance of users to exploit them. Because, many
users are unaware of their entitlements underlying exceptions and limitations under the
doctrine of fair use, to reproduce a copyrighted work in limited amounts without seeking
clearance from copyright owners or their agents, they are exploited.92
Indeed a problematic quality of audiovisual media lays in the fact that developed
countries possess economic advantages over developing countries. This is because
western producers able to extensively market their film or entertainment productions to
massive markets for example producers such as 20th Century Fox. 93 Moreover once
89
Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations (RROs) in the Provision of
Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya” Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University
Eldoret.
90
Vitro (1990) cited in Menou, MJ., (Ed) (1993) Measuring the Impact of Information on
Development Ottawa: IDRC
91
Ibid 40
92
Berkman Centre for Internet and Society (2009). Copyright for librarians: a distance learning course: Hauroo, P.
(nd). Copyright issues for libraries in Mauritius, Library and Information Association, Mauritius.
93
Smiers, J., (Ed) (2003) Arts under Pressure. Promoting Cultural Diversity in the Age of Globalisation New York:
Zed Books p 171

19
losses on one film are incurred, the big film corporations recover their investment by
falling back on previous or subsequent productions. Small producer countries lack the
initial capital base to market their films and therefore remain restricted to marginal
markets. Yet the high cost incurred in movie production is the same regardless of the
number of times it is screened.94
The study will explore whether attempts to improve legal awareness of users and
keeping them abreast of the law like the owners may be of help in overcoming copyright
issues that arise out of information sharing.

Though imitation of role models facilitates cognitive learning, it decries the exposure at
an early age and does not recommend democratization. 95 By extracting a piece of
literary material or a part from the whole performance, may be because of a yearning
relationship to get away from self by wishing and imagining self to be like someone else
that one may be admiring.96

The filming industry for example presents an experience of vicarious transportation, an

opportunity to participate in distant scripts, sceneries and scenarios, representing new
acquaintances. This presents faces, voices and personal lives to become well known by
mass media audiences, thus are both admired and followed with interest by a large
segment of the population when they become celebrities. The public thus may desire to
emulate a multitude in achievement and style. This has led to invasion of the
audiovisual celebrities in the private sphere violating their ownership rights, because
their intention of creating a popular background is to sustain publicity while maintaining
a link with their fans. However, the social order is disrupted on the other hand, when the
role-model concern is ignored to impose ownership recognition. 97 But the imitators or

94
Price, ME., (Ed) (1995) Television, the Public Sphere and National Identity Oxford: Clarendon Press.
95
Arendt (Arendt, H., (Ed) (1969) Between Past and Future New York: Viking Press pg 186)
96
Orrin E. Klapp (1969), Collective Search for Identity, Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc.
Freidman, LM., (Eds) (1990) The Republic of Choice: Law, Authority and Culture Cambridge MA:
Harvard University Press pp 112-132
97
S usan Karstedt, and Kai-D Bussman (2000), (Eds) Social Dynamics of Crime and Control: New
Theories for a World in Transition Oxford: Hart Publishers Chapter 4

20
new celebrities may easily pass off fraudulent identities as confidence tricksters.98
Whether copying from a work of a celebrity amounts to unfair use, and whether
protection for sustainability of a name is sufficient to dispense the legal promotion of
development for all individuals and nation at large, remains an issue of concern to be
explored under this study in the context of Uganda and Kenya.

By transferring rights in a copyright, there is increased trust, solidarity and informal

control. However this may result in organized crime especially in developing nations
which have less literate and less commercially sophisticated populations with weaker
information gathering institutions.99 Patented right holder may use innuendo to invite
innocent buyers to rely upon distributed images which the courts have difficulty in
defining and penalizing for example in Carlill V Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.

In Uganda, weakness of the law is one reason why infringement of copyright is a

common practice. It is noted that there is rampant illegal photocopying of books just like
is music copying which mainly stems from the technologically enabling environment and
internet infringement is also common in newspapers where lifting of articles is done
without attribution or acknowledgement. One study also points out on the lack of
effective administration of the law, weak enforcement and lack of awareness amongst
right-holders to be a recipe for the problematic copyright environment. Further assertion
is drawn from another study which notes that authors and musicians alike and other
copyright owners are vulnerable to economic exploitation by users because of the long
history of non-enforcement of copyright which created an impression that copyright is
not protectable property yet authors can be promoted through infringement.

In information economies, media houses like CNN, ABC, BBC, provide consumer lobby
groups with avenues to sponsor television commercials aired during peak viewing

98
(Karstedt, S., 2000 "Knights of Crime: The Success of the ‘Pre Modern' Structures in the
Illegal Economy" in Susan Karstedt, and Kai-D Bussman, (Eds) Social Dynamics of Crime
and Control: New Theories for a World in Transition Oxford: Hart Publishers
99

21
hours. Audiences in homesteads pay attention to messages conveyed by popular
programmes and are able to accumulate information thereby creating a demand for its
use100 as pleasure of an interface in visual technology which helps to brand products to
the detriment of unadvertised products. However, whether this is viewed as an
infringement of copyright or a development issue in the error of growing technology is a
prime concern of what amounts to fair use in this study.

The growth and advancement of the information technology is a factor of the

infringement of copyrights. The increasing use of digital technologies and the internet is
constraining the lack of provisions in the copyright regime to regulate digital media,
because recent developments in technology provide a window for accessing electronic
resources under fair use, for example, by those at tertiary institutions with good access
to ICTs.101
For example how capacity for developments in information technology can be protected
and not hampering information access is a legal aspect of concern. The rationale is that,
implementation of copyright requires a clear legal and policy framework, a supportive
infrastructure for implementing the laws and trained personnel and resources to get the
framework operative.

Similarly one study associates infringement practices with the lack of awareness of the
law, weaknesses of the law and low literacy rates, among other factors. The dimension
of the copyright problem stems from the ill-conceived onset of the law which does not
account for Ugandan circumstances. Assertion is put on copyright being applied by
developed nations to deter their counterparts in Africa from meeting local demand which
leaves African publishers heavily dependant on foreign publishers with copyright acting
as a yardstick.

In situations of poverty, piracy is providing low income groups with affordable materials

100
Claus Mueller (1973), The Politics of Communication. A Study in the Political Sociology of Language,
Socialization and Legitimation, NY, Oxford.
101
Kawooya Dick, Ronald Kakungulu and Jeroline Akubu (2009), African Copyright and Access to Knowledge:
Country Report, ACA2K.

22
and books which are priced out of range. Much as publishers are aware of the copyright
law, the government machinery available for copyright administration is insufficient. The
Ugandan book sector is experiencing a reproduction and copying of works without
authorization. Copied works generate appeal of the low class groups because they are
priced out of range. This intuitive assertion, made in the study reveals that piracy is
filling the gap left by formal industries.
On the contrary another study102 associates the problem of infringement or piracy as not
simply stemming from a quest to cheap materials or copies, but from bookshops as their
accomplices.103 The plaintiffs sued defendant for infringement of copyright of the book
“Introduction to Biology” and alleged that the first defendant was selling counterfeit
copies of the book in his Kampala Newstyles Bookshop, thus causing a decline in the
plaintiff’s sales, strict liability was imposed on the defendant.

If the principle of fair use existed at the time, the ideal situation for a poor country like
Uganda would be a list of possible exceptions and limitations for education and
research related copying not constrained by definition of fairness. 104 The book is one of
the types that had dominated the market in secondary schools. Domination of the
market by particular text books promotes piracy. Unlike other books, textbooks have an
ever-growing market which outstrips other publishing segments. 105 In addition foreign
textbooks dominate the curriculum and yet are costly to acquire, this creates a favorable
environment for copying as pirates don’t get to feel the presence of the owner.
Information hungry students therefore have no choice but to reproduce any material that
will be of use to them for their studies, as this is not illegal.

Difficulties in separating of roles in the production process to identify who owns what
102
Elizabeth Lumu The impact of piracy on Uganda’s publishing industry: a case study of Kampala New
Styles Bookshop Ltd versus John Murray (1999) Unpublished dissertation for the award of a Master of
Science in Information Science, Makerere University.
103
John Murray (Publishers) Ltd and Others v George William Senkindu and
Another.
104
Berkman Centre for Internet and Society (2009). Copyright for librarians: a distance learning course: Hauroo, P.
(nd). Copyright issues for libraries in Mauritius, Library and Information Association, Mauritius.
105
Elizabeth Lumu The impact of piracy on Uganda’s publishing industry: a case study of Kampala New
Styles Bookshop Ltd versus John Murray (1999) Unpublished dissertation for the award of a Master of
Science in Information Science, Makerere University.

23
and how much benefits go to who? in appreciation of copyright as an asset is major
concern in associated ownership. Further difficulties are experienced in understanding
the concept of collective management as well as the concepts of assignment and
licensing.106 The current situation is that, authors and composers are more into self-
producing, self-management, self-marketing, self-everything. The organizational apathy
and self isolation among right owners creates a divided industry which can collectively
come together, while copyright issues remain a complex to be handled at individual
levels.107 This has created impunity for users who violate copyrightable works while they
make a fortune out of these creations.

Considering Intellectual Property as an asset in the trade arena provokes an

impression of confrontation between developed and developing countries. In case of
Uganda the copyright regime is viewed as inconsistent with needs and aspirations of
the people and those of the economy which leads to loss of incentive to create at the
hands of lax protection systems. Similarly, counteracting laws are established to be a
factor in copyright infringement. The weak enforcement mechanism dissuades foreign
direct investment as investors are interested in an environment with a strong copyright
regime. The counteracting laws require undergoing reform if development is to be
enhanced.108

The absence of stimulating and supportive policies is a hindrance to innovative thinking

especially in the higher institutions of learning. In case of Uganda for example, the
Makerere Intellectual Property Management is a recent development of 2008 despite
the fact that the university is the biggest and oldest in the country. This development
was realization of the call by the Inter-University Council for East Africa (IUCEA) which
recommended universities and research institutions in East Africa to develop
institutional policies in addition to building capacities to manage intellectual properties.
106
James Wasula (2011) Challenges Faced by Collective Management Organizations in Uganda, UPRS.
107
Elizabeth Lumu The impact of piracy on Uganda’s publishing industry: a case study of Kampala New
Styles Bookshop Ltd versus John Murray (1999) Unpublished dissertation for the award of a Master of
Science in Information Science, Makerere University
108
Elizabeth Lumu The impact of piracy on Uganda’s publishing industry: a case study of Kampala New
Styles Bookshop Ltd versus John Murray (1999) Unpublished dissertation for the award of a Master of
Science in Information Science, Makerere University

24
Despite this being the case, there is a general absence of stimulating policies in other
institutions to enable ownership and efficient management of intellectual assets and
innovations created by students and staff.

1.9. 3 Conclusion
Copyright protection is a necessary, if creative and innovative ideas are to be promoted
among writers and performers. This is because copyright is a return for their investment
which can further growth of ideas as well as development. However, the extent of
limitation or exception requires to be clearly established to help users work hand in
hand with copyright owners, in promoting growth through information access. This is
because no society can survive in an information vacuum. If information is held from
use, ceases to be of purpose and when it is accessed by the public criticisms and
additions are expected.

1.10 Methodology
The research being of a legal nature, an exploratory research design in which
qualitative aspect will be observed in achieving the objectives of this study will be
undertaken. The study will be carried out within Uganda through library research and
interviews with key informants including members of Collective Management
Organizations (CMOs), legal students from Kenya and Uganda as well as Performing
Rights Groups representatives who shall be drawn through snowballing. Snowballing as
recommended by Bryman109 is a form of convenience sampling where initial contact with
a small group of people who are relevant to the study will be made and these will then
help to establish contacts with others.”

The research will qualitatively be driven and to obtain the qualitative components,
challenge assessments interviews will be carried out with individual artists and writers.
Interview method is purposely selected because it allows for a systematic flow of
information and is directly carried out by the researcher who ensures that interviews
remain impressionistic and free from suspicion. To carry out this study, permission will

109
Bryman . A (2001:100)

25
be sought from Collective Management Organizations like the UPRS.

The study will explain, describe and present the study findings guided by the specific
objectives of the study, and research questions where data analysis will be done and
concluded qualitatively.

1.11 Synopsis of the chapters

This chapter covers the introduction, background, statement of the problem, purpose,
objectives, research questions, scope, significance, literature review and methodology
that will be applied in carrying out this exploration.

Chapter two will cover the copyright regime for both national and international
instruments applicable in Kenya and Uganda and a critique of these laws.

Chapter three will involve an analysis of the scope of copyrights for creative writers and
entertainment industry covering; determinants of copyrights; management and
implementation of copyrights of the works of writers and entertainment industry;
transferability of copyrights; awareness and integration; benefits and disadvantages of
copyrights;

Chapter four will provide an analysis of the views obtained from the findings through
book review as well as from the respondents.

Chapter five will provide a summary, conclusion and recommendations of the study
findings as expressed in chapter four.

26
 Bibliography

Arendt (Arendt, H., (Ed) (1969) Between Past and Future New York: Viking Press pg
186)

Australian Book Contracts (4th ed): see the ASA website at www.asauthors.org

Berkman Centre for Internet and Society (2009). Copyright for librarians for librarians: a
distance learning course: Hauroo, P. (nd). Copyright issues for libraries in Mauritius,
Library and Information Association, Mauritius.

Claus Mueller (1973), The Politics of Communication. A Study in the Political Sociology
of Language, Socialization and Legitimation, NY, Oxford.

Colin Kirkpatrick and Watanabe Matsuo (2005). Regional Trade in Sub-Saharan Africa:
An Analysis of East African Trade Cooperation from 1970 to 2001, Manchester School,
Vol. 73 No. 2.

East African Community (EAC) (2007). Treaty for the establishment of the East African
Community. (As amended on 14th December, 2006 and 20th August, 2007).
http://www.eac.int/index.php/advisory-opinions/doc_details/158-amended-treaty-for-the-
establishment-of-east-african-community.html

Elizabeth Lumu The impact of piracy on Uganda’s publishing industry: a case study of
Kampala New Styles Bookshop Ltd versus John Murray (1999) Unpublished
dissertation for the award of a Master of Science in Information Science, Makerere
University

27
Freidman, LM., (Eds) (1990) The Republic of Choice: Law, Authority and Culture
Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press pp 112-132

Fujita, Anne K. “The Great Internet Panic: How Digitization is Deforming Copyright Law.”
Updated 1996. Retrieved 10 Feb. 2003
<http://journal.law.ufl.edu/~techlaw/2/fujita.html>.

Galtbach, Phillip (ed) (1995), Copyright and development: Inequality in the information
age. Bellagio Publishing Network.

Ginsburg, J (2003), ‘From having copies to experiencing works: the development of an

access right in US copyright” Journal of Copyright Society of the USA.

IDS (2008). Study on Impact of the EAC Customs Union on Businesses. Consultancy
study done for EABC, Arusha, Tanzania.

Japhet Otike (2012) “The Challenges Posed by Reproduction Rights Organizations

(RROs) in the Provision of Information to Users with Special Reference to Kenya”
Copyright, School of Information Sciences, Moi University Eldoret.

Jeroline Akubu Balancing features in Uganda’s copyright law (2007) Collaborating on

Copyright Balance in Commonwealth Project at 1.

Karstedt, S., (2000) "Knights of Crime: The Success of the ‘Pre Modern' Structures in
the Illegal Economy" in Susan Karstedt, and Kai-D Bussman, (Eds) Social Dynamics of
Crime and Control: New Theories for a World in Transition Oxford: Hart Publishers.

Kawooya Dick, Ronald Kakungulu and Jeroline Akubu (2009), African Copyright and
Access to Knowledge: Country Report, ACA2K.

28
Masciola, Amy. “Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States.” Updated 22 Nov.
2002. Retrieved 10 Feb. 2003 <http://arl.cni.org/info/frn/copy/timeline.html>.

Mukwaya, R. G. (2008), Trade Effect of a Single Currency in East Africa. Ph.D.

Dissertation. Clemson University, Clemson SC.

Orrin E. Klapp (1969), Collective Search for Identity, Holt, Rinehart and Winston Inc.

Otike, Japhet (1996). The provision of legal information to rural populations in

Anglophone Africa. Libri, Vol. 46, pp. 228-31.

Otike, Japhet (1997). Legal information needs of the general public, with special
reference to developing countries. Library Review, Vol.46 ( 1&2), pp. 28-33.

Peter Drahos (2003), “Who owns the Knowledge economy” Information Feudalism,
Earthscan, London.

Price, ME., (Ed) (1995) Television, the Public Sphere and National Identity Oxford:
Clarendon Press.

Rikowski, Ruth (2005). Globalization, information and libraries: the implications of the
World Trade Organization’s GATS and TRIPS Agreements, Chandos Publishing, Oxford
University.

Seville C (2006), “The Internationalization of Copyright Law Books”, Buccaneers and

the Black Flag in the Nineteenth Century. Mc Millan Publishers.
Smiers, J., (Ed) (2003) Arts under Pressure. Promoting Cultural Diversity in the Age of
Globalisation New York: Zed Books p 171

Soloaga, Isidro, and L. Alan Winters (2009) “How has Regionalism in the 1990s Affected
Trade?”, Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 2156, World Bank.

29
Susan Karstedt, and Kai-D Bussman (2000), (Eds) Social Dynamics of Crime and
Control: New Theories for a World in Transition Oxford: Hart Publishers Chapter 4

Vitro (1990) cited in Menou, MJ., (Ed) (1993) Measuring the Impact of Information on
Development Ottawa: IDRC

30
INTERVIEW GUIDE

1) How has copyright law addressed the protection of the rights of writers and artists
in Uganda and Kenya in light of the contravening EAC policy demands?
2) How has the right to individual development constituted a copyright infringement of
writers’ and artists’ works in Uganda and Kenya?
3) In what context has the right to personal development affected the realization of
copyright implementation in copyrighted works for artists and writers in Uganda
and Kenya?
4) How has the principle of fair use hindered knowledge expansion in Uganda and
Kenya?
5) How appropriate can a copyright in joint ownership be apportioned to satisfy owner
interest in leasing or selling of ownership rights?
6) Has the law been able to come up with specific standard measurements as to what
amounts to fair use in application of knowledge from a copyrighted work?
7) Are there any legal challenges met in separating roles in the production process for
appropriate apportioning of copyright?
8) Is copyright law inconsistent with the policy demands as applicable in Kenya and
Uganda?
9) How has divisionism among copyright owners amounted to copyright infringement
in Uganda and Kenya?
10) What are the ways through which copyright law can be improved to serve to the
best of owners as well as to users in light of the principle of fair use?
11) How far true is it that domination of the market by particular copyrighted materials
accelerates copyright infringement in Uganda and Kenya?
12) Is there a possibility that copyright owners may be violating the exceptions
afforded for users in light of their exclusive ownership rights?
13) Are the established reproductive bodies fully functional in addressing the demands
of the law for both users and owners to benefit from information.

31