Creative industry pushes back as copyright bill sparks clash with broadcasters

Uganda’s creative sector has mounted a strong defence of its economic rights, warning Parliament against weakening proposed copyright reforms that could unlock millions in lost revenue for artists.

In a joint statement issued under the National Culture Forum, industry players, including Collective Management Organisations, federations, and domain associations, rejected claims that radio airplay should be treated purely as promotion rather than a paid commercial service.

“Airplay Is Not Payment”

At the centre of the dispute is Clause 9 of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which seeks to strengthen the legal framework for collecting royalties from broadcasters.

The creative industry argues that radio stations profit directly from music through advertising revenue and audience growth, making it a commercial transaction rather than a favour to artists.

“Promotion and payment are not mutually exclusive,” the statement notes, pointing out that countries such as Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom operate royalty systems without harming their broadcasting industries.

Economic Model Defended

The sector also pushed back against concerns that enforcing royalties would cripple small radio stations. Under collective licensing, fees are calculated as a percentage of revenue—meaning smaller stations pay less while larger, urban broadcasters contribute more.

Industry players say this scalable model ensures fairness while sustaining the ecosystem.

They further dismissed fears that royalties would limit exposure for emerging artists, arguing that blanket licensing systems allow stations to play any music without incurring additional per-song costs.

Lost Revenue and Global Implications

A key concern raised in the statement is Uganda’s inability to fully tap into international royalty systems.

Without a legally empowered collecting framework, Ugandan artists risk losing income from global airplay—money that is already being collected abroad but cannot be remitted back home.

The statement highlights that international music dominates up to 80 percent of Ugandan radio playlists, meaning local stations are already exposed to copyright obligations beyond domestic artists.

Technology Exists, Law Lags Behind

The industry revealed that government has already developed audio fingerprinting technology capable of tracking music usage across platforms. However, without a strong legal framework, this data cannot be effectively used to enforce payments.

This, stakeholders argue, makes the passage of the bill not just necessary, but urgent.

Conflict of Interest Concerns

In a bold move, the statement also raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest within Parliament, noting that both the Speaker and Deputy Speaker reportedly have ownership interests in radio stations.

The industry warned that any attempt to dilute Clause 9 under such circumstances could trigger legal challenges over the legitimacy of the legislative process.

What the Industry Wants

The creative sector is calling on lawmakers to:

• Pass Clause 9 without amendments that introduce exemptions or make royalty payments voluntary
• Reject provisions that weaken the authority of collecting societies
• Fast-track the entire bill to prevent further financial losses

A Defining Moment for Uganda’s Creative Economy

The standoff underscores a broader tension between content creators and distributors in Uganda’s evolving media economy.

For artists, the bill represents long-overdue recognition of intellectual property as a revenue-generating asset. For broadcasters, it raises concerns about cost structures and regulatory burdens.

As Parliament prepares for the next stages of debate, the outcome of the bill could redefine how value is shared across Uganda’s creative and media industries—setting a precedent for the future of digital and broadcast content monetisation.