“One of the reasons why COSOTA has not been successful is that structurally it is both a copyright office and a collecting society. This is not the case in other jurisdictions such as Kenya where the Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBO) is only a copyright office and only issues licenses to collecting societies for various genres.” Discuss

Introduction

Intellectual property (IP) refers to creations that involve the use of mind; inventions, literary and artistic works; symbols, names, sounds, and images used in commerce . The term refers to the property that originates from someone’s brain. As such, anything that involves the use of the intellect is an intellectual property.  These intellectual creations or inventions attract certain legal protected rights. The IP rights are statutory and intended to secure individuals’ creativity. The IPs laws only protects idea(s) already transformed into a work or creation, which is totally original to the owner and, at least, contains some creativity.  The general public is allowed or can freely create similar works or even identical, provided they do so independently by using their own efforts without interfering original owner’s rights. This approach prevents monopoly in a particular intellectual work and it encourage more inventions using the intellect. After all, ideas remain free for the entire public use unless creators express them in a certain form which guide or limits the use of such intellectual properties. 

In many jurisdictions, intellectual properties are considered as the same as other forms of properties i.e land, and the owner is entitled full rights upon such IP. In Tanzania particularly, the intellectual properties are protected by several statutes and infringement to it may result to legal action before court of law. Intellectual property laws exist in order to protect the creators and covers areas of “copyright”, “trademark laws” and “patent”, the intellectual property is an umbrella which covers both copyrights and industrial property such as patents, trademarks and inventions. As per section 5 (1) and (2) of The Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act , authors of all literary and artistic works (which forms part of IPs) enjoys protections of their works hence only the owners have rights to reproduce, distribute or make copies of their original works. Third parties may reproduce, distribute or make copies of original work, but all these must be done under consent of the original owner to avoid infringement of rights associated with IPs. The literary and artistic works which are subject to the copyright includes books, pamphlets, computer programs, addresses, lectures, dramatic and musical works, choreographic works and pantomimes, cinematographer works, audio-visual works, works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, engraving, lithography and tapestry, photographic works including works expressed by processes analogous to photography.

Industrial properties such as patents, trademarks and inventions all forms part of Intellectual properties and are protected from third parties by several statutes such as The Patent Registrations Act . The owner of the patents as per The Patent Registrations Act are entitled special rights and privileges concerning their creations and innovations. Section 35(a) and (b) of The Patent Registration Act , patent owners are given special rights to preclude others in respect of a patent given. 

S.35(a)When the patent has been granted in respect of a product, third parties are precluded from- 

(i)making, importing, offering for sale, selling and using the product;

(ii) stocking such product for the purposes of offering for sale, selling or using; or

(b)When the patent has been granted in respect of a process, third parties are precluded from-

 (i) using the process; or

 (ii) doing any of the acts referred to in paragraph (a) of this section, in respect of a product obtained directly by means of the process.

The trade and service marks are also protected under our municipal laws, as per section 2 of The Trade and Service Marks Act  , “trade or service mark” means any visible sign used or proposed to be used upon, in connection with or in relation to goods or services for the purpose of distinguishing in the course of trade or business the goods or services of a person from those of another. Section 32 of The Trade and Service Marks Act , provides privileges to trade and service marks owners and precludes third parties from using trademarks of other business without justification, and it also prohibit imitation of trade marks as it has impacts on the business brand of original owners. Intellectual Property (IP) is a kind of knowledge which by the perspective of the society, it needs to be assigned specific property rights and that these IPs carries the same rights as to the ownership of other physical properties such as land, vehicles, buildings etc. The Intellectual Property Rights are available in different forms of asserts such as trademarks, geographical indications, industrial designs, patent, layout-designs (topographies) of integrated circuits and copyright. 

Genesis of Intellectual Property Rights Protection

i. The origin and history of copyright in England

The early of 1483, Richard III recognized the value of literary works such as books and papers, and he encouraged the spread of printing, at the same time he was seeking to limit and censor writings deemed to be harmful to the church and crown. The Printers and Binders Act of 1534, banned the importation of foreign literary works and enabled the Lord Chancellor to limit the price of books. Henry VIII went too far in censorship of literary works by introducing new harsh rules which required approved of the books before publication.  In 1557 the Stationers' Company received its Royal Charter from Mary I, giving the company the power to decree who could print books, and the right to confiscate illicit or pirated works. This was not copyright as we understand it today, but rather a monopoly granted to the printer (publisher) to copy a particular work.

The Licensing of the Press Act 1662 was built on this Monopoly framework by stationers' company and titled as “An Act for preventing the frequent Abuses in printing seditious treasonable and unlicensed Books and Pamphlets and for regulating of Printing and Printing Presses". Now the Stationers' Company had the mandate to censor and regulate literary works. The Act had a two years duration clause and so had to be renewed by Parliament after every two years; but censorship led to public demonstration and, in 1694, Parliament rejected to renew the Act as the statute had no blessings from the civilians and literary works rights.  

The Stationers' Company seriously campaigned to convince citizens, literary works rights, stake holders and government for new legislation so as to regain their role which was suspended after rejection by parliament of The Licensing of the Press Act. Their campaign failed, but the failure led to a important move toward introduction of new modern copyright law. Apart from focusing on the printers and publishers, Stationers’ now argued that the writers of literary works should have all legal right of ownership in what they have wrote. This argument got support from the majority of the parliament which led to the enactment of the first Copyright Act, the Statute of Anne, in 1710. 

ii. The origin and history of patents in England.

The year 1331 have been said being too connected to the history of patents where the intellectual property rights came to recognition and started being granted to creators or innovators by kings or monarch. On 16th July, 1331 a king of England, King Edward III created history on the beginning of intellectual property rights by providing King's protection through a letter's patent. It was given to a Flemish weaver of woolen clothes by the name John Kemp. Kemp was allowed by the monarch to exploit his invention and conduct trade on woolen clothes made by his craft in England.  Apart from being given exclusive rights to produce woolen clothes, he was also given rights to establish classes and teach his weaving techniques to individuals he chose, he got exclusive rights to disseminate knowledge and skills without being interfered by third parties. put into account the privileges given to Kemp then compares to today patent privileges you will find that, the root of today’s patent originated from ancient times in England and other states in a whole.

Patent grants evolved from letters patents which were given by king or monarchy to other new forms of giving patents to innovators due to the claims by natives that the letters patents were used by kings to raise money for the crown by creating monopoly even to common commodities, the situation had negative impacts to common civilians who had no grant of patent letters by king. Queen Elizabeth 1 went even far more to create patent to common commodities like salt and starch, these monopolies led to intense conflicts between businessmen and civilians who were looking those commodities as source of their income. These odious monopolies led to a conflict between the Parliament and the Crown, which was finally settled in 1601. It was decided that the power to administer patents would be turned over to the common law courts. 

iii. The origin and history of trademarks in England

In England, trademarks started being officially used at the beginning of 13th Century during the reign of King Henry III in 1266, during 1200’s there was serious fraud in breads business in England, King Henry passed a legislation which required all bread producers to add distinctive marks to all bread sold so as to be able to control frauds and to simplify tracing of bakers who infringed bakers making laws.  Bread bakers who failed to comply with this legislation faced serious heavy fines and at some point, the unmarked bread was confiscated by the government. the bakers got chance for the first time to enjoy the advantage of Trademarks.  Bakers started to use trademarks to distinguish products between one merchant and another. However, France was the earliest state in history to introduce a modern legislation governing trademarks dated back in the year 1857, followed by the Merchandise Act . The oldest registered trademark under the U.K.’s Trade Mark Registration Act  in United Kingdom was in the year 1876- The Bass Brewery's label which had three triangles logo for ale.

Applicant’s name	Trademark	Trademark No.	Date of Grant	Class	Validity
Bass and Company		1	1st Jan, 1876	32	Till 1st Jan, 2022

Figure 1.0 : Bass—the brand name and logo—was the very first trademark to be registered under the U.K.’s Trade Mark Registration Act of 1875.

iv. The origin and history of copyright in India.

The Indian copyright law enacted for the first time by the British colony, the statute itself was a copy and paste of English laws. The Act was enacted in 1847, during the regime of East India Company. As per the statute, the copyright term was either, for the lifetime of author and addition of seven years and in whatever case, the addition of years should not exceed 42 years post mortem. The government had the authority to grant the publishing license after the death of the author if the owner of the copyright refused permission. All suits and copyright infringement came under the jurisdiction of the highest local civil court. The statute was replaced by the copyright Act of 1914.

The first modern Indians statute on copyright was that of 1914. The statute was a copy of English law of 1911 and it was the first law to include all works of art and literature under the ambit of copyright. It came up with several changes as follows; First, it introduced criminal punishments for copyright infringement (se sections 7 to 12 of the statute). Second, it modified the scope of the term of copyright; under section 4 the “sole right” of the author to “produce, reproduce perform; or publish a translation of the work shall subsist only for a period of ten years from the date of the first publication of the work.” The author, however, retained her “sole rights” if within the period of ten years she published. 

Quit after independence, The Copyright Act of 1957 came into operation on the 21st of January, 1958 replacing the 1914 Act. Apart from amending the existed copyright law, the 1957 Copyright law also came up with milestone changes such as provisions for setting up copyright office under the control of Registrar of copyright for registration of books and other works of art. It also established a copyright board which was entitled powers to settle all disputes which was arising from Copyright infringement. 

The statute has undergone several amendments include 1983, 1984, 1992, 1994 and 1999. In May 2012, the Indian Parliament unanimously passed the Copyright Amendment Bill which led to the birth of Copyright Act in 2012. The 2012 was a major amendment which extended Copyright protection particularly in the digital environment to conform to the rapid changes in development of ICT. The statute came up with mandatory statutory licenses for cover versions and broadcasting stations. Ensuring the right to receive royalties for authors, and music composers, exclusive economic. Moral rights to performers, equal membership rights in copyright societies for authors and other right owners. Moreover, the exception of copyrights for physically disabled to access any works. 

The 2012 amendments to India copyright Act brought major changes to Copyright laws and no any other major changes has been done concerning copyright. The amendment was mostly influenced by the rapid changes in ICT technology where infringement of copyrights shifted from physical to digital environment. The 2012 Indian Copyright Act influenced changes to Copyright laws of other countries which adopted India Copyright law.

v. The origin and history of patents in India.

The Act VI of 1856 was the first statute in India on issue concerning patents, the Act intended to motivate more creation and inventions and to induce creators to disclose information concerning their inventions. For the purpose of granting exclusive rights to inventors, a fresh legislation was introduced as Act XV of 1859. In 1872, the Act was renamed as The Patterns and Designs Protection Act. The Act remained in force for 30 years with only 1 amendment in the year 1883. The Indian Patents and Design Act replaced all the previous statutes concerning patents in India. In this Act, provisions relating to grants of secret patents and patent of addition were added, the term of patents increased from 14 years to 16 years. During and after independence, various committees were established to examine the revisions in the law and thus a bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in 1965 which however lapsed. Though it lapsed in 1965, in 1967, an amended bill was introduced and then on the final recommendation of the committee, the Patents Act, 1970 was passed which is presently used in India. 

vi. The history and origin of Trademarks in India.

The trademarks were used even before the coming of the term “trademarks”, in history, there is good evidence which shows that merchants and producers of hand made products in Egypt and China were using symbols or drawings as to decorate their goods, but also as to make unique identity or to create recognition of a particular product basing on its design.  Roman craftsmen left their distinctive symbols or marks on everything they made such as tableware, brickwork and roof tiles, decorative vases, gravestones, lead slingshot ammunition, and even plumbing. In India, the evolution of trademarks can be traced back from 1860 where there was no official trademarks law until 1940. the first Trademark Act was enacted in 1940. The statute was borrowed from British Trademark Act , later on, after independence in 1958, the statute changed to the Trade and Merchandise Act . Several amendments were made until 1999 when the Trademarks Act  was enacted which is present until now. The trademarks Act came to protect the trademarks owners from duplicity by their competitors and to secure goods, trademarks owner’s business and goodwill which is added to trademarks by consumers.

Among the earliest registered trademarks in India is trademark No. 10 granted by Kolkata Trade mark Office on 1st June, 1942 for the mark BLACK AND WHITE (Device) to James Buchanan & Company Ltd. It is a British company involving in the manufacture of Whisky.  There were other earliest trademarks but unfortunately, they are untraced and unavailable.

 

Figure 2.0: the earliest registered trademarks in India is trademark No. 10 granted by Kolkata Trade mark Office on 1st June, 1942 for the mark BLACK AND WHITE (Device) to James Buchanan & Company Ltd. It is a British company involving in the manufacture of Whisky

vii. The origin and history of copyright in United States of America.

The copyright law history in America is too connected to the introduction of the printing press to England in the late 15th century. As per the increase of number of presses, the existed regime sought to regulate the publication of literary works particularly books by granting printers a near monopoly on publishing in England. The Licensing Act of 1662 cemented and confirmed that monopoly and established a register of licensed books to be regulated by the Stationers’ Company, a group of printers with the mandates to censor publications. The 1662 Act came to an end in 1695 leading to a relaxation of government censorship, and in 1710 Parliament passed the Statute of Anne to address the concerns of English booksellers and printers. The 1710 statute empowered authors toward ownership of copyright and a fixed term of protection of copyrighted works (14 years, and renewable for 14 more if the author was alive upon expiration). The Act prevented a monopoly on the part of the booksellers and printers, then created a “public domain” for literature by limiting terms of copyright and by ensuring that once a work was purchased the copyright owner no longer had control over its use. While the Act did provide for an author’s copyright, the benefit was minimal because in order to be paid for a work an author had to assign it to a bookseller or publisher. 

Since the Statute of Anne, United States laws has been revised/amended to extend the scope of copyright, to change the life span of copyright protection, and to address new issues associated with technological development. For several years, the US has considered and acted on copyright reform. 

viii. The origin and history of trademarks in United States of America.

In United States of America, the trademark laws were mostly influenced by English trademark law (common law). USA, introduced for the first time, the Federal Trade Mark Act  of 1870 as the first U.S. federal law to protect trademarks. The trade mark law of 1870 was later, on 1879 declared unconstitutional by U.S. supreme court for contravening U.S. constitutional provisions concerning patents. It was therefore abolished. Two years later, a trademark law was enacted on March 3, 1881 that targeted trademarks used in interstate commerce based on the interstate commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution (Art.1, Sec. 8, Cl. 3). This law, however, proved failure on its compatibility to the speed of development of the American economy and underwent a major amendment in 1905. 

Upon the enactment of the Lanham Act  on 1946, American trademark law became with the same rank compare to English or German trademark laws. The Lanham Act adopted English trademark law hence the status and quality of the statute was the same as that one of England. Further, it was the first United States trademark law which approved the registration of service marks. The Lanham Act introduced trade and service mark registration rules and granted administrative authority to United States Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") over trademark registration and regulation.

The recent development in U.S. trademark law include adoption of several other statutes regulating trademarks such as the Federal Trademark Dilution Act , Ant cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act  and the Trademark Dilution Revision Act . Trademark dilution is a trademark law concept which empower the owner(s) of famous trademark standing to forbid third parties from using that mark in a way that would lessen its uniqueness or that will affect the reputation of the original mark. Trademark dilution involves the unauthorized use of someone's business mark on products that have no connection to marks owner’s products without authority from the owner which may affect status of his business.

Unfortunately, there is no clear evidence on the first trademark to be registered in USA as there is no sample marks which were registered for the first time, but there is some credible evidence which may convince us that, there were earliest registered trademarks during 1870’s. During 2000’s, an employee of the US Patent Office found one oldest, dusty book in the archive. He did not really know what it was, but he was intrigued by the date on it: July 1870. He felt that he was holding something important in his hands.  It is was really something important since it was a first register of trademarks in United States of 1870. In this register, there was clear evidence that, the first application for trademark registration was filed on 28th of July 1870 and after three months, one trademark got registered. 

 

Figure 3.0: The first trademark registers of 1870

Later on, researchers found one of the trademarks which was a match to the description of the one trademark visible on the above 1870 trademark register. The descriptions of the mark were that, “There is an eagle holding paint in its beak” and the below image resemble all the stated descriptions of the trademark.

 

Figure 4.0: An eagle holding paint in its beak.

The historical background of copyright protection and the birth of copyright society of Tanzania (C.O.S.O.T.A)

Copyright protection is not a new concept in Tanzania, the history of copyright protection in Tanzania can be traced back during the British colonial period when Tanzania mainland was referred to as Tanganyika (before independence). The first Copyright law in Tanganyika was Copyright Ordinance  which was enacted in1924 for the purpose to governing copyright as at that time, there was rapid growth in production of literary and artistic works. The British colonial administration introduced Copyright law so as to secure the community against piracy and to extend scope of tax collection by registering copyright owners and collect tax from them basing on profit they made on their literary works. The copyright ordinance was in force since 1924 until 1966 when it was replaced by The Copyright Act Cap 218. There were no major changes between Copyright Ordinance of 1924 and Copyright Act of 1966, it was just a name from being Ordinance to Act. The Copyright Act became in force for 33 years, from 1966 to 1999 when it was replaced by the Copyright and Neighboring Right Act  (CNRA), Cap 218 of 1999.

The Copyright and Neighboring Right Act came with important changes which now governed copyrights locally and at the global level. The rapid increase of literary and artistic works and the need by authors or owners of literary works to protect their works influenced much to the changes on copyright laws. But also, the claims from literary and artistic works owners that the government has failed to protect rights associated with intellectual properties, influenced the changes of copyright related laws. Among other key changes, The Copyright Act of 1999 established Copyright Society of Tanzania (C.O.S.O.T.A) under section 46, where by COSOTA is vested with power to administer the Copyright Act. This was a great improvement on the old Act which, among other things, did not provide for an Institution to administer the Act. 

The major functions of COSOTA are stated under Section 47 of The Copyright and Neighboring Right Act  as follows;

i. To promote and protect the interests of authors, performers, translators, producers of sound recordings, broadcasters, publishers, and, in particular, to collect and distribute any royalties or other remuneration accorded to them in respect of their rights provided for in the Act;

ii. To maintain registers of works, productions and associations of authors, performers, translators, producers of sound recordings, broadcasters and publishers;

iii. To search for, identify and publicize the rights of owners and give evidence of the ownership of these where there is a dispute or an infringement;

iv. To print, publish, issue or circulate any information, report, periodical, books, pamphlet, leaflet or any other material relating to copyright and rights of performers, producers of sound recordings and broadcasters.

v. And to advise the responsible minister on all matters under The Copyright and Neighboring Right Act.

The copyright owners and stakeholders thought that, the establishment of COSOTA will be the cure to the literary and artistic works piracy but later, they came to notice that there was still a lot to be done on protection of literary works. Since the launch of COSOTA, there has been complaining by artists that, COSOTA has failed to protect artistic works because nothing has been seen to be done and there were no visible efforts toward protection of copyrights. Joseph Mbilinyi who was a parliamentarian of Mbeya constituency and copyright stakeholder, several times spoke about weaknesses of COSOTA and how in some cases COSOTA becomes barrier to improvement in copyright protection. One example of the weaknesses was the delay in issuing TRA stickers which were to be used by artists on their works so as to differentiate the original and forged works.  COSOTA took a long time and finally failed to implement properly the project of issuing stickers to artists. COSOTA is seen as collecting body and not regulatory institution and most of its efforts are directed to collect fees and taxes from artists and not to protect their works from piracy. 

Basing on the above functions of COSOTA as provided under section 47 of The Copyright and Neighboring Right Act, it is clearly visible that, the society is both a copyright office and a collecting society. At one side, COSOTA is responsible to enforce Copyright Act since it is a copyright office, and on the other side, COSOTA is responsible as a collecting society, which grant licenses for public performance of copyright works on behalf of artists, collect and distribute royalties and take legal action against infringements.  Unfortunately, COSOTA is seen as un-organized institution, it has proved serious weaknesses especial on enforcing copyright laws upon infringement, there are several examples which shows that, COSOTA is un-organized institution. The following are claims which did not actually reached the court of law, but they were demands by COSOTA which took front pages of newspapers and other medias as follows;

COSOTA v W-Stores Company (T) Ltd, in 2007, COSOTA served two invoices to the company which claimed payment of total of 720,000 Tsh/= for public performance of sounds and music which were under control of COSOTA without license. The claims were unsuccessful as the company raised several strong arguments one of it was that, the company was not playing the music for commercial purposes and they legally bought original copy of the CD which contained those sounds and music hence they had right to use it. This was a proof that, COSOTA is un-organized entity, they need improvements to their legal department. Other cases which failed include COSOTA v Simba Mtoto Transport Ltd and COSOTA v hotel, bar and restaurants in Arusha.

In Zanzibar, they have the copyright society of Zanzibar (COSOZA) which is almost the same in structure and functions to the copyright society of Tanzania (COSOTA). COSOZA deals with registration, protection of artistic works and providing licenses to the users and distribution of royalties to owners the same as what COSOTA do. A good thing about COSOZA is that, they have minimum number of artistic and literary works due to small number of people engaging themselves in IPs works. Their geographical area is too small hence it is easy for them to monitor things easily compare to COSOTA which needs enough resources to provide services all over the country.

Reasons toward poor performance by COSOTA on copyright protection

COSOTA is both a copyright office and a collecting society. The statutory functions of COSOTA are too many per one institution, it is very tough for one institution to handle properly all of its duties as stated under section 47 of Act. The Kenya Copyright Board (KECOBA) is a successful copyright institution because it has few duties, it is only a copyright office and issues licenses to collecting societies for various genres.  COSOTA needs structural adjustment to reduce some functions and assigns it to other boards.

Artists have lost faith in the COSOTA’s ability to administer their works. This have made them either not to declare their works to the society or deliberately by-pass it and administer their own works. Due this, COSOTA has lost legal powers to enforce copyright Act as they cannot sue on behalf of an artist who is not a registered member of the society. It is a requirement of the law that, for the literary or artistic works to be protected by COSOTA, every owner of the artistic work must cause it to be registered under COSOTA.

Few criminal charges on copyright infringement as per section 42 of the Act. Section 42 of The Copyright and Neighboring Right Act allows criminal prosecution against copyright infringements and there are excessive punishments of fines or imprisonment which are stated under this Act. Unfortunately, there are very few criminal charges concerning copyright infringement in Tanzania, one of the known criminal case on copyright infringement is one of the Republic v. Ajay Amarsh Chavda , the accused was charged for reproduction, distribution and adaption of copyrighted works from India. There must be good coordination between COSOTA and TANPOL especially on matters concerning copyright infringement so as many criminal cases can be opened before court of law.

Confusion on if members of COSOTA may still administer their work by themselves. It is arguable that under regulation 6 of the Copyright Registration of Members and their Works Regulations, artist may continue to deal with his or her work the way he or she likes. The issue here is what happens if both an artist and COSOTA separately sues a same person or organization on same grounds and subject matter? Does this fall under “res-judicata or res-subjudice principle”? If yes, there is problem on the provision, it needs to be clear under which circumstances an artist may separately handle copyright infringements without being barred by the law and without interfering COSOTA’s actions.

The National Arts Council of Tanzania

The national arts council of Tanzania (Baraza la Sanaa Tanzania, BASATA), was established under Act No. 23 of 1984. The Act was a result of the amalgamation of the National Arts Council Act and the National Music Council Act, both of 1974. The amalgamation was done in order to streamline the promotion of the Arts into a single Council and to bring in theatre arts which has been excluded in the 1974 Acts. 

The major functions of the Council include, to revive and promote the development and production of artistic works, carrying out research on the development, production and marketing of artistic works, providing advisory services and technical assistance for the development of artistic enterprises, planning and co-ordinate artistic activities. To issue advise to the Government on all matters relating to the development and production of artistic works, providing and promoting training programmes and facilities, undertaking the production, importation, exportation and sale of artistic works and to prepare regulations for registration of people and organizations involved in the arts.

BASATA is an important stakeholder when it comes to issues of artistic works hence no one can reject that; the council is given important task connected to COSOTA. There must be healthy collaboration between these two institutions, and the changes must include shifting of some duties from COSOTA to BASATA. COSOTA must remains a copyright office only and collecting duties should be transferred to BASATA. The National Arts Council works closely with many other partners, among them are government and non-government organizations and other stakeholders involved in the arts and culture. The partners include The Department of Fine and Performing Arts of University of Dar es Salaam (DFPA). Taasisi ya Sanaa na Utamaduni Bagamoyo (TaSUBa), The Dar es Salaam Museum and House of Culture, and Tanzania Theatre Centre (TzTC).

Conclusion

Copyright society of Tanzania (COSOTA) has failed to achieve various goals due to a number of reasons such as too much duties imposed to this institution which makes it very tough to implement them accurately, few COSOTA regional offices which makes it very tough to artists living out of Dar es salaam to register their works, poor coordination between COSOTA and other stakeholders like BASATA, TASUBA, TZTC and DFPA as visible above, few operations intending to dispose artistic works piracy, and few criminal charges over copyright infringement. There must be good communication between COSOTA and TANPOL to enable smooth criminal charges under section 42 of the Copyright Act.

REFERENCE

BOOKS

Marjorie Hodges Shaw, H. M., and Brian B. Shaw, B. B., (2003), “Copyright in the Age of Photocopiers Word Processors, and the Internet”, Taylor & Francis, Ltd., 35(6), 20-27, p. 23.

THESIS

Mwaipopo, A.R., (2008), “Intellectual Property Rights and the Regulation of Access to and Benefit Sharing of Genetic Resources in Mainland Tanzania”, Dar es Salaam, PhD Thesis: University of Dar es Salaam, p. 61.

TREATIES

See Article 2 of World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Treaty, 1996. Also, see Bainbridge, D., (2010), Intellectual Property, 8th ed., Pearson Education Ltd, Harlow, UK, p. 5.

JOURNAL

Alex Makulilo and Patricia Boshe, “Looks like copyright license but really it is not-COSOTA and enforcement of copyright in Tanzania”, Open University Law Journal, 2013, Vol. 4, No. 2:120-132. P.122

STATUTES

The Copyright and Neighboring Rights Act, Cap 218 R: E 2010) s. 5(1) & (2).

The Patent Registration Act, Cap 217 of 1987. S. 35(a) and (b)

The Trade and Service Marks Act [CAP 326 R.E. 2010]

Merchandise Act in England in 1862> (accessed December 18, 2021).

The U.K.’s Trade Mark Registration Act of 1875

Federal Trade Mark Act, 1870

Lanham Act on July 5, 1946,

Federal Trademark Dilution Act, 1995

Ant cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act, 1999

British Trademark Act, 1938

The Trade and Merchandise Act, 1958

Trademarks Act, 1999

The Trademark Dilution Revision Act, 2006

Copyright Ordinance, Cap 218 of 1924.

The Copyright and Neighboring Right Act, Cap 218 of 1999 R: E 2002. S.46

WEB-SOURCE

History of information, “The Statute of Anne: The First Copyright Statute 1709”, available at < https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?entryid=3389> (Accessed December 18 2021).

Britannica, “Statute of Anne Great Britain [1710]”, available at < https://www.britannica.com/topic/Statute-of-Anne> (Accessed December 18 2021).

Legal service india, “IPR Law history”, available at < https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-3581-ipr-law-history.html> (accessed December 17, 2021) 

Dennemeyer, “The evolution of trademarks - from ancient Egypt to modern times”, available at <https://www.dennemeyer.com/ip-blog/news/the-evolution-of-trademarks-from-ancient-egypt-to-modern-times/

Vakilsearch, “evolution of copyright laws”, available at < https://vakilsearch.com/advice/evolution-of-copyright-laws/> (Accessed December 18 2021).

Ssrana, “Copyright law in India”, available at < https://ssrana.in/ip-laws/copyright-law-india/> (Accessed December 18 2021).

Altacit, “First Amongst Equals: Review of the Historical Perspectives of the Trademark Legislation and Registration” available at <https://www.altacit.com/trademark/first-amongst-equals-review-of-the-historical-perspectives-of-the-trademark-legislation-and-registration/> (accessed December).

Association of research libraries, “Copyright Timeline: A History of Copyright in the United States”, available at < https://www.arl.org/copyright-timeline/> (Accessed December 18 2021).

Znakitowarowe, “The oldest registered trademarks– United States –“, available at <https://znakitowarowe-blog.pl/the-oldest-registered-trademarks-in-the-world/> (accessed December 18, 2021)

E-government, “The Copyright Society of Tanzania (COSOTA)”, available at <https://www.tanzania.go.tz/home/pages/1711> (accessed December 19, 2021)

 Suguformbeya, “COSOTA acheni kukwamisha stika za TRA “, available at <http://suguformbeya.blogspot.com/2013/08/cosota-acheni-kukwamisha-stika-za-tra.html> (accessed December 19, 2021)

Bowmans, “copyright enforcement in Tanzania”, available at <https://www.bowmanslaw.com/insights/intellectual-property/copyright-enforcement-in-tanzania/> (accessed December 20, 2021).

 E-government, “The National Arts Council (BASATA) “available at <https://www.tanzania.go.tz/home/pages/1707> (accessed December 20, 2021)

WIPO, “What is Intellectual Property?”, available at <https://www.wipo.int/about-ip/en/> (accessed December 17, 2021)