Artificial intelligence (AI) is transforming how people work and create in Kenya. From healthcare tools that diagnose diseases to apps that help farmers predict weather, AI is everywhere. But with these advancements come questions about intellectual property (IP), which protects creations like books, music, inventions, and software. In Kenya, IP is governed by laws like the Copyright Act of 2001 and the Industrial Property Act of 2001. These laws were designed for human creators, not AI systems. As AI generates art, music, or inventions, it’s unclear who owns the results. This gap in the law could lead to disputes and slow down innovation if not addressed. Understanding this issue is crucial as Kenya embraces AI to boost its economy and solve local challenges.
Kenya’s IP system is managed by two main bodies: the Kenya Industrial Property Institute (KIPI), which handles patents and trademarks, and the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO), which oversees copyrights. These organizations follow laws that assume only humans can create or invent. For instance, the Copyright Act defines an author as a “natural person,” meaning AI cannot legally hold copyrights. Similarly, the Industrial Property Act requires inventors to be human. A 2022 study by the Centre for Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law (CIPIT) at Strathmore University highlighted this problem. It found that AI tools, like those creating digital art or writing code, challenge Kenya’s IP framework. Without updates, the system risks becoming outdated, leaving creators and businesses uncertain about their rights.
A global case illustrates the challenge of AI and IP. In 2019, Stephen Thaler applied for patents for inventions created by his AI system, DABUS, in the United States, United Kingdom, and European Union. The applications were rejected because patent laws in these regions require a human inventor, similar to Kenya’s laws. Courts, like in the 2022 case Thaler v. Vidal in the U.S., ruled that only humans can be inventors. In Kenya, the Industrial Property Act’s definition of an inventor as a person means AI-generated inventions face the same barrier. However, South Africa made history in 2021 by granting a patent for a DABUS invention, listing the AI as the inventor. This shows that some countries are adapting their laws faster. Kenya could learn from such examples to stay competitive in the global AI race.
In Kenya, AI is already impacting industries that rely on IP. For example, musicians use AI tools like Amper Music to compose songs, while businesses use AI for data analysis or automated designs. But who owns the output? Under current Kenyan law, the human who operates the AI is considered the owner. A 2023 article in The Platform Magazine explored this, noting that AI could revolutionize Kenya’s creative industries, like music and film. For instance, a Kenyan artist using AI to create a hit song would claim the copyright, but disputes could arise if multiple people or companies are involved. The article warned that without clear guidelines, legal battles over AI-generated works could increase, especially in Nairobi’s growing creative hub. This uncertainty could discourage investment in AI-driven projects.
Globally, some countries are ahead in addressing AI and IP. The United Kingdom’s Copyright, Designs and Patents Act of 1988 allows copyrights for “computer-generated” works, with the human who arranged the AI system getting the rights. Singapore updated its copyright laws in 2021 to permit data mining for AI training, encouraging innovation. Japan has guidelines recognizing AI’s role in creative processes. In contrast, Kenya lacks specific AI regulations, as noted in a 2024 report by the law firm White & Case. Kenya relies on general laws like the Data Protection Act of 2019, which covers data privacy but not IP ownership for AI outputs. This gap could hinder Kenya’s ability to attract tech companies or protect local innovators. For example, a Kenyan startup using AI to develop software might struggle to prove ownership without clear laws.
Updating Kenya’s IP laws won’t be easy. Changing legislation requires coordination between lawmakers, tech experts, and industry leaders. It also needs public awareness, as many Kenyans are unfamiliar with AI’s implications. A 2024 CIPIT study on AI in Kenyan education raised concerns about automated systems, like those used for school placements or e-learning platforms. These systems involve complex algorithms and data, raising questions about who owns them. For instance, if a private company develops an AI tool for Kenyan schools, who holds the IP: the company, the government, or the AI’s creators? CIPIT recommends that Kenya adopt policies balancing innovation with fair IP protection. This could include public consultations and pilot projects to test new rules, ensuring they suit Kenya’s unique context.
In conclusion, AI is reshaping intellectual property in Kenya, but the country’s laws are not ready. Global cases like DABUS highlight the need for change, as do local examples in music and education. Kenya’s Copyright Act and Industrial Property Act must evolve to address AI-generated works clearly. By studying countries like the UK, Singapore, and South Africa, Kenya can craft modern IP rules that encourage creativity and protect innovators. KIPI, KECOBO, and the government should work together to update laws and educate the public. Acting now will ensure Kenya remains a leader in Africa’s tech landscape, fostering innovation while safeguarding creators’ rights in the AI era.
The writer is a legal scrivener and researcher.
Similar Posts by Mt Kenya Times:
- The Visionary Journey Of Ihuaku Patricia Nweke
- Safeguarding Heritage: Tharaka Nithi’s Bold Steps To Preserve Culture And Empower Communities
- PS Appeals To Kiambu Residents, The Disabled To Go For New Jobs
- When Big Brother Becomes Everyone’s Business: The Illusion Of Oversight In The Age Of Perpetual Surveillance.
- Waiguru Ask Counties To Exploit Unique Strengths On Value Chains That Attract Manufacturers For Job Creation
