AI Challenges For Africa’s Creative Future: Urgent Policy Needs

AI Series by The Music Advocate Africa: Protecting Africa’s Creative Future: Lessons from the EU AI Act, Indian Case Law and the Path Ahead

Africa’s creative industries are a vibrant force, driving cultural identity, economic growth, and global influence. From Afrobeats, to Amapiano to Nollywood, African creators are reshaping global culture. Yet, as generative AI (GenAI) technologies advance, they pose both opportunities and threats to these industries. Recent developments in the European Union (EU) provide important insights for Africa. These insights focus on safeguarding intellectual property (IP). Additionally, they emphasize ensuring fair practices in the age of AI.

---

The Challenge: AI’s Unchecked Use of Creative Works

The EU recently finalised its AI Act, a law designed to regulate artificial intelligence. A coalition of European creators, publishers, and rightsholders has raised alarms about its implementation. They argue that the law’s current measures fail to protect creators’ rights. Key issues include:

1. Unauthorized Data Scraping: AI companies often use copyrighted music, texts, and artworks to train their models without permission or compensation.
2. Lack of Transparency: The EU’s guidelines for disclosing training data are vague. This vagueness makes it nearly impossible for creators to identify misuse. It also challenges creators when they try to address misuse.
3. Unfair Competition: AI-generated content risks flooding markets, undercutting human artists who invest time, skill, and resources into original work.

These challenges mirror what African creators already face. For example, AI tools might replicate the styles of African musicians or visual artists without acknowledgment. This replication dilutes their cultural and economic value.

---

Africa’s Creative Industries Under Threat: Real-World Cases

Case Study: Arijit Singh vs. AI Voice Cloning – India’s Blueprint for Protecting Artistic Identity

---

Background: The Rise of a Voice, The Threat of AI

Arijit Singh, India’s most-streamed playback singer, has become a global phenomenon. With 138.5 million Spotify followers as of March 2025, he surpasses Taylor Swift in listener count, though trailing in total streams. His soulful voice—synonymous with Bollywood’s biggest hits—now faces an unprecedented threat: AI-powered voice cloning.

---

The Case: Arijit Singh v. Codible Ventures LLP (2024)

In a landmark ruling, the Bombay High Court sided with Singh, who sued Codible Ventures LLP for:

1. AI Voice Cloning: Synthesizing his voice without consent.
2. Misleading Endorsements: Using his likeness to promote virtual events.
3. Unauthorized Merchandise: Selling digital assets bearing his name/image.

Court’s Decision:

• Recognised Singh’s voice, vocal style, and signature as protected “personality rights.”
• Banned Codible from exploiting his persona, citing risks of economic harm and reputational damage.
• Declared AI tools enabling voice conversion illegal without celebrity consent.

Key Quote:
“What shocks the conscience is how celebrities are targeted by unauthorized AI content. This undermines control over one’s identity.”
— Justice R.I. Chagla

---

India’s Legal Evolution: From Film Stars to AI

Singh’s case builds on India’s growing jurisprudence around personality rights:

Daler Mehndi Case in 2010: Dolls singing the artist’s songs were deemed unauthorised exploitation.

A legal battle unfolded in the heart of New Delhi. It pitted an entertainment company against several retail defendants. The case centered on the beloved pop icon Daler Mehndi. This case was decided on April 29, 2010, in the High Court of Delhi. It shines a light on the critical issue of publicity rights. It also addresses the concept of false endorsement.

The complainant in this case, D.M. Entertainment Pvt. Ltd., was not just any company. It was the brainchild of Daler Mehndi himself. His name is synonymous with music and entertainment in India. The company was established in 1996. It was tasked with managing Mehndi’s burgeoning career. Additionally, it promoted charitable causes and fostered awareness around ecological and social issues.

Daler Mehndi, a cultural icon, has captivated audiences worldwide with his signature style and electrifying performances. Over the years, he has amassed numerous awards and accolades, cementing his status as a household name. Yet, with fame comes the risk of exploitation. The case at hand involved unauthorized dolls marketed by several defendants in the case. These dolls bore a striking resemblance to Mehndi. They even claimed to sing snippets of his famous songs.

The defendants Baby Gift House, Poonam Gift Palace, and others were accused of misappropriating Mehndi’s likeness without permission. Selling these dolls under the brand SUN TOYS, they failed to recognize the implications of their actions. The plaintiff contended that these practices infringed on Mehndi’s right to publicity. They also misled consumers into believing there was an endorsement from the artist himself.

The court found significant evidence. The dolls were marketed in a manner that exploited Mehndi’s fame. This potentially misleads buyers about the source of the products. Daler’s D M Entertainment argued that this false endorsement dilutes the uniqueness of his persona. It causes financial harm and damages the reputation built over years of hard work.

In its judgment, the High Court ruled in favor of D.M. Entertainment, granting a permanent injunction against the defendants and awarding token damages of 1,00,000 rupees for the infringement. The court emphasized that using a celebrity’s identity for commercial gain without their consent is unauthorized. This action is a serious violation of their rights.

This case underscores the delicate balance between free expression and the protection of individual rights in a democratic society. The law protects against the unauthorized exploitation of a celebrity’s identity. However, it also recognizes the value of parody and artistic expression.

As we delve into the third Indian case study, we’re left to ponder the implications of this ruling. Celebrity culture is pervasive in this digital economy. How can we, as Africans, ensure that artists and public figures maintain control over their own identities? The Daler Mehndi case serves as a reminder that while fame can open doors, it also demands caution. Fame requires vigilance against those who seek to profit from it without permission.

Anil Kapoor Case in 2023: Unauthorized use of Kapoor’s likeness for merchandise violated his “right to livelihood.”

When Digital Deception Meets Celebrity Rights: The Anil Kapoor Case

Anil’s case shows how the line between reality and fabrication has become dangerously thin. Deepfake technology has evolved into a weapon of exploitation, targeting celebrities with fabricated content that can destroy reputations in seconds.

The Rise of Digital Impersonation

Picture this: Your favorite celebrity’s face seamlessly morphed onto someone else’s body. They are saying things they never said. They are appearing in situations they were never in. This isn’t science fiction, it’s happening right now. Scammers and opportunists are using sophisticated AI technology. They create fake content featuring popular personalities. All of this is in the name of profit. The technology has become so advanced that distinguishing between authentic and fabricated content requires expert analysis. This digital deception has forced celebrities into courtrooms worldwide. They are fighting for the fundamental right to control their own image and persona.

A Bollywood Star’s Fight for Digital Dignity

Enter Anil Kapoor, the beloved Bollywood actor known for his iconic catchphrase “jhakaas” and decades of memorable performances. Kapoor found himself in a legal storm. He discovered that his identity was being systematically exploited across digital platforms. But this wasn’t just about unauthorized posters or fake merchandise. The violations ran deeper and more disturbing than anyone could imagine.

The Shocking Extent of Digital Exploitation

When Kapoor’s legal team investigated, they uncovered a web of twenty-one defendants engaged in various forms of identity theft:

The Commercial Exploiters were selling digital stickers featuring his image. They were printing unauthorized posters. They were manufacturing t-shirts bearing his name and likeness. All of this was done without permission and for profit.

The Digital Deceivers had created fake social media accounts. They distributed forged signatures and photographs. They even registered domain names like anilkapoor.com to mislead his fans.

But perhaps most disturbing was The Deepfake Creators. They used artificial intelligence to generate offensive content. They morphed Kapoor’s face with prominent actresses like Katrina Kaif, Madhuri Dixit, and the late Sridevi. They also produced cartoon versions of the actor and spread GIF images across social media platforms.

Building the Legal Case for Kapoor

Kapoor’s legal strategy drew from groundbreaking international precedents. His attorneys referenced the famous Bette Midler versus Ford Motor Company case. In this case, the court ruled that using a celebrity’s distinctive voice without permission violated their rights under copyright law.

They also cited Vanna White v. Samsung Electronics America, a case that established celebrities’ right to profit from their popularity. It protected their financial interests in their identities. The court in that case recognized that a celebrity’s image and persona have genuine commercial value that deserves legal protection.

Kapoor’s team argued that these deepfakes and unauthorized uses fell under “dark patterns.” These are deceptive design tactics that manipulate consumers. They violate their rights through misleading advertising and unfair commercial practices.

A Landmark Ruling

Justice Prathiba M. Singh delivered a judgment. It could change everything in how India and the rest of the world deals with such cases. She acknowledged that while fame brings many benefits, it also makes celebrities vulnerable to exploitation. This exploitation can strip away their privacy, dignity, and livelihood.

The court recognized a fundamental truth. In today’s economy, a celebrity’s endorsement deals and brand partnerships form the backbone of their income. When unauthorized parties exploit a celebrity’s image, they’re not just violating abstract rights, they’re stealing someone’s livelihood.

The ruling was comprehensive and clear. Any use of Anil Kapoor’s name, image, or related personality features is strictly prohibited without permission. This includes use in GIFs, ringtones, domain names, or merchandise.

The Bigger Picture for African Economies Without AI legislation Safeguards.

This Indian case represents more than one actor’s fight against digital exploitation. It’s a precedent-setting moment that establishes crucial protections in our AI-driven world. Justice Singh highlighted an important aspect. Courts must not ignore when someone’s identity is stolen. They must take action when personality features are misused. This is a crucial learning point for African courts as they deal with such matters.  The judgment sends a powerful message. Celebrities’ rights to control their image are fundamental. Profiting from their popularity are fundamental rights that deserve protection. This is especially crucial as technology makes exploitation easier and more convincing than ever before.

What This Means for the Future of AI

The Anil Kapoor case has opened a new chapter in personality rights law globally. As deepfake technology continues to advance, this ruling provides a roadmap for protecting celebrities. It could potentially protect anyone whose image might be manipulated without consent.

Indian Legal Framework:

• Personality rights in India derive from copyright law, trademarks, and consumer protection guidelines.
• Courts require proof of:

1. Celebrity status.
2. Identifiable unauthorized use.
3. Commercial intent.

How AI voice cloning works

Real-voice cloning is an open-source AI algorithm. It is also known as retrieval-based voice conversion (RVC). This technology allows users to clone voices from pre-existing audio samples. Using easy-to-use tools like Jammable or TopMediai, you only need a few seconds of audio to clone a voice. The cloning can be done with up to 95 percent accuracy. These voice-cloning tools pose a substantial risk to IP right holders. They also threaten the public at large through potential fraud. Scammers can clone the voice of a friend or loved one. They use it to request money.

AI tools need to be trained on data. This training is necessary for them to generate new works. These works feature attributes of the training dataset. In Arijit Singh versus Codible Ventures LLP, there was an allegation. It claimed that a dataset of 456 songs from Singh’s repertoire was uploaded to AI tools without authorization. These tools enabled users to convert any text, speech, voice recording or audio file to Singh’s AI voice version.

The challenge of AI voice cloning exists at the intersection of personality rights and copyright protection. For singers such as Singh, voice is both a personal attribute and the medium for creating copyrightable works. When AI tools are trained on an artist’s songs without permission, they infringe on the artist’s copyright. They also extract and replicate their distinctive vocal characteristics.

Laws need to be applicable not only to celebrities but to every individual, as each person has a right to protect their personality and their privacy

In Singh’s case, the defendants attracted visitors to their websites and/or AI tools. They capitalized on Singh’s popularity and reputation. This subjected Singh’s personality rights to potential abuse. The defendants also emboldened internet users to create counterfeit sound recordings and videos that misused Singh’s character and identity.

The Court held that providing AI tools that convert any voice into that of a celebrity without permission is not allowed. This action violates the celebrity’s personality rights. They also found a celebrity’s voice to be “a key component of their personal identity and public persona.”

This form of technological exploitation not only infringes upon the individual’s right to control and protect their own likeness and voice. It also undermines their ability to prevent commercial and deceptive uses of their identity,” noted Justice R.I. Chagla of the Bombay High Court.

The Court observed that allowing the defendants to continue using Singh’s name, voice, likeness, and so on, in the form of AI content without consent would risk severe economic harm to the singer’s life and career. It would also leave room for unscrupulous individuals to misuse such tools for nefarious purposes.

The courts stand out by applying existing legal frameworks to these new challenges. They focus on personality rights and copyright rather than dismiss them as too novel to address. While technology evolves apace, fundamental principles about personal identity and the right to control one’s own expression remain important.

---

How AI Voice Cloning is Dangerous

• Retrieval-Based Voice Conversion (RVC): Open-source tools like Jammable clone voices using 5–10 seconds of audio (95% accuracy).
• Training Data Abuse: In Singh’s case, 456 songs were allegedly scraped to train AI models without permission.
• Dual Threat: Cloning violates copyright (songs) and personality rights (voice/style).

Risks Beyond Celebrities:

• Fraudsters clone voices of family members to scam victims.
• Lesser-known artists lack resources to fight exploitation.

---

Key Takeaways for Africa’s Creative Industries

1. Personality Rights Are Actionable:

• African nations can adapt existing laws (e.g., Kenya’s Copyright Act) to protect voices/styles as unique identifiers.
• Example: Nigeria could classify Burna Boy’s vocal inflections as protected traits.

2. Precedent Over Paralysis:

• India’s courts applied old laws to new tech. Africa needn’t wait for AI-specific legislation.
• Strategy: Use anti-piracy laws to sue platforms hosting cloned content.

3. Collective Advocacy Wins:

• Singh’s victory was bolstered by precedents from Bachchan/Kapoor cases. African artists should collaborate on test cases.

4. Tech Transparency Demands:

• Mandate AI platforms to disclose training data sources, inspired by EU’s Article 53.

---

A Playbook for African Creators & Governments

India’s Arijit Singh case proves that existing laws can combat AI exploitation when applied creatively. For African artists and policymakers, the path forward includes:

• Legislating voice/style as protected attributes.
• Issuing John Doe orders against unnamed infringers.
• Building regional coalitions to share legal strategies.

“Laws must protect every individual—not just celebrities—from AI’s threat to identity and privacy.”

Why Africa Must Act Now

Africa’s creative sectors contribute significantly to GDP and employment. For instance:

Nollywood, Nigeria’s film industry, is a significant contributor to the Nigerian economy. It’s estimated to contribute around 1.1% to 2.3% of Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). In terms of monetary value, Nollywood is valued at $6.4 billion. Furthermore, it’s a major employer, generating over a million direct and indirect jobs.  Here’s a more detailed breakdown: Economic Contribution: Nollywood’s contribution to Nigeria’s GDP is substantial, estimated to be between 1.1% and 2.3%. This translates to a significant monetary value, with estimates ranging from $6.4 billion to $7.2 billion. 

Job Creation: The industry employs over a million people. This makes it a key source of employment in Nigeria. It is second only to agriculture.  Cultural Impact: Nollywood acts as a cultural ambassador for Nigeria. It goes beyond economics. The industry portrays authentic African narratives. It influences audiences across the continent and beyond.  Growth and Evolution: Nollywood has evolved significantly. It started with VHS tapes and DVDs. Now, it utilizes digital platforms like Netflix and Prime Video. Partnerships with global distributors and the emergence of film collectives have further propelled its growth.  Future Potential: Despite challenges like piracy, Nollywood is poised for further expansion. Potential improvements in regulations and copyright laws are likely. They could enhance its profitability.

Nollywood has transformed over the past few decades. It began with a modest start and has become a vibrant, thriving industry. The industry now produces an estimated 2,500-plus films annually. It is recognized as the world’s second-largest film industry in terms of volume, trailing only Bollywood and leading Hollywood.

Kenya’s film industry contributes approximately KSh 20 billion to the country’s GDP annually and supports over 10,000 jobs. The industry has seen significant growth in recent years. It focuses on leveraging the country’s locations and talent. This strategy aims to attract international productions.

However, there is potential for further growth through strategic investments and partnerships. The film industry makes significant contributions to Kenya’s economy. These include direct, indirect, and induced impacts. The direct Gross Value Added (GVA) is KSh 18.6 billion, according to the Kenya Film Commission (KFC).

In 2024, the recorded music revenue in Sub-Saharan Africa reached US$110 million. This surpassed the US$100 million mark for the first time. This achievement was according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). This represents a growth of 22.6% compared to the previous year. The growth was primarily driven by subscription streaming. Mobile internet penetration increased rapidly. The expansion of platforms like Boomplay and Spotify in partnership with telecom companies was crucial.

Key Facts:

• Record Music Revenue: The US$110 million figure represents the total revenue. This revenue is generated by the sale and distribution of recorded music in Sub-Saharan Africa. 
• Impressive Growth:The 22.6% growth rate for 2024 was notably higher than the global average of 4.8%, making Sub-Saharan Africa one of the fastest-growing music markets globally. 
• Streaming Dominance: Streaming, especially subscription streaming, was the main driver of this growth, accounting for 67.3% of the total revenue. 
• Key Players:South Africa remains the largest market in the region. Countries like Nigeria, Kenya, Côte d’Ivoire, and Ghana are also experiencing significant growth. They are showing increasing potential. 
• Future Potential:The report highlights the potential for further growth through innovation, investment in artists, and the development of the music ecosystem

However, weak IP enforcement and fragmented policies leave these industries vulnerable. Without action, AI could:

• Erode Cultural Ownership: African stories, sounds, and art risk being appropriated by global AI platforms.
• Undermine Livelihoods: Unlicensed AI replication threatens income streams for artists, producers, and publishers.
• Stifle Innovation: If creators aren’t fairly compensated, investment in original African content could decline.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by WOMEX (@womex_theworldmusicexpo)

---

Policy Recommendations for African Nations and the African Union

To protect its creative future, Africa must adopt progressive policies that balance AI innovation with creators’ rights. Here’s how:

1. Strengthen Copyright Laws

• Modernize Legislation: Update copyright frameworks to explicitly cover AI training data. Ensure that using protected works for AI requires licenses and compensation.
• Collective Licensing Models: Support collective management organisations (CMOs) to negotiate fair licensing deals with AI companies on behalf of creators.

2. Demand Transparency from AI Developers

• Adopt “Data Provenance” Rules: Require AI companies to disclose detailed summaries of training data, including sources of African content.
• Create Public Databases: Set up regional registries where rightsholders can find unauthorised use of their works.

3. Build Regional Frameworks

• Harmonize IP Standards: The African Union (AU) should lead efforts to harmonise copyright laws across member states, simplifying cross-border enforcement. The Africa Continental Free Trade Area Agreement (AFCFTA) IP Protocol is a great start. It requires the support and endorsement of every African country.
• Establish an AI Task Force: Create a pan-African body to monitor AI developments, advise policymakers, and engage with global regulators (e.g., the EU) to align standards.

4. Invest in Tech Infrastructure

• AI for Good: Fund African-led AI initiatives that respect IP rights. For example, tools that help artists license their work or detect unauthorized AI replication.
• Digital Literacy Programs: Train creators to navigate AI-related challenges, from licensing to legal recourse.

5. Advocate Globally

• Unite in International Forums: African nations should join global coalitions. They should collaborate with groups like the EU’s dissenting rightsholders. The goal is to push for ethical AI practices.
• Leverage Trade Agreements: Negotiate IP protections in trade deals, ensuring foreign AI companies respect African creative rights.

---

Join the Movement: Your Voice Matters

Foster The Music Advocate Africa community engagement with actionable steps:

1. Share Your Story
   Have you or your creative community faced challenges with AI? Email us at Membership@TheMusicAdvocate.Africa or tag #TheMusicAdvocateAfrica on social media. Your experiences will shape our advocacy!
2. Attend Virtual Workshops
   Join monthly webinars hosted by The Music Advocate Africa. Through these webinars, you will learn about AI rights, licensing, and legal strategies. [Subscribe below].