Uganda’s Amended Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Bill 2026: Digital Royalty Collection and Licensing Implications for Automated Exploitation

Introduction

During the parliamentary sessions of 17–18 March 2026, Uganda’s legislature adopted a substantially revised Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Bill. This legislation represents one of the more ambitious efforts by an African emerging market to modernise its copyright framework in response to the realities of software-driven economies, digital content distribution, and the growing commercial use of local creative and scientific works in automated systems, including those powering generative AI. While the bill introduces severe statutory penalties for digital copyright infringement, including substantial corporate fines and criminal imprisonment of up to ten years, its most significant long-term implications for the licensing ecosystem lie in the new provisions governing digital royalty collection and management, particularly in relation to automated or web-scraped exploitation of Ugandan works.

For content creators, publishers, collective management organisations, and international users of Ugandan scientific, literary, and artistic works, these reforms mark a shift from a relatively permissive environment for digital exploitation toward one characterised by stronger enforcement tools and more structured mechanisms for royalty collection. The changes have particular relevance for licensing practices in the context of AI model training, large-scale data aggregation, and automated content scraping, where Ugandan works may be ingested without prior authorisation or compensation.

Severe Penalties as a Deterrent and Licensing Lever

The amended bill introduces significantly enhanced penalties for digital copyright infringement. Corporate offenders face substantial fines, while individuals, including those responsible for automated scraping or the operation of systems that exploit protected works without authorization, may face criminal imprisonment of up to ten years. These penalties are designed to serve both a deterrent function and a signalling function: they communicate to domestic and international actors that unauthorised digital exploitation of Ugandan works will carry meaningful legal and financial consequences.

From a licensing perspective, the existence of severe penalties alters the risk calculus for potential licensees and infringers alike. Parties that might previously have engaged in large-scale scraping or automated ingestion of Ugandan content with relatively low perceived legal risk now face the prospect of significant criminal and civil exposure. This environment creates stronger incentives to seek licences proactively, to implement robust compliance and filtering mechanisms, and to engage with Ugandan rights holders or collective management organisations before rather than after exploitation occurs. At the same time, the threat of severe penalties can be leveraged by rights holders in licensing negotiations to obtain more favourable terms or to encourage settlement of claims arising from past unauthorised use.

Digital Royalty Collection and Management Provisions

The most forward-looking aspect of the amended bill lies in its specific provisions addressing digital royalty collection and management. These provisions aim to standardise the mechanisms by which royalties are identified, collected, and distributed in respect of automated or web-scraped exploitation of protected works. By creating clearer legal pathways for royalty claims arising from digital uses, including large-scale data ingestion that may support AI training or other automated systems, the legislation seeks to reduce the practical barriers that have historically made it difficult for Ugandan creators to obtain compensation when their works are exploited online at scale.

The new framework is likely to have several concrete effects on licensing practice. First, it may facilitate the development or strengthening of collective management organisations capable of administering digital royalties on behalf of Ugandan creators, including in cross-border contexts. Second, it provides a clearer legal basis for individual or collective claims against entities that have engaged in unauthorised web scraping or data crawling involving Ugandan works. Third, by standardising enforcement protocols, the bill reduces some of the uncertainty that has previously discouraged both domestic creators and international licensees from entering into formal licensing arrangements for digital uses. Over time, these changes could contribute to the emergence of more predictable and better-functioning markets for the licensing of Ugandan content for AI training, data analytics, and other automated applications.

Implications for AI Training Data and Automated Exploitation Licensing

The combination of severe penalties and new digital royalty collection mechanisms has particular significance for the licensing of Ugandan works as training data for AI models. Large-scale web scraping of scientific articles, literary works, news content, images, and other protected materials originating in Uganda has likely occurred without authorisation or compensation, as has been the case with content from many jurisdictions. Under the new regime, AI developers and data aggregators that have ingested or plan to ingest Ugandan works face both heightened legal risk (from the penalty provisions) and a clearer pathway for rights holders to assert claims for remuneration (through the digital royalty provisions).

This environment is likely to accelerate licensing activity in several ways. Developers may seek to regularise past use through negotiated settlements or licensing programmes. Rights holders and their representatives may be more willing to engage in licensing discussions knowing that they have stronger legal tools at their disposal. Collective management organisations, if adequately resourced and empowered under the new framework, could play a central role in administering licences and collecting royalties for automated uses at scale. Over time, these dynamics could contribute to the development of more standardised licensing terms and pricing benchmarks for Ugandan content used in AI training and related applications.

Implementation Challenges in an Emerging Market Context

While the legislative reforms are ambitious, their practical impact will depend heavily on implementation. Effective digital royalty collection requires institutional capacity, including technical systems for monitoring online exploitation, legal mechanisms for cross-border enforcement, and administrative structures capable of processing claims and distributing royalties fairly and efficiently. Uganda, like many emerging markets, faces resource constraints that may limit the speed and effectiveness with which these new provisions can be operationalised. Capacity building for the Copyright Office, collective management organisations, and the judiciary will be essential if the bill’s objectives are to be realised.

There are also questions about the interaction between the new domestic framework and international obligations, including those arising under the Berne Convention, TRIPS Agreement, and any applicable bilateral or regional trade agreements. Ensuring that the enhanced penalties and royalty collection mechanisms are applied in a manner consistent with these obligations, and that they do not create unnecessary barriers to legitimate cross-border data flows or technology transfer, will require careful regulatory design and ongoing international engagement.

Regional and International Significance

Uganda’s reforms are part of a broader trend among African and other emerging market jurisdictions to strengthen IP frameworks in response to digitalisation and the rise of AI. By introducing robust penalties alongside structured royalty collection mechanisms, Uganda positions itself as a jurisdiction that takes the protection of local creative and scientific output seriously while also seeking to create workable pathways for legitimate commercial exploitation. For international AI developers and data companies, the Ugandan model may serve as an early indicator of the direction in which other African countries could move, potentially influencing global strategies for sourcing and licensing training data from the continent.

At the same time, the success or difficulties encountered in implementing Uganda’s new provisions may offer valuable lessons for other jurisdictions considering similar reforms. The balance between strong deterrence (through severe penalties) and the creation of functional royalty collection systems will be closely watched by policymakers, rights holders, and industry stakeholders across the region and beyond.

Conclusion

Uganda’s amended Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Bill, adopted in March 2026, represents a significant effort to modernise the country’s copyright framework for the realities of digital exploitation and automated data use. By combining severe penalties for infringement with new provisions on digital royalty collection and management, the legislation creates both stronger deterrents against unauthorised web scraping and automated exploitation and clearer mechanisms through which Ugandan creators can seek compensation when their works are used in digital contexts, including AI training.

For licensing professionals, the reforms signal that the market for Ugandan content in digital and AI applications is entering a new phase characterised by greater legal risk for unauthorised use and greater opportunity for structured, compensated licensing arrangements. Realising the full potential of these reforms will require sustained investment in institutional capacity, careful regulatory design, and ongoing engagement between Ugandan stakeholders and the international community. If successfully implemented, Uganda’s approach could serve as a meaningful reference point for other emerging markets seeking to balance strong protection of local creative output with the demands of an increasingly data-driven global economy.

Author:- Amrita Pradhan, in case of any queries please contact/write back to us at support@ipandlegalfilings.com or   IP & Legal Filing.

References

1. The Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, 2006 (Uganda), Act No. 19 of 2006, Laws of Uganda, https://ulii.org/akn/ug/act/2006/19/eng.
2. Parliament of Uganda, Hansard Proceedings of 17–18 March 2026 concerning consideration and passage of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2026, https://www.parliament.go.ug.
3. Parliament of Uganda, Copyright and Neighbouring Rights (Amendment) Bill, 2026 (as passed by Parliament), https://www.parliament.go.ug.
4. The Constitution of the Republic of Uganda, 1995 (as amended), art. 40(2), https://www.parliament.go.ug/documents/1240/constitution.
5. Uganda Registration Services Bureau, Intellectual Property Directorate, Copyright Administration Framework, https://ursb.go.ug.
6. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), WIPO Lex Database – Uganda Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, legislative profile and copyright framework, https://www.wipo.int/wipolex.
7. World Intellectual Property Organization, Guide on Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights, https://www.wipo.int.
8. Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, Sept. 9, 1886, as revised at Paris July 24, 1971, administered by WIPO, https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne. 
9. Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), Apr. 15, 1994, Annex 1C to the Marrakesh Agreement, https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/27-trips.pdf.
10. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Generative Artificial Intelligence and Copyright (2024), https://www.wipo.int.
11. United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), Digital Economy Report, https://unctad.org.
12. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Copyright, Data Access and Artificial Intelligence (2024), https://www.oecd.org.
13. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Collective Management of Copyright and Related Rights, https://www.wipo.int.
14. International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations (IFRRO), Licensing and Collective Rights Management for Digital Uses (2024–2025), https://www.ifrro.org.
15. World Bank, Digital Development in Africa: Opportunities and Challenges, https://www.worldbank.org.
16. African Union, Digital Transformation Strategy for Africa (2020–2030), https://au.int.
17. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA), Intellectual Property Rights and the African Digital Economy, https://www.uneca.org.
18. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights: Artificial Intelligence and Copyright Discussions, https://www.wipo.int.
19. International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC), Global Collections Report (latest edition), https://www.cisac.org.