Uganda’s copyright reform explained: Who wins, who pays and what’s still unclear

• New bill forces businesses to pay royalties whenever music is played publicly
• Artists gain higher revenue shares and stronger protection against piracy
• Lack of clear rates, tracking systems and enforcement raises major concerns

This week saw a historic moment for the music industry after the Copyright Amendment Bill 2025 was passed by Parliament, finally updating the outdated Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act of 2006 that artists have criticised for years.

Musicians have for long been yearning for this, saying that it is what will help them to earn from their work. Speaking after Parliament approved it, the UNMF president Eddy Kenzo said artists are now waiting for the regulations that will guide how the law will actually work.

At the heart of the new law is one major change — businesses making money from music will now be legally required to pay royalties. This includes radio stations, television stations, bars, clubs, hotels, restaurants and even digital platforms. For artists, this could mark the beginning of consistent income whenever their music is played in public spaces.

The bill also introduces changes to caller ring-back tunes, one of the few areas where artists were already earning. Under the new structure, creators are expected to take about 60 percent of the revenue, a significant shift in their favour.

In addition, collecting societies are now required to remit at least 70 percent of what they collect directly to artists, limiting how much they can retain for administrative costs. For years, many musicians have accused these bodies of taking too much while artists received little.

The bill further cracks down on piracy, introducing tougher penalties including heavy fines and possible jail time for individuals distributing music illegally, especially online.

However, the development has been met with some skepticism. Some argue that government may have rushed creatives into celebrating before key details are made clear, and we have decided to take a dive into what the law actually says and what it does not.

One of the biggest gaps is that the bill does not clearly spell out the royalty rates or the payment formula. It does not specify whether businesses will pay a fixed fee, a percentage of their revenue, or negotiate rates depending on usage.

It also remains unclear how exactly music usage will be tracked — a critical factor in determining how much each artist earns. Without a reliable monitoring system, there are fears that collections could be inaccurate or unfairly distributed.

This uncertainty is exactly what broadcasters raised during the debate. Many warned that if the rates are set too high, smaller radio stations, TV stations, bars and entertainment venues could struggle to stay afloat or respond by cutting down on local music.

That leads to the biggest question — will this law actually be implemented and enforced?

Uganda has passed strong laws before, but enforcement has often been weak due to unclear guidelines, limited capacity and poor oversight. Without strong institutions to monitor compliance, the promise of this law could remain on paper.

For now, artists are understandably celebrating what appears to be a long-overdue breakthrough. But the real test will come after the President signs the bill into law.

That is when government must issue clear regulations, set fair and workable royalty rates, establish transparent tracking systems and ensure collecting societies actually deliver money to the musicians.

If that system works, artists could finally begin to earn consistently from their music. If it fails, this moment could simply become another missed opportunity.