The Copyright Tribunal of Kenya has issued a landmark judgment in the case of Aryeh Movement Limited vs Cynthia Beldina Akoth Okello, a decision that could reshape how copyright law interacts with artificial intelligence (AI)-generated works in the country.
At the heart of the dispute was a letter from the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO), dated July 15, 2025, which sought to compel the parties to reach a written agreement on copyright ownership or risk deregistration of the disputed literary works. Aryeh Movement Limited challenged the decision, arguing that KECOBO had acted outside its legal authority.
Tribunal’s Findings
The Tribunal ruled that:
- KECOBO acted ultra vires (beyond its legal authority) when it attempted to resolve the copyright ownership dispute administratively.
- Copyright registration disputes fall squarely under the Tribunal’s jurisdiction as provided under Section 48(4)(a) of the Copyright Act.
- The decision communicated by KECOBO was therefore a nullity in law and was set aside in its entirety.
Key Issues Raised
Beyond jurisdictional concerns, the case surfaced critical questions about authorship and copyright in the digital era:
- Commissioned Works: The Tribunal stressed that without a written commissioning agreement, copyright vests in the original author, not in entities claiming commercial rights.
- AI-Generated Content: The Tribunal acknowledged that Kenya’s Copyright Act does not expressly cover AI-generated works. However, it emphasized that copyright protection requires sufficient human intervention to give a work “original character,” aligning Kenya with global positions that purely machine-generated works cannot attract copyright.
- Global Context: The Tribunal referenced international jurisprudence, including the Thaler v. Perlmutter case in the United States, where an AI-created image was denied copyright for lack of human authorship.
Why This Matters
This ruling is significant for Kenya and the wider African digital economy for three reasons:
- Clarifying KECOBO’s Role: It limits KECOBO to its regulatory and administrative functions, while affirming that disputes over copyright ownership belong to the Tribunal.
- AI and Copyright: It opens a crucial debate on how African legal systems should address works created with—or entirely by—AI.
- Data Governance Implications: As AI adoption grows across Africa, questions of ownership, authorship, and intellectual property will increasingly intersect with broader issues of data governance, digital trade, and creative rights.
The Road Ahead
Kenya joins the list of jurisdictions grappling with the tension between traditional copyright frameworks and emerging technologies. While the Tribunal did not settle the question of authorship in this case, it made clear that Kenya needs legal and policy reforms to address AI’s role in creative industries.
As Data Governance Africa continues to track these developments, this case underscores the urgency of rethinking copyright, authorship, and ownership in a digital-first, AI-driven economy.