Former rapper-turned-pastor Bamboo The African Bantu emerged victorious after a lengthy court battle with telecommunications giant Safaricom.
Bamboo sued Safaricom for copyright infringement and the case dragged in the corridor of justice for nine long years before the court ultimately ruled in his favour in August 2023.
Bamboo first moved to court in December 2015 against Safaricom and two premium rate service providers (PRSP) Bensoft Interactive Limited, owned by software engineer Bernard Kioko and Nigerian-owned Mtech Communication Limited.
The rapper accused the three companies of using his songs ‘Mama Africa’ remix (2005) featuring renowned American-Senegalese singer Akon, ‘Yes Indeed’ (2005), and ‘Move On’ featuring now defunct hip-hop group Camp Mulla (2012) without his consent to generate revenue while he was left on the fringe.
Safaricom picked the three songs from third parties and placed them on its Skiza platform cashing in from the records from 2009 to 2014 without paying him a single cent. Safaricom only stopped selling the records when Bamboo wrote to the telecom giant a demand letter.
Lady Justice Asenath Nyaboke found Safaricom guilty of using three songs of the ‘Usilete Compe’ hitmaker for commercial gains without his authorization.
In her ruling, the High Court assessed and awarded Bamboo general damages totalling to Ksh4.5 million for the three records.
However, Safaricom has since slammed the breaks on Bamboo’s celebration.
The telco has successfully secured stay orders to suspend the ruling by Justice Asenath Ongeri.
Safaricom, through the law firm of Prof. Musili Wambua & Co. Advocates, argues that the Judge misunderstood the core matter under consideration, which was to establish whether Bamboo held the copyright for the three musical compositions.
Safaricom states that Justice Ongeri deviated from this central question and introduced an alternate matter that was not addressed in the proceedings: whether Bamboo’s copyright was violated.
The Company also asserts that the High Court Judge failed to differentiate between the separate concepts of authorship and ownership within the realm of copyright.
The telco claims that the high Court made a crucial error by arriving at a conclusion of copyright infringement liability without the support of concrete evidence.
Safaricom says the decision to award Ksh4.5 million in general damages was misguided, as there was no loss suffered by Bamboo on the basis of evidence produced in court.
