10/01/2026
LIPO & COSOL UNDER FIRE OVER COPYRIGHT ROYALTIES AS RIGHTS HOLDERS DEMAND FULL ACCOUNTABILITY
Serious questions are being raised over the collection, management and distribution of copyright royalties in Liberia, with growing calls for the Boakai-Koung administration to investigate the Liberia Intellectual Property Office (LIPO) and the Copyright Society of Liberia (COSOL) and demand a full accounting of money collected on behalf of Liberian creators.
At the center of the controversy is the private-copying levy, commonly referred to as the “blank tape” levy, through which money is collected on materials and devices capable of being used to reproduce copyrighted works.
Liberia’s Intellectual Property Act of 2016 expressly provides for such a levy. Section 9.35 states that a levy shall be paid on materials capable of being used to infringe copyright and that the money is to be paid into LIPO’s funds, with LIPO empowered to disburse the funds among approved collective management organizations in accordance with regulations.
COSOL has also publicly identified numerous Liberian businesses as compliant under its “Blank Tape/Private Copying” category, including telecommunications companies, electronics businesses, hardware stores and other importers and commercial entities.
The critical question, therefore, is no longer simply whether money is being collected.
The question is: How much has been collected, how much has been distributed, who received it, and what happened to the balance?
LIPO and COSOL have maintained that levy proceeds have been distributed among members and used to provide welfare and other forms of support to artists, copyright owners and stakeholders. But rights holders and the public deserve detailed financial disclosure showing the total amount collected, administrative deductions, amounts allocated for welfare, royalties distributed to individual rights holders, and the formula used to determine those distributions.
This concern becomes particularly important because Liberia’s Intellectual Property Act imposes financial-accountability obligations on LIPO. Section 6.2 requires proper books and records covering LIPO’s income, expenditure and assets and requires annual accounts to be submitted to the Auditor-General, including statements of income, expenditure, assets and liabilities. Section 6.3 also requires an annual report to the President and Legislature containing information on income generated and other relevant facts necessary for decision-making.
RIGHTS HOLDERS ARE NOT WELFARE RECIPIENTS
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of the controversy is the apparent treatment of creators as recipients of charity rather than owners of valuable intellectual property.
COSOL has previously publicized what it calls its “Welfare Distribution” program. In October 2024, more than few creators reportedly received an approximate below $100 checks under the program. COSOL has also said its welfare initiatives have included food, cash, medical assistance, educational assistance and rent support but with no public records to account for such supports.
There is nothing inherently wrong with providing welfare assistance to artists in need but Royalties are better way of adding value to these Right Holders.
But welfare must not become a substitute for transparent royalty accounting.
Liberian musicians, filmmakers, photographers, writers, producers and other creators are entrepreneurs and intellectual-property owners. When money is collected because of their creative works and legal rights, they deserve to know what was collected and what share they are legally or contractually entitled to receive.
A bag of rice, gallon of oil or occasional welfare payment cannot answer fundamental financial questions about royalty collections.
Rights holders should not have to appear grateful for handouts while remaining unable to independently determine how much revenue has been generated through a system established partly for the protection and economic benefit of creators.
WHERE IS THE FULL ACCOUNTING?
If LIPO and COSOL maintain that the private-copying levy has been properly collected and distributed, transparency could resolve much of the controversy.
The institutions should publicly disclose:
1. The total amount collected through the private-copying/blank-tape levy for each year since collection began;
2. The businesses and institutions from which payments were collected;
3. The amount transferred or disbursed to COSOL and any other approved collective management organization;
4. Administrative expenses deducted from collections;
5. The amount actually distributed as royalties to rights holders;
6. The amount spent on welfare programs, including food, medical assistance and other benefits;
7. The criteria and formula used to determine who receives royalty payments;
8. The number of rights holders who received payments and the amounts paid; and
9. Independent audit reports covering the collection and management of these funds.
These are reasonable accountability questions involving money collected under a statutory copyright framework.
The 2016 Intellectual Property Act itself distinguishes royalty rights from general assistance. Section 9.36 provides that broadcasting, transmission or playing of sound recordings generally requires payment of royalties to the relevant copyright owner, absent an agreement to the contrary, and addresses how royalties are to be shared with performers.
ALLEGATIONS OF MISMANAGEMENT REQUIRE INVESTIGATION — NOT SILENCE
There are accusations within the creative sector that royalty revenues have been mismanaged and that welfare distributions involving selected beneficiaries are being used to create the appearance that creators are benefiting from the system.
Those are serious allegations and should not be treated as established facts without documentary evidence or an official investigation.
But they also should not simply be dismissed.
The appropriate response is independent scrutiny, financial disclosure and an audit capable of establishing exactly how much money entered the system and where it went.
If every dollar has been properly collected, recorded and distributed, an independent audit should help demonstrate that.
If discrepancies exist, the same process should identify them and establish responsibility.
BOAKAI-KOUNG ADMINISTRATION MUST ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY
The administration of President Joseph Nyuma Boakai and Vice President Jeremiah Kpan Koung now faces calls to ensure that Liberia’s intellectual-property institutions are operating transparently and in the interests of the country’s creators.
This should not be reduced to personalities.
It is about whether Liberia can build a creative economy in which musicians, filmmakers, photographers, writers, designers, producers, software developers, inventors and other innovators can trust the institutions established to protect their intellectual property.
The government should therefore ensure an appropriate independent examination of LIPO and COSOL’s royalty and levy operations, including collections, transfers, administrative deductions, welfare expenditures and distributions to rights holders.
The findings should be made public.
Liberian creators deserve more than ceremonies and occasional assistance.
They deserve transparent accounting. They deserve to know the value generated from their intellectual property. And where royalties are legally due to them, they deserve a transparent system for receiving their proper share.
Until LIPO and COSOL provide comprehensive figures showing how much has been collected, how much has been spent, how much has been distributed and who received what, the questions surrounding Liberia’s copyright royalty system will remain.
Royalties are not charity. Intellectual property is an economic asset, and its owners deserve accountability.
゚
Follow, Like, Comment & Share for more updates…!!!
