Opinion / Columnist
Charamba, Jah Signal dispute sparks a debate
17 Feb 2024 at 06:37hrs | Views
The ongoing copyright dispute between Charamba and Jah Signal has sparked a debate within the legal community about the enforcement of copyrights in the gospel music genre. Some, including myself, are skeptical and believe that there should be a legal exception for gospel music.
My reasoning is based on the House of Lords decision in Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571, in which Lord Atkins ruled in a breach of contract case between husband and wife. His Lordship held that contractual agreements between family members are presumed unenforceable because there is no intention to create legal rights enforceable in courts between parties. He also argued that small courts would be overwhelmed if these arrangements resulted in legal obligations.
These reasons can be applied to the issue between Charamba and Jah Signal. Gospel singers do not record songs with the intention to enforce copyright. Copyright grants exclusive rights to distribution, performance, and reproduction, but in gospel music, artists want their work to be freely used, reproduced, and performed.
Furthermore, there are popular gospel songs like "Zorabhata" by Macheso, which have been sung by churches, and Zimpraise has remade songs like "Mumba maMwari Mune Mufaro," and Minister Mahendere's "Makanaka Jesu" was originally a Sunday School song. Should churches be sued for singing these songs? If the AFM church decided to sue all the churches that sang "Mwari Muri Zuva Redu," it would create a chaotic legal situation.
While Jah Signal is in the wrong, his case could potentially improve the legal landscape if the court considers the view that there should be an exception for gospel music.
Gospel music ndeya Mwari. It can not be be owned individually. Copyright should not apply. Nobody forced Charamba to classify his songs as gospel. If what Jah Signal is doing is bad, God will deal with him.
My reasoning is based on the House of Lords decision in Balfour v Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571, in which Lord Atkins ruled in a breach of contract case between husband and wife. His Lordship held that contractual agreements between family members are presumed unenforceable because there is no intention to create legal rights enforceable in courts between parties. He also argued that small courts would be overwhelmed if these arrangements resulted in legal obligations.
Furthermore, there are popular gospel songs like "Zorabhata" by Macheso, which have been sung by churches, and Zimpraise has remade songs like "Mumba maMwari Mune Mufaro," and Minister Mahendere's "Makanaka Jesu" was originally a Sunday School song. Should churches be sued for singing these songs? If the AFM church decided to sue all the churches that sang "Mwari Muri Zuva Redu," it would create a chaotic legal situation.
While Jah Signal is in the wrong, his case could potentially improve the legal landscape if the court considers the view that there should be an exception for gospel music.
Gospel music ndeya Mwari. It can not be be owned individually. Copyright should not apply. Nobody forced Charamba to classify his songs as gospel. If what Jah Signal is doing is bad, God will deal with him.
Source - X
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
