MPs remain divided over the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2025, which seeks to increase earnings for local artists and producers.
In the corridors of the August House, a storm is brewing that could fundamentally reshape the landscape of Uganda’s creative industry. At the center of this legislative tempest is the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2025. While the Bill’s stated objective—to increase the earnings of local artists, musicians, and producers—is universally cheered by the creative community, Member of Parliaments (MPs) remain sharply divided on the “how,” the “when,” and the “who” of its implementation.
For a nation whose music and film industries are among the most vibrant in East Africa, the stakes have never been higher. As the debate intensifies, the Bill has become a litmus test for how Uganda balances the rights of creators against the interests of telecommunications giants, broadcasters, and the digital public.
The Core of the Contention: The Revenue Split
The most explosive element of the Bill concerns the distribution of revenue from Caller Ring Back Tunes (CRBTs) and digital streaming. For years, Ugandan artists have lamented that they receive a “pittance” from the billions of shillings generated by their music on telecom networks.
Under the current system, after taxes and telecom “administrative costs,” an artist might walk away with as little as 10% to 15% of the revenue generated by their song. The 2025 Amendment seeks to mandate a statutory minimum of 60% for the artist and producer, leaving the remaining 40% to be shared among the telecom companies and the government.
“We cannot have a system where the middleman eats the meat and the owner of the cow is left with the hooves,” argued one MP from the Committee on ICT during a heated session this week. However, opposing MPs argue that such a radical shift in revenue sharing could lead telecom companies to hike prices for consumers or discontinue the services altogether, citing “unviability.”
The “Fair Use” Friction
Beyond the money, the Bill introduces a more technical but equally contentious debate: the definition of “Fair Use.” In the digital age, where content is shared, remixed, and parodied in seconds, the Bill seeks to tighten the rules on how broadcasters and social media influencers use copyrighted material.
MPs representing the media and broadcasting sectors have voiced concerns that the Bill is “too restrictive.” They argue that if the laws become too punitive, it will stifle the growth of content creators on platforms like TikTok and YouTube, who often rely on snippets of popular music for their work. Conversely, the “Pro-Artist” faction in Parliament insists that “every second of play is a second of pay,” arguing that even short clips used by large media houses should be compensated.
The Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) Crisis
Another major sticking point is the regulation of Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) like the Uganda Performing Right Society (UPRS). The Bill proposes a complete overhaul of how these bodies collect and distribute royalties.
Some MPs are pushing for a government-led central collection system, citing years of alleged mismanagement and lack of transparency within the private CMOs. “The artists don’t trust the collectors, and the collectors say the broadcasters aren’t paying,” noted a legislator from the North. The division here lies in whether the government should take a “hands-on” approach to royalty collection or remain a “hands-off” regulator.
Critics of government intervention warn of bureaucracy and potential “political vetting” of artists’ earnings, while proponents argue that only the state has the “teeth” to force large hotels, bars, and radio stations to pay their dues.
The Producer’s Voice: A New Frontier
For the first time in Ugandan legislative history, the 2025 Bill explicitly recognizes the rights of Music Producers. Traditionally, once a producer was paid a “session fee” to create a beat or mix a song, their financial claim to the track ended.
The Amendment seeks to grant producers a percentage of the “Neighbouring Rights” royalties in perpetuity. While this is seen as a victory for the “silent architects” of the industry, some MPs fear it will complicate contract law. “If a song has five songwriters and three producers, how do you split 100 shillings without the legal fees costing more than the royalty?” asked a skeptical MP during the second reading of the Bill.
The Global Context: Protecting the Pearl
The debate is also framed by Uganda’s international obligations. As a signatory to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties, Uganda is pressured to bring its laws in line with global digital standards. Supporters of the Bill argue that without these changes, Ugandan content will continue to be “looted” by international platforms without any benefit returning to the country’s GDP.
However, the “Digital Libertarian” wing of Parliament cautions that over-regulation could make Uganda a “legal island,” where international tech firms might hesitate to launch new features or services due to the complexity of local copyright compliance.
The Public Sentiment: Artists Take to the Streets
Outside the walls of Parliament, the creative community is not staying silent. High-profile musicians and film producers have been seen in the gallery during sessions, and social media campaigns under hashtags like #PayTheCreator are putting immense pressure on MPs.
For many artists, this Bill is about more than just money; it is about the transition of the creative sector from an “informal hustle” to a professional industry. They argue that with the high cost of living in 2026, the Shs 50 or Shs 100 they earn per download is the difference between surviving and thriving.
A House Divided
As the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2025, moves toward its final vote, the division among MPs reflects a deeper national struggle: how to foster a modern, digital economy while protecting the rights of the individual creator.
The coming weeks will be crucial. If the Bill passes with the 60% revenue split intact, it will be a historic victory for the creative class. If it is watered down, it may be seen as a capitulation to corporate interests. One thing is certain—the eyes of every musician, producer, and artist in Uganda are fixed firmly on the Speaker’s gavel.
