Copyright and Related Rights Bill, 2026 – Analysis
Kenya’s creative economy has never been more alive. From its thriving music scene, its increasingly influential film industry to software developers building the next generation of tech startups. Kenyan creators are producing original work at an unprecedented scale. And yet the law governing these works has not kept pace. The Copyright Act of 2001 was drafted for a different era, one in which streaming did not exist. It was not designed to address artificial intelligence, digital revenue distribution or the rights of creators in a world where their work can be copied, shared and monetised at the click of a button.
The Copyright and Related Rights Bill, 2026, developed by the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO) proposes to repeal and fully replace the 2001 Act with a comprehensive modern framework. It is one of the most consequential pieces of intellectual property legislation Kenya has ever considered. The Bill introduces reforms across six key areas that are expounded below:
- From KECOBO to the Kenya Copyright Authority
Under the current law, KECOBO operates with limited enforcement powers. It registers works and licenses Collective Management Organisations (CMOs) but lacks the ability to compel compliance or intervene in the royalty collection ecosystem. This has resulted in an opaque environment on matters royalty distribution, with limitations on the avenues for recourse short of full litigation.
The Bill proposes a revamp of the Board to become the Kenya Copyright Authority, granting the proposed body significantly expanded powers specifically to approve royalty management systems and directly supervise CMOs. As a result, CMOs would be required to distribute royalties within six months of collection, submit quarterly reports and use digitally approved systems for all transactions. The new Authority is being built to not only administer but also actively enforce it.
- Specialized justice for copyright disputes
Prior to this Bill, copyright disputes were resolved through a court system not built for it. For a musician pursuing unpaid royalties or an artist challenging unauthorised reproduction of their work, this meant potentially years of delay and significant legal costs, making resolution of copyright disputes highly discouraged.
The Bill seeks to remedy this by establishing a dedicated Copyright Disputes Tribunal, chaired by a person qualified to be a high court judge supported by four members with expertise in copyright law. The Tribunal will have original jurisdiction over ownership disputes, infringement claims, fair dealing defences, and CMO licensing disagreements. Most significantly, it must work expeditiously as the Bill prescribes the issuance of decisions within thirty days and seventy-two hours for urgent matters. This is specialised, timely justice designed for the pace of the digital age.
- Creation and elaboration of creator rights
The Bill significantly strengthens the hand of Kenyan creators by forming precedent rights and establishing clear parameters on the existing rights.
- The Artist’s Resale right
The Bill introduces an entirely new right for visual artists where a minimum five percent (5%) share of the net sale price whenever their original work is commercially resold goes to the original artists. This right is inalienable and lasts for the duration of copyright and cannot be contracted away under any circumstances. Under the current law, an artist only benefits from the first sale of their work with redistribution of the art gaining profits to the possessors of the art at the time. With this new right, the original artist generates income automatically without any separate agreement needed.
- Moral rights and attribution
Authors and performers gain an inalienable right to be identified when their work is reproduced, broadcasted or performed, with the ability to object to any distortion or modification that would prejudice their reputation. These rights endure for the creator’s lifetime plus fifty (50) years and can only be waived by a signed, specific written instrument. In a digital environment where works are routinely remixed and reposted without consent, these rights provide recourse beyond financial compensation.
- Commissioned works and employment
For commissioned works, the Bill reinforces that the author retains copyright ownership unless the commissioning contract expressly transfers it. This reverses the common assumption that paying for creative work automatically transfers all rights in it. This creates significant bargaining power as copyright belongs to the creator by default and its transfer must be actively negotiated, clearly written and fairly compensated in a written contract.
- Sanding down the rough edges of copyright in the digital economy
The Bill draws a clear line between passive platforms and those that benefit from infringement. For rights holders, the Bill seeks to introduce a novel legally enforceable takedown framework where platforms must remove infringing content within forty-eight (48) hours of a valid notice with repercussions on non-compliance. For platforms, the safe harbour is conditional as they must act promptly on notices and enforce repeat infringer policies. For ordinary users, a counter-notice mechanism protects against wrongful takedowns on content that falls within exceptions for parody, criticism or education granting them a formal avenue to contest removal.
- Private copying, digital levies and the price of convenience
The Bill introduces a levy on devices capable of reproducing copyright works including mobile devices such as smartphones and tablets and on digital platforms that enable downloading or caching of content. Proceeds collected from this levy will be collected by the proposed Authority and distributed through CMOs to compensate rights holders for private copying that is permitted under the Bill’s exceptions that currently go unremunerated. This would subsequently lead to the price increase from the imposition of the levy both on the devices and digital platforms as this levy is likely to be passed down to the end consumers.
- Need for further comprehension of the application of exceptions on education, research and accessibility
Currently, educational establishments, libraries and archives may copy, communicate and lend works for non-commercial purposes without authorisation. Similarly, researchers may make copies for computational analysis while Persons with disabilities may access works in accessible formats as stipulated in the Marrakesh Treaty. The key caveat becomes the application of these exceptions in the availability of licensing scheme. As CMOs develop and licensing becomes more accessible as prescribed in the Bill, institutions would need to engage proactively with the licensing landscape rather than assume existing practices remain automatically permissible.
Conclusion
The Copyright and Related Rights Bill, 2026, is a statement of intent showcasing that Kenya seeks to take its creative economy seriously and is ready to build the institutional infrastructure that would highlight the value of the work of artists and innovators. In as much as the Bill would not resolve challenges overnight, its direction is unambiguously positive. This is a country updating its laws to match its reality moving from a framework designed for the analogue age to one built for the digital economy it has already become. For Kenyan creators, this is reason for well-founded optimism.