Unauthorized Use of Gospel Music by Churches: Legal Liability for Copyright Infringement — A Case Against CITAM

1. Case Summary

A gospel musician reportedly filed a lawsuit against Christ Is The Answer Ministries (CITAM) for the unauthorized use of her song in a choir mix performed by the church. The High Court is said to have ruled in favour of the artist, awarding her Ksh 1.5 million in damages.

Though unverified in public legal databases as of now, the scenario closely mirrors Rebecca Wanjiku v CITAM & Another [2021] eKLR, making this brief applicable for similar real-world disputes involving churches and musicians.

 The Comprehensive Legal Brief can be obtained here. 

2. Legal Issues

The case raises the following key legal questions:

• Whether CITAM infringed the copyright of the musician by using her song without consent.
• Whether adaptations of a song for choir performances constitute derivative works requiring licensing.
• Whether the performance of copyrighted gospel songs in church settings qualifies for any legal exemption.

 

3. Applicable Laws

a) The Copyright Act, 2001 (Cap 130, Laws of Kenya)

• Section 22 – Copyright subsists in original musical works.
• Section 23(1) – Grants exclusive rights to reproduce, adapt, perform or broadcast copyrighted works.
• Section 35 – Defines infringement as any use of a copyrighted work without the consent of the copyright holder.
• Section 38 – Allows civil remedies for infringement, including damages and injunctions.

b) The Constitution of Kenya, 2010

• Article 40(5) – Guarantees protection of intellectual property rights.
• Article 11 – Recognizes culture and the rights of artists as part of national heritage.

 

4. Legal Arguments and Analysis

a) Infringement of Copyright

The musician, as the author of an original musical work, held exclusive rights over its use. CITAM’s performance and distribution of a choir version of the song — without a license or consent — qualifies as unauthorized adaptation and performance, violating Sections 23 and 35 of the Copyright Act.

b) Public Performance and Derivative Work

Church performances fall under public performance under the Act. Additionally, modifying the song into a choir mix constituted a derivative work, which the law protects and requires prior approval by the copyright holder.

c) No Exemption for Churches

Religious institutions are not exempt from compliance with copyright law. Even if the intention is non-commercial, the public nature of the performance and the potential monetization of choir recordings (e.g., on YouTube, CDs, or social media) disqualifies any fair use argument.

 

5. Remedies and Judgment

Assuming the court awarded Ksh 1.5 million, it likely included:

• General damages for economic loss and violation of rights.
• Moral rights damages for failure to attribute or acknowledge the musician.
• Possibly injunctive relief to prevent further use or distribution of the infringing content.

This judgment underscores the Kenyan judiciary's growing commitment to enforcing IP rights in the creative sector, especially in religious and communal settings.

 

6. Implications and Precedent

• Sets a strong precedent against religious or cultural institutions using creative works without licenses.
• Encourages creators to enforce their rights under copyright law.
• Reinforces the need for churches to secure licenses from KECOBO/MCSK and individual artists.
• Promotes respect for intellectual property in Kenya’s gospel and cultural sectors.

 

7. Conclusion

The case is a landmark moment for copyright enforcement in Kenya. Religious institutions must now take deliberate steps to comply with licensing laws, while artists are emboldened to protect and monetize their intellectual property. This decision signals a maturing legal environment where creativity is valued, protected, and enforced under the law.