FINIDINGS OF A SURVEY ON RROs AND OTHER CMOs IN

ARIPO MEMBER STATES

Keitseng Nkah MonyatsiCopyright Officer

African Regional Intellectual Property OrganisationLagos, 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

MalawiZambia

Uganda

Sudan

Namibia

Liberia Rwanda

ARIPO Mandates1. 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)

EnforcementRole 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

Botswana

Gambia

GhanaKenya

Leso

tho

Liberia

Malawi

Moza

mbique

Namibia

Rwanda

Sierra

Leone

Somalia

Swazil

and

Tanzania

Uganda

Zambia

Zimbabwe

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

1

0

2

4

0 0

1 1

2

0 0 0 0

2 2 2 2

Number of CMOs

• RROso Ghanao Kenyao Tanzaniao Ugandao Zambiao Zimbabwe

• Multipurposeo Botswanao Malawi

MEMBER STATE

Name of Participating CMO Nature of Entity Year Established

Botswana Copyright Society of Botswana Private Co. Ltd by Guarantee

2008

Kenya

Kenya Association of Music Producers Not for Profit Co. Ltd by Guarantee

2003

KOPIKEN-The Production Rights Society of Kenya Private Co. Ltd by Guarantee

2005

Performers Rights Society of Kenya Private Co. Ltd by Guarantee

2010

Malawi Copyright Society of Malawi Statutory Entity 1992

Namibia Namibian Society of Composers and Authors of Music

Statutory Body 1993

Uganda Uganda Reproduction Rights Organisation Private Co. Ltd by Guarantee

2010

Zambia

Zambian Music Copyright Protection Society Private Co. Ltd 1993

Zambia Reprographic Rights Society Quasi Govt 2010

Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe Music Rights Association Pvt Co. 1982

ZIMCOPY -The Reproduction Rights Organisation of Zimbabwe

Association 1985

Equal to All Equal (save for Board Elections)

Not all 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90 82%

9% 9%

Voting Rights

Equal to All

Equal (save for Board Elections)

Not all

6Members 7<8 9<100

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40 36.5%

27%

36.5%

Number of Board Members

6Members 7<89<10

2 Years 27%

3 Years 64%

Not Clear 9%

Term of Board Membership

RRO No. of Years

KOPIKEN 3

URRO 2

ZARRSO Not specific

ZIMCOPY 2

-Inadequate human resource was sited as a challenge by most CMOs.

-Interestingly even the CMO with 21 employees identified this as a challenge .

1<5 5<10 11<210

10

20

30

40

50

6055%

27%

18%

Number of Employees

1<55<1011<21

KOPIKEN URRSO ZARRSO ZIMCOPY0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3

2

3

2

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

Independent Still Dependant0

10

20

30

40

50

60

45.5%

54.5%

Current Financial Status of CMOs

- 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.

91%

9%

CMO Received Financial Support for Take Off

Yes No

18%

73%

9%

Source of Financial SupportGovernment Donors/Partners

Rightholders

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

Independent Still Dependant0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

30%

70%

Financial Status for CMOs with Support

Independent

Still De-pendant

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

Governement Donor/Partners N/A0

20

40

60

80

100

120

50%

25%

100%

50%

75%

0%

Financial Status in relation to Source of FundingIndependent Still dependent Totals

SourceEarliest Establishment

Most Recent Establishment Percentage

Government 1992 2008 18%Donors/Partners 1993 2010 73%Members' Loans 1982 N/A 9%

Financial Support: RROsRRO Support

ReceivedSource of support

Independent/Not

KOPIKEN Yes KOPINOR NORCODE

Not yet

URRO Yes KOPINOR Not yet

ZARSO Yes KOPINORNORCODENORAD

Not yet

ZIMCOPY Yes Bilateral 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.

Yes No Not Yet0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 64%

11% 11%

License Agreements with Users

KOPIKEN Yes

URRO No

ZARRSO No

ZIMCOPY No

Yes No0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

8073%

27%

Is the CMO Collecting Royalties

KOPIKEN Yes Since 2007

URRO No N/A

ZARSO No N/A

ZimCopy Yes (on and Off)2005(Transaction licenses)

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

Nationwide Not yet 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

80%

20%

Collections Coverage

NationwideNot yet

Royalty collection strategies

1<5 5<10 11<210

10

20

30

40

50

60 55%

27%

18%

Number of Employees

1<55<1011<21

Yes45%No

55%

Branches in other Parts of the Country

Directly Both No Info 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

7064%

18% 18%

Direct Collection or through Sub-Contracts

55%

18%

27%

Distribution of Royalties

Yes No N/A

KOPIKEN Yes Since 2010

URRO No N/A

ZARRSO No N/A

ZIMCOPY No As received

•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.

Yes No0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

73%

27%

75%

25%

Rolyalty Collection vs Distribution

Distribution

CollectingN

umbe

r of C

MO

s

Yes No Unclear 0

10

20

30

40

50

60 55%

36%

9%

Withholding Income Tax

Yes No Unclear

AFFILIATIONS AND RECIPROCAL AGREEMENTS

Yes No N/A0

10

20

30

40

50

60 55%

36%

9%

Reciprocal Agreements with Foreign CMOs

Yes

No

N/A

KOPIKEN Yes

URRO No

ZARRSO No

ZIMCOPY Yes

Yes No0

10

20

30

40

50

60 55%

45%

Collecting for the use of Foreign Works

YesNo

KOPIKEN Yes

URRO No

ZARRSO No

ZIMCOPY No

*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

36%

55%

9%

Distribution of Royalties to Foreign CMOs

Yes No Not Yet

Yes No0

10

20

30

40

50

60 55%

45%

Collecting for the use of Foreign Works

YesNo

Yes36%

No45%

Not

Yet9%

Sometimes9%

Receiving Royalties from Foreign CMOs

36%

55%

9%

Distribution of Royalties to Foreign CMOs

Yes No Not Yet

KOPIKEN No

URRO No

ZARRSO No

ZIMCOPY Sometimes

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.

Copyright Society of Botswana

Copyright Society of Malawi

Kenya Association of Music Producers

KOPIKEN-Reproduction Rights of Kenya

Namibian Society of Composers and Authors of Music

Performers Rights Society of Kenya

Uganda Reproduction Rights Organisation

Zambia Music Copyright Protection Society

Zambia Reprographic Society

ZimCopy -Reproduction Rights Organisation of Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe Music Rights Association

19651970

19751980

19851990

19952000

20052010

2015

2008

1992

2003

2005

1993

2009

2010

1993

2010

1995

1982

2008

1992

2008

2011

1993

2009

2011

1993

2010

2007

2007

2011

1992

2008

2007

1993

2009

2011

1996

2010

2007

1982

1993

2008

2010

1996

2011

1994

1985

1994

2010

1996

1996

2005

1985

TIMELINE

Royalty Distribution Royalty Collection ComemncementLicenseRegistration

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.