Since June 2024, Kenya’s creative industry has been characterized by legal back and forth between Kenyan collective management organizations (CMOs) and Kenya’s copyright regulator, Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO), over the licensing of CMOs (read more here). As these courtroom battles over royalties unfold, many Kenyan musicians are taking ownership of their intellectual property (IP) rights. Amid the turbulence, one question has echoed louder than the beat of a drum: where are the royalties? Royalty payments to Kenya’s music artists have long been a concern, with challenges such as low payouts remaining a topic of debate. 

In an effort to harmonize the system, the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO) consolidated the function of three collective management organizations (CMOs) into a single entity. In June 2024,¹ KECOBO licensed the Performing and Audio-Visual Rights Society of Kenya (PAVRISK) as the sole CMO, hoping to resolve the long-standing issues that hinder fair royalty distribution². This decision however was challenged, and legal proceedings have been taking place at different levels, and we discuss this in another blog piece (here).

How jurisprudence has shaped the Kenyan CMO landscape 

Kenya’s CMO landscape has not always been a three-part harmony. The Music Copyright Society of Kenya (MCSK) dominated for years until the 2014 Copyright Act amendment introduced the Kenya Association of Music Producers (KAMP) and the Performers Rights Society of Kenya (PRISK), creating overlapping rights and conflicting tariffs. 

As a result, legal battles ensued: Cascade Co. Ltd v. KAMP & 3 others  (2015) complained of harassment and corruption, while Xpedia Management Ltd & 4 others v. Attorney General (2016) highlighted transparency flaws. KECOBO attempted to license the Music Publishers Association of Kenya (MPAKE) in 2017, however this was quashed in the Laban Toto Juma & 4 others v. Kenya Copyright Board & 9 others case, with the court emphasizing fairness and sufficient public engagement. 

On July 16, 2024, KAMP challenged the decision at the Copyright Tribunal, which ordered KECOBO to issue provisional renewal licenses for KAMP, PAVRISK and MCSK.³ The court stated that while KECOBO had invited companies with requisite competence to apply for registration, it ultimately failed to justify the issuance of a solitary license to PAVRISK and did not communicate the reasons for denying other CMOs license renewals.⁴

Still, the tribunal also ruled that KECOBO remained “at liberty to conclude the process of registering a single Collective Management Organization anew and ensure transparency, accountability, and due regard for the law on procedural matters.” ⁵

KECOBO reaffirmed PAVRISK’s sole license in a statement on August 2, 2024⁶, but subsequent court rulings complicated matters again. In October, the High Court lifted the stay of execution orders, while in December 2024, MCSK was barred from unauthorized collections. Yet, on January 31, 2025, the High Court, sitting as an appellate court, effectively reinstated a multi-CMO system. Legal proceedings have been ongoing since, and as of the time of publishing, provisional six-month licenses were issued to MCSK, KAMP and PAVRISK.⁷

Copyright Tribunal – Kenya’s new CMO referee 

Amid these legal twists, the Copyright Tribunal has played a crucial role in reinforcing transparency and due process in CMO licensing. By scrutinizing KECOBO’s decisions, the Tribunal underscored the importance of balanced stakeholder engagement, copyright law reform and lawful governance. While KECOBO’s single-CMO approach aimed to streamline operations, ongoing litigation highlighted a key lesson: efficiency must not come at the cost of fairness. 

This shows how Kenya has made significant strides in advancing the development and recognition of intellectual property. Article 40(5) of Kenya’s 2010 Constitution obliges the Government, among other things, to protect and enforce Kenyans’ IP rights.⁸ As a result, intellectual property has become a central component of various policy and legal frameworks across both the public and private sectors. 

Artists find their groove – taking action and control of their IP 

While institutions clash over royalty collection, Kenya’s musicians are taking charge of their IP management.  For example, recently, Nikita Kering, a talented musician, represented Kenyan artistes at a creatives meeting at the African Union (AU) headquarters.⁹ Sharing on her social media platform(s), she spoke to the issues discussed above and emphasized the continued need for reform and better pay for artists who have been mismanaged at the hands of CMOs.¹⁰

Additionally, Kenyan music group Sauti Sol have also and continue to set a benchmark for artists by restructuring from a band into a collective of businesses.¹¹ As a result, they have gained greater control over their music rights, licensing and brand deals. Through strategic ownership of their masters, trademarks and content, they have diversified into record labels, talent management and digital platforms.¹²  

Artists are also increasingly leveraging digital innovation and entrepreneurship to manage their IP and diversify their income streams. Streaming platforms such as Spotify, Mdundo, Boomplay and YouTube now connect them to global audiences, with one Kenyan artist reportedly earning Ksh 300,000 (US$2,330) monthly through Spotify in 2022¹³, while Mdundo paid African creators US$800,000 (Ksh 103 million) in late 2024.¹⁴ Additionally, Safaricom’s Skiza Tunes platform continues to ring up earnings for artists despite ongoing concerns about revenue splits.¹⁵

Beyond digital platforms, artists are turning festivals such as Blankets & Wine¹⁶ and SolFest¹⁷ into lucrative ventures through ticket sales and merchandise. Embracing technology further, forward-thinking artists are experimenting with AI-generated sounds and digital marketing to expand their reach and manage their IP in innovative ways. 

Looking ahead – navigating the path to fair royalties 

Recent court rulings have reshaped Kenya’s collective management landscape, strengthening accountability and IP rights protection. The Copyright Tribunal’s assertive stance has made artists more aware of their value, while Kenyan musicians are increasingly asserting control over their intellectual property. 

Early indications suggested that KECOBO’s single-CMO model has improved revenue collection and reduced inefficiencies. A public statement released by KECOBO in July 2024 reportedly showed improved collections, with goals to increase royalty distribution; developments that, if accurate, would be a welcome step forward.

Regardless of the rulings and court proceedings, one thing is clear, Kenyan musicians are no longer passive observers. They are actively shaping a future where their rights are managed equitably and sustainably. 

The image is generated from CanvaAI.