FINIDINGS OF A SURVEY ON RROs AND OTHER CMOs IN ARIPO MEMBER STATES Keitseng Nkah Monyatsi Copyright Officer African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation Lagos, Nigeria 17 September 2013

Presentation Outline Introduction: Brief on ARIPO Findings on the Collective management Organisations in ARIPO Member States Conclusion

Brief on ARIPO Established in 1976: Lusaka Agreement Based in Harare, Zimbabwe Objectives of ARIPO : Article III of the Lusaka Agreement: (a) to promote the harmonization and development of the intellectual property laws, and matters related thereto, appropriate to the needs of its members and of the region as a whole; (b) to foster the establishment of a close relationship between its members in matters relating to intellectual property; (c) to establish such common services or organs as may be necessary or desirable for the co-ordination, harmonization and development of the intellectual property activities affecting its members; (d) to establish schemes for the training of staff in the administration of intellectual property laws; (e) to organize conferences, seminars and other meetings on intellectual property matters; (f) to promote the exchange of ideas and experience, research and studies relating to intellectual property matters; (g) to promote and evolve a common view and approach of its members on intellectual property matters; (h) to assist its members, as appropriate, in the acquisition and development of technology relating to intellectual property matters; (i) to promote, in its members, the development of copyright and related rights and ensure that copyright and related rights contribute to the economic, social and cultural development of members and of the region as a whole; and (j) to do all such other things as may be necessary or desirable for the achievement of these objectives.

Member States of ARIPO (18 countries) Botswana Kenya Mozambique Somalia The Gambia Lesotho Sierra Leone Swaziland Tanzania Ghana Zimbabwe Malawi Zambia Uganda Sudan Namibia Liberia Rwanda

ARIPO Mandates 1.Industrial Property: Patents, Industrial Designs and Utility Models: Harare Protocol Trademarks: Banjul Protocol Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions: Swakopmund Protocol Geographical Indications Genetic Resources Plant varieties 2.Copyright and related rights (2002)  Coordination of policy matters;  Harmonisation of laws and practices.

Pillars of an effective Copyright System Administration Policy Legislation Institutional frameworks Management Licensing: Enable access/use of works and remuneration Policing (by rightholders) Enforcement Role players; Police Customs Judiciary Prosecutors

Collective Management Situation in ARIPO Member States (2012) Rwanda and Liberia have newly established CMOS An additional CMO has been established in Ghana RROs o Ghana o Kenya o Tanzania o Uganda o Zambia o Zimbabwe Multipurpose o Botswana o Malawi

RRONo. of Years KOPIKEN3 URRO2 ZARRSONot specific ZIMCOPY2

-Inadequate human resource was sited as a challenge by most CMOs. -Interestingly even the CMO with 21 employees identified this as a challenge.

FINANCIAL STATUS OF CMOs Considers financial resources that were used to establish the CMO; Looks at the sources of support that the CMO received for take off; Looks into whether the CMO is able to sustain its operations with its royalty collections;

Of all 11 CMOs in the survey, 45.5% are now self sustaining, i.e. they generate sufficient revenue to sustain their operations

- Establishment of a CMO needs external support; - Private sector contribution is higher than government support. - Private sector include NORCODE, KOPINOR, NORAD, SAMRO and loans by CMO founding members.

70% of the CMOs that received support for take off are still dependant on their donors/governments

-CMOs that were supported by private sector are still financially dependent;

Financial Support: RROs RROSupport Received Source of support Independent/Not KOPIKENYesKOPINOR NORCODE Not yet URROYesKOPINORNot yet ZARSOYesKOPINOR NORCODE NORAD Not yet ZIMCOPYYesBilateral and other CMOs from cooperating countries Not yet

ROYALTIES This section examines whether; – The CMO is collecting and distributing royalties; – Examines royalty collection and remission to foreign CMOs, as well as receiving royalties from foreign CMOs.

KOPIKENYesSince 2007 URRONoN/A ZARSONoN/A ZimCopyYes (on and Off) 2005(Transaction licenses)

80% of the Participating CMOs indicated their licensing/royalty collection is nationwide.

Royalty collection strategies

73% of the participating CMOs are collecting royalties; Of the 73% that is collecting royalties, 75% are already distributing royalties to their members while the other 25% of those is not yet distributing royalties to their members.

AFFILIATIONS AND RECIPROCAL AGREEMENTS

*No distribution to foreign counterparts

55% of the CMOs are collecting royalties for foreign works. In those only 36% are distributing royalties to foreign CMOs Reasons for non-distribution to foreign CMOs include agreements with those CMOs to utilise the funds for the growth of the CMO

Affiliations 36% (n=4)of the participating CMOs indicated that they are affiliated to the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisation (IFRRO);  KOPIKEN, ZARSO and Zimcopy [and COSOMA]  At the time of the survey URRO was not yet affiliated Another 36% (n=4) also indicated an affiliation to the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC); One CMO is affiliated to both IFRRO and CISAC i.e. COSOMA; Three CMOs are neither affiliated to IFRRO nor are they to CISAC, while the response of one participating CMO was unclear on this question.

Conclusion ARIPO is working on its Copyright and Related Rights Strategy  Zimcopy and Ghana RRO and other stakeholders recently participated at a consultative meeting to consolidate the Strategy.  Participating in this meeting gives further insight on issues unique to RROs Awareness raising remains an important element in the success of all IP areas; Works of creators are used without compensation in jurisdictions where there are no CMOs, where RROs are not fully functional; Public Private partnerships are essential to take collective management forward; Government support is needed for the establishment of effective CMOs; – Provisions for collective management in the national law; – Resources for establishing CMOs; – Playing the supervisory role in an enabling manner.

Conclusion Awareness raising remains an important element in all IP issues; Works of creators are used without compensation in jurisdictions where there are no CMOs; Government support is needed for the establishment of effective CMOs; – Provisions for collective management in the national law; – Resources for establishing CMOs; – Playing the supervisory role in an enabling manner.