Iuze Mukube
The High Court of Namibia has removed a matter from the roll following the withdrawal of a N$315 000 lawsuit by a local composer against the Namibia Training Authority (NTA).
Arthur /Nanub, who is said to be a registered member of the Namibia Society of Composers and Authors of Music (NAMSCAM), became embroiled in a legal dispute with the NTA over one of his composed pieces.
According to court documents, the plaintiff’s agent allegedly entered into an oral agreement with a representative of the NTA on or before 10 October 2022 for the use of his song, Live Your Passion.
The agreement allegedly provided that /Nanub would grant the NTA approval to use the Live Your Passion theme track for season three of the authority’s Live Your Passion project.
Court documents further state that /Nanub was to be reasonably compensated on or before 9 November 2022 during the launch of the project’s third season.
It is alleged that the oral agreement was later recorded in a letter dated 20 October 2022, and that the plaintiff duly performed in terms of the agreement by granting the NTA permission to reproduce and duplicate the Live Your Passion theme track for season three.
The NTA allegedly breached the oral agreement by failing to pay /Nanub N$315 000.
The damages were quantified as N$150 000 for consent to music rights, N$60 000 for the production of stringers and jingles, N$42 000 for studio booking and usage, and N$63 000 for agency fees.
The lawsuit was lodged in March last year.
The NTA, however, contended that the plaintiff was neither the composer nor the exclusive owner of the work in dispute.
It argued that at the time of the initial agreement for the creation and non-commercial use of the musical work Live Your Passion during season one of the project, the plaintiff did not hold exclusive rights to the work.
The authority further contended that /Nanub collaborated with at least two other individuals in the original composition, arrangement and production of the musical work.
It argued that the plaintiff’s claim failed on this basis and alleged that he misrepresented facts to the authority by concealing that the initial creation and use of the musical work was a joint work of authorship.
Additionally, the NTA claimed that the plaintiff misled the authority regarding the scope and nature of the rights he was entitled to assert.
The authority maintained that /Nanub was legally incapable of enforcing rights he did not exclusively own and therefore denied infringing on any exclusive copyright.
It further argued that the individual who allegedly represented the authority in entering into the agreement with /Nanub’s agent had no power, capacity or authority to bind the NTA to such an agreement.
Following /Nanub’s withdrawal of the matter, the court ordered that the case be removed from the roll and that the plaintiff pay the defendant’s wasted costs.