Tag Archive | copyright amendment bill

Copyright Bill goes back to Parliament

….posted on July 13 2020….

Hung by its own petard: Copyright Bill 

Threatened not so much by the US administration, as Cabinet advisers would like us to believe, but more probably actioned more as per the presidency statement because of incompatibility with international agreements,  President Cyril Ramaphosa has made his long outstanding move with regard to the Copyright Amendment Bill, was sitting with him for over a year for assent.

Correctly, we believe, he has returned the Bill to Parliament in the light of the Bill’s constitutional and legal deficiencies, particularly in respect of non-compliance with the international “3-step test” of the Berne Convention and WTO Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

Long time coming

This delays further the implementation South Africa’s much-needed revised copyright legislation which has been stuck in the same groove with regard to royalties since before the digital age.  But then the Presidency also sat on their hands for 13 months before deciding on the matter, a decision which for most in business and industry should have been a complete no brainer.

Sad it will be for academics and educationalists who will remain with standard limitations on published works and sad also we understand for local performers and artists but, in the case of the latter grouping, this we admit is outside of our scope and brief.

Most of the delays so far have emanated from an overwhelming and misguided socialist belief that the Bill, as it stood according to the tenets of the governing party and particularly the beliefs of the previous Trade and Industry Minister, Rob Davies, that the Bill should introduce an emphasis on the “protection” of local artists and performers, a matter which seemed well worth to them a disregard for international copyright norms.

As the Bill is to be returned to Parliament, the delays will obviously be compounded.

Where we were

The Copyright Amendment Bill and the Performer’s Protection Bill as tandem Bills have both considered at the same time by Parliament’s Trade and Industry Portfolio Committee, both dealing with the same broad subject but both by their names dealing with separate issues.  By far the major issue was the matter of international copyright agreements and hence it was the Copyright Amendment Bill that came into the public eye because of international trading issues.

The view was originally espoused by Joanna Fubbs, stalwart and ANC chairperson for many years of the Portfolio Trade Committee on Trade and Industry that local performers and educational bodies were injured by the extensive international controls on copyright matters.  She personally took on the job of drafting the Bill with an emphasis on this subject, calling for help with various committees of experts but at the same time, as was called for, drafting a Bill which contained the tenets of a new approach to copyright matters.


She was undoubtedly driven by her beliefs that that the SA music and publishing industry was largely ignored, and she referred regularly to “well known SA artists and performers who had died penniless”. The position was even reached a point where a submission on the Bill was made in song by one grouping to MPs, an extraordinary moment,

Although it was generally acknowledged that local bodies in South Africa in the past were not famous for adherence to internationally accepted copyright norms ,particularly following sanctions by the Free World in years previous, it was agreed that a tightening up of this process had to happen and that copyright collection agencies, although not much liked by small business, were a part of the generally accepted process of royalty governance.

It was agreed by both government and business that something had to be done urgently about the fact that the existing Copyright Act had not been updated since 1976

Started by DTIC

The first draft on the subject from the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) was rejected outright by eminent legal opinion, including that of the well-known Stellenbosch University, Anton Mostert School of Copyright Law.

This original draft, in the opinion of many legal experts, introduced “crude wording on the de-colonialisation’ of issues on royalties”, views which were only slightly watered down in subsequent years of endless and boring re-written versions whilst the Bill progressed under the two sub-committees formed by Joanna Fubbs.

Probably to stay in new Bill

The process resulted in a locally invented “hybrid” compromise wording regarding royalty usage, drawn up from the international norms of ‘fair use’ and ‘fair dealing’ principles of copyright application. The parliamentary authors felt they had achieved a result that would result in better protection of local author’s and performer’s copyright and a fair slice of royalties.

The point was, however, that the World Intellectual Property Organisation already provided latitudes with regard to the publishing industry in this regard but Fubbs persisted with her draft, fired by belief that South African educators were being denied educational opportunities by an over-zealous and, in her opinion, a somewhat pernicious publishing industry.

Rumpus followed

Book publishers then complained to the US Intellectual Property Association, which escalated by circumstance into a threat to South Africa in respect of  GPS benefits under AGOA.  Such produced a major moment of unhappiness in Trump/SA relationships.  One sensed that for some thirteen months whilst the Bill sat for assent, President Ramaphosa did not know which way to jump, although perhaps Covid 19 pre-occupation must have played a part in the extraordinary delays.

With President Ramaphosa now returning the Bill to Parliament, it is important to understand why the Bill is returned and what this implies. The process now could be lengthy and somewhat torturous.

Provincial and local input

The Cabinet statement merely states, aside for concern for visually impaired persons, that both the Copyright Amendment Bill and the Performers Protection Bill had been incorrectly tagged as Section 75 Bills in terms of the constitutionally prescribed process for parliamentary legislation. However, the President is of the view that the Bills concerned are in fact Section 76 Bills, given that they affect cultural matters.  To business, this remains a blind alley.

Section 75 Bills, which categorized the previous Bill, require just the mere acknowledgement of the National Councils of Provinces, but Bills tagged as Section 76 require a mandate from all nine provinces, and in some case cases provincial public hearings in each of the nine.  By returning the Bill on the basis of not being tagged correctly, this possibly means that as well as the Copyright Amendment Bill being altered and re-worded, the result will have to be considered by all provincial legislatures as well.

Rough guess

We expect that there will be a continued attempt to champion legislatively  “local user rights” in a compromised form, something that is mostly foreign to all international copyright statutes and agreements. At the same time, we do not expect any Copyright Amendment Bill to be passed any time in 2020 and if by July 2020, this will be going some.

Nevertheless, what we can expect is a Bill more along lines that the World Copyright Organisation would expect, the book publishing industry will want, and the US music and film publishing is used to seeing on the world stage. It is assumed that Minister Ebrahim Patel will gazette a new draft for public consideration, DTIC having learnt much in the four years of process.


Posted in Cabinet,Presidential, Home Page Slider, Justice, constitutional, Trade & Industry0 Comments

Parliamentary Overview 12 June 2019….


Changing the guard…  

Plenty of note for business has happened legislatively during the parliamentary recess but perhaps none so important as the re-structuring of Cabinet. As a result  there will be a change in the appropriate portfolio committees to reflect any changes and a consequent shift in portfolio responsibility for various Bills held over from the previous Parliament.    In the areas of energy, trade and industry and communications this will be particularly interesting of who gets to be the chairperson in the light of differences emerging within ANC structures.

Parliament will choose its portfolio committee chairpersons for the National Assembly and select committee chairpersons for the National Council of Provinces on 27th June, two days after the State of Nation Address ANC party chairpersons.  These appointments reflect how a government governs on policy and legislation. Through the chairpersons.

Read more..Parliamentary overview 12 June 2019

Posted in Agriculture, cabinet, Cabinet,Presidential, Energy, Fuel,oil,renewables, Health, Justice, constitutional, Land,Agriculture, Trade & Industry, Transport0 Comments

Draft Copyright Amendment Bill raises queries

Copyright Bill proposes revenues to state…

copyright graphicsent to clients 28 Oct….  Anomalies abound in the draft Copyright Amendment Bill, recently published for comment and now awaiting tabling in Parliament hopefully with a number of changes, say experts in the intellectual property industry.

The Bill primarily affects music, artistic and literary copyrights but the whole issue of patents, copyright and intellectual property rights are so intertwined that any changes will undoubtedly send up red flags up in various areas.

Government says in this instance it is trying to modernise the existing Copyright Act but as with any changes to established procedures that have existed for years, there are pros and cons that come with change it seems.

50 years after death

The draft Bill deals primarily with copyright of artistic, musical and literary work and most assume earphonesthat works of great composers such Brahms, Beethoven and Schubert are free of copyright, those geniuses having long since passed away. In fact under the existing Act, the author, composer or artist has copyright for life and then fifty years

The draft states both clearly and unambiguously that the ownership of all copyright held by individuals will automatically transfer to the state upon their death.

Until death do us part….

There is not the slightest indication of what body or entity is involved, other than the fact that the Bill is to be tabled by the Minister of Trade and Industry, meaning that DTI, or an entity controlled by it, would receive such, presumably the individual’s Estate being responsible for notifying DTI that they are heirs. The draft also states that government may never re-sell or pass on such copyrights.

The question to any casual observer is what happens to this money, at present collect by such bodies in doubtful manner by such bodies as SAMRO and passed to DTI? It is revenue and does it go to National Treasury, perhaps a fund for aged musicians, authors and artists even child education in the arts? On this the Bill is silent, no policy having been ever stated by any cabinet minister on such matters.

Another tribunal

In the absence of any new guides as promised on intellectual property in general, such having been promised by DTI in the form of a National IP Policy many months ago, more concerning is the establishment of an Intellectual Property Tribunal which is a case of “overkill” in dealing with this limited area of copyright and royalties.

Such a body may adjudicate on “on any application and on any legislation brought before it”, the draft supermarketstates.

On the whole, we have to assume that the majority of the draft Bill applies to individuals only, with the exception of the recording industry and literary reproduction industry, there also being certain clauses regarding End User Licence Agreements affecting software sales.


Of concern though to many is the growing tendency to introduce criminalisation into legislation such as areas of BEE with fines normally reserved for more serious and harmful criminal police offences. In this case DTI have once again mentioned maximum jail and penalties of totally disproportionate periods and amounts.

To many, this Bill appears to have a lot more written in between the lines and prompts again many questions as to the direction DTI is taking with regard to international agreements, in this case the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights.

It will be interesting to see what is finally tabled in Parliament for debate and what emerges from parliamentary public hearings

Posted in Facebook and Twitter, LinkedIn, Special Recent Posts, Trade & Industry0 Comments

This website is Archival

If you want your publications as they come from Parliament please contact ParlyReportSA directly. All information on this site is posted two weeks after client alert reports sent out.

Upcoming Articles

  1. Covid Budget enormous for what it did not say
  2. De Ruyter plays cards close at Eskom
  3. DoH updates Parly on NHI plans
  4. Road to Africa: 6 border facilities
  5. Eskom, Mantashe spurn DA privatisation plan
  6. FFC: budget cuts will affect service delivery

Earlier Editorials

Earlier Stories