By Tarcizio Mondwe
Scriptwriter Kendall Kamwendo and poet Sylvester Kalizang’oma have backed the Copyright Society of Malawi’s (COSOMA) decision to exclude Artificial Intelligence (AI)-generated works from copyright registration and royalty distribution, arguing that royalties should reward human creativity.
The artists shared their views with the Malawi News Agency on Tuesday following a clarification issued by COSOMA amid a growing debate over the use of AI in the creative industry.
COSOMA had earlier dismissed reports suggesting that AI-generated works could be registered and earn royalties through the society, describing the claims as misleading and inaccurate.Kalizang’oma emphasized that royalties should reward human creativity rather than works produced entirely by artificial intelligence hence appealed for clear guidelines on the disclosure of AI use.
“The law should clearly distinguish between fully autonomous AI creations and hybrid works involving substantial human input,” Kalizang’oma said.
He added that creators who meaningfully direct, edit, or shape AI-assisted content still deserve legal protection.
Kamwendo, a renowned film actor and musician, also said that Malawi’s current copyright rules do not address artificial intelligence and are primarily designed to protect human-created works.
“The current Copyright Act does not say anything about AI. Any move by COSOMA to distribute royalties for AI-generated works under the existing legal framework would be contrary to the law,” Kamwendo noted.
A statement released by COSOMA management highlighted that copyright protection is intended to reward human skill, judgment, and originality. It further said that AI-assisted works are not currently eligible for registration, copyright administration, or royalty distribution.
“The Copyright Act of 2016 was enacted before the emergence and widespread use of modern generative AI technologies, and therefore does not expressly provide for the registration or administration of AI-generated works.
“However, the society may review its position in the event of future legislative amendments, policy directives, or judicial guidance on the treatment of AI-generated works,” the statement read in part.
