Win for KECOBO as MCSK barred from collecting royalties

In a ruling on Thursday, the Tribunal chaired by Elizabeth Lenjo discharged the interim injunction that had shielded MCSK’s operations, citing recent High Court rulings by Justices Chacha Mwita and John Chigiti that addressed similar disputes within the copyright and music tariff space.

“The interim order of injunction, stopping, barring, restraining, and/or prohibiting the respondent from interfering with MCSK from the collection and distribution of royalties and all actions and/or decisions, is hereby discharged,” read the order signed by the Tribunal chairperson.

The Tribunal relied on Section 46A of the Copyright Act, which outlines the legal requirements for collective management operations, and revised the timelines for the ongoing case.

It further directed the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO) and other interested parties to file their responses to MCSK’s appeal within the statutory period.

KECOBO, through lawyer Alex Nyabwengi, argued that MCSK has been conducting the operations of a CMO without a valid licence after its renewal application for the 2025–2026 period was rejected by the board.

“The appellant is neither approved nor authorised as prescribed under Section 2 of the Copyright Act, Cap 130, to carry out the functions of a CMO, and thus, the impugned orders sought to permit illegality,” KECOBO stated in its response.

In a public notice issued on October 14, 2025, the regulator announced that only the Performing and Audio-visual Rights Society of Kenya (PAVRISK) and KAMP Copyright and Related Rights had been licensed to manage royalties for a one-year period effective November 5, 2025.

Applications from MCSK, Film Makers Rights Achievers of Kenya (FRAK), and Collective Management Services (CMS) were unsuccessful. PAVRISK and KAMP are now listed as interested parties in MCSK’s appeal.

KECOBO also pointed to Section 46A of the Copyright Act, which prohibits any entity from collecting royalties based on tariffs that have not been approved and gazetted by the Cabinet Secretary responsible for copyright matters.

The Board referenced a High Court ruling delivered in July 2024 by Justice Chacha Mwita in Milimani HCCHRPET/E076/2024, which nullified tariffs gazetted under Legal Notice No. 84 of 2023 due to a lack of adequate public participation.

“Effectively, there are no tariffs upon which even approved and licensed CMOs can collect royalties,” KECOBO noted, adding that MCSK was a party to that case but failed to disclose the outcome to the Tribunal.

The regulator added that it has since submitted revised 2025–2028 tariffs to the Ministry of Youth Affairs, Creative Economy and Sports for publication, in compliance with the High Court’s directive.

Through its lawyers, Okubasu and Munene Advocates, MCSK maintained that KECOBO’s decision to deny its licence renewal was unlawful.

The Society argued that the Board erred in law by claiming that MCSK failed to provide certified copies of annual returns, audited financial statements for the past five years, and documents authorizing it to manage rights — requirements under Regulation 3(i)(c) of the Copyright Regulations 2020.

“KECOBO erred in law in finding that the appellant failed to meet these documentation requirements,” MCSK argued.