The Attorney General of Uganda has finally published the Copyright & Neighboring rights regulations 2010 that many players in the media industry have been looking forward to; or loathing depending on who you are! The regulations are intended to fully operationalize the Copyright Act of 2006.

A few highlights in the regulations include the following:

* Procedure for application for copyright. Note that registration is not mandatory although its of tremendous value in proceedings to enforce Copyright.

*Registration of assignments and licenses.

*Extensive procedures for registration of collecting societies.

*Provision for copyright inspectors with powers to seize allegedly infringing material.

*the regulations provide for a maximum sentence of 6 months imprisonment for those found guilty of copyright offences or fines of up to the equivalent of US$200 or both, neither of which seems deterrent enough to stem pervasive infringement of copyrighted works.

The other key thing to note is the publication period of 60 days before grant of a Copyright certificate, similar to that under the Trademark Regulations.

The question is, will the Registrar cope with the huge number of expected registrations in the weeks to come? The Attorney General deserves a pat on the back, and a request for funding to automate registration. This would definitely minimize backlog and streamline the registration system.

Greenwatch, that tenacious NGO that has consistently fought for environmental governance in Uganda is at it again! Among other objectives, it advocates for the proper use, management and protection of the environment.

According to the New Vision newspaper, the NGO took the Uganda Government to court  on 22nd December 2009 for blocking vital access to Oil revenue sharing agreements signed with companies like Tullow and Heritage Oil. The Monitor Newspaper had previously reported that two Ugandan journalists, Charles Mwanguhya Mpagi and Angelo Izama sued the Government for the Solicitor General for refusal to give them access to the country’s oil production and revenue sharing agreements. At the heart of both cases is the issue of implementation of the Access to Information Act, which is specifically pleaded as a concern for both litigants.

The High Court is yet to fix the High Court case for hearing but the suit filed by the Monitor newspaper journalists is awaiting the rendering of a ruling by Nakawa Chief Magistrate, Deo Sejjemba. As of now, it is not clear what public interest is being served by keeping the agreements secret, other than aiding further speculation in the shares of these companies on the presumed premise that they will make a windfall profit from the recent oil discoveries. Its important that both decisions take congisance of the importance of the Access to Information legislation, as well as the overarching need to break with the tradition in other developing countries where secrecy over natural resource concessions have led to bloodshed and civil strife.

Recently, local media reported a campaign by the Private sector Foundation to promote the ‘proudly Ugandan’ brand. This initiative has been supported in various ways by the Uganda Manufacturers association (UMA), as well as the Kampala City Traders Association (KACITA).

Whereas this new effort must be commended, it is important to find out whether its architects have learned lessons from previous ‘country branding’ initiatives. In the search for a brand identity, Uganda has sold its wares under the fashionable label, “Uganda – the Pearl of Africa”. Other less famous ones include “Uganda Gifted by Nature” and so on. It is important to note that a country’s brand value represents the collective value of local and foreign brands operating in the Ugandan market place. This means putting alot of emphasis in developing, nurturing and protecting the finest Ugandan brands.

Public institutions therefore must rally behind businesses to protect their brands through supporting passage of a new trademarks law as well as empowering institutions like the  Uganda National Bureau of standards to fight counterfeits. The debate about what slogan to use in order to sell Uganda should continue to bring all interested parties in the public and private spaces on the same table. In the absence of this, Uganda will not be able to effectively sell itself as a durable brand in the cutthroat world of international commerce. The East African Community(EAC), Common Market for East and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the World Trade Organisation(WTO) all provide tremendous opportunities as well as risks to the ‘sovereignty’ of local brands.  The earlier we get our act in order the better for Uganda.

Welcome to the SIPI Law Associates Blog!

Our firm is largely focussed on legal services related to Telecoms, Media and Technology. As such, areas like Intellectual property law that are at the intersection of these practice areas form a great part of our focus.

We look forward to posting informative news and updates, whether legal or otherwise that may be of interest to our clientele.