THE country’s unemployment figures continue to raise a fundamental question: where will the jobs come from?
The latest Labour Force Survey offers some cautious optimism, with national unemployment declining from 35.4% in 2023 to 33.5% in 2025. Yet more than one in three people in the labour force remain unemployed, while young people continue to face particularly difficult conditions in entering the labour market.
The State of the Youth Report reinforces this picture, highlighting the economic challenges confronting young people and the need to broaden the opportunities available to them.
This should compel the country to look beyond conventional employment and examine sectors capable of creating livelihoods through entrepreneurship, innovation and intellectual property.
Could the creative economy, supported by a properly functioning intellectual property system, become part of the answer?
Copyright will not solve unemployment on its own. But the country possesses a significant, underdeveloped economic asset in the creativity of its people. The challenge is creating systems that allow that creativity to become sustainable income.
That possibility came into sharp focus during the recent Copyright Awareness and Media Engagement Workshop hosted by the Copyright Office in collaboration with the Eswatini Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Society (ESWACOS).
The workshop was intended to help editors, journalists and media practitioners understand the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act of 2018, the copyright ecosystem, and the processes surrounding registration, licensing, collection and distribution of royalties.
The country is already consuming and commercially using creative works across schools, businesses, hotels, banks, broadcasters and major entertainment events. The question is whether the people who create those works are receiving a fair share of the value generated from them.
That is why actualising the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, 2018 should be viewed as an economic priority, not merely a legal obligation.
WHEN CREATIVE WORK GENERATES VALUE
The discussion around the textbook rental system in public schools provides an important example.
Concerns were raised about schools purchasing textbooks and subsequently renting them to learners. While a school may own the physical copy of a book, that does not automatically mean it owns the copyright in the underlying work. Authors and publishers remain rights holders whose economic interests must be considered when their works are reproduced or otherwise used in ways covered by copyright law.
This matters to the survival of local publishing. Authors need to earn from their intellectual work, while publishers need revenue to print books, commission writers, employ editors and designers and invest in new material.
If educational works continue generating value without mechanisms for their creators and publishers to benefit, investment in local publishing is weakened.
The reported case involving LIFA, the Grade 1 Siswati literacy book, makes the issue even more tangible. The alleged photocopying and commercial reproduction of the book, reportedly resulting in the arrest of a Chinese national, demonstrates why copyright protection cannot remain theoretical.
The case also points to the need for stronger understanding within law enforcement.
Copyright custodians and law enforcement agencies must work closely enough for officers and prosecutors to understand infringement and the remedies available under the law.
COMPLIANCE IS BEGINNING TO TAKE ROOT
There are encouraging signs. In the hospitality industry, Sibane Sami Hotel and George Hotel have obtained licences for the use of copyrighted music. This demonstrates that businesses can incorporate copyright compliance into ordinary commercial practice.
SibaneSami provides an interesting example. Its compliance has allowed it to become an appropriate venue for ESWACOS activities, showing that licensing can strengthen relationships between rights-management organisations and compliant businesses.
The same development is visible in the events industry. MTN Bushfire, Standard Bank Luju and Eswatini Biggest Braai have been highlighted as major entertainment platforms that have obtained licences for copyrighted music.
This matters because their economic impact extends far beyond the stage. They support composers, songwriters, performers, producers, sound engineers, promoters, hospitality businesses, vendors and other service providers.
When major events license the music they use, they recognise that creative work is an economic asset.
CORPORATES AND BROADCASTERS
The corporate sector must also be part of this transition. EswatiniBank provides a positive example by obtaining a licence for the use of copyrighted music, while other commercial banks and businesses still have an opportunity to follow.
The broadcasting sector presents an even greater opportunity. Concerns raised during the workshop that local broadcasters play only around 12% local music, if accurate, should prompt serious reflection.
A local music industry cannot grow if artists struggle to access the platforms through which audiences discover their work. Broadcasters therefore do more than entertain; they help create the market for local creative products.
This also makes discussions around a reported E2 million allocation in the 2024/25 national budget to the Eswatini Broadcasting and Information Service for music-rights licensing important.
If public funds are allocated for music rights, there must be a clear connection between that expenditure, licensing structures and the creators whose works are being used.
The concern raised that EBIS is not among the approximately 400 copyright holders registered with ESWACOS also deserves attention and clarification. A national broadcaster should arguably be among the strongest examples of copyright compliance given its influence over the consumption and promotion of local creative work.
FROM REGISTRATION TO LIVELIHOOD
The reported 400 registered copyright holders with ESWACOS suggest that the system is beginning to formalise. But registration alone is not the measure of success.
The real test is whether rights holders receive meaningful royalties, whether users of creative works are licensed, whether tariffs are collected and whether the money reaches those who created the works.
ESWACOS, therefore, has an important role in building confidence that registration and collective management can produce tangible economic returns. Once royalties begin reaching creators consistently, copyright becomes more than an abstract legal concept. It becomes a source of livelihood.
This is particularly important for young people already writing music, producing films, designing, photographing, publishing and creating digital content.
UNESCO has recognised the potential of cultural and creative industries to contribute to employment and entrepreneurship, particularly among young people. Eswatini should take this potential seriously.
A songwriter who earns royalties can reinvest in their career. A publisher that earns from its books can produce more and employ others. A filmmaker who can monetise intellectual property can finance another production.
The economic multiplier can extend well beyond the original creator.
THE KNOWLEDGE GAP
Yet enforcement alone will not build a copyright culture. Understanding is equally important.
Questions raised during the workshop about why artists should receive royalties after already being paid to perform demonstrate that the economic logic of copyright is still poorly understood in some quarters.
A performance fee and royalties arising from authorised use are not necessarily the same thing. Similarly, a business using music commercially is using an intellectual asset belonging to someone else.
This understanding needs to reach schools, businesses, Parliament, law enforcement, broadcasters and the wider public.
THE OPPORTUNITY THE COUNTRY
The workshop demonstrated that the country already has many of the ingredients required for a stronger creative economy: creators, publishers, broadcasters, commercial users, major events and a legal framework.
What is missing is a more effective connection between them. That means wider registration, greater licensing, stronger enforcement, better cooperation between ESWACOS and law enforcement, increased use of local creative content by broadcasters and effective collection and distribution of royalties.
The positive examples are already emerging. Hotels are licensing music. Major festivals are complying. EswatiniBank is showing corporate leadership. Hundreds of rights holders are entering the collective management system.
But the textbook rental concerns, the LIFA case, questions around broadcasting and gaps in enforcement show that much remains to be done.
The country cannot solve unemployment through the creative economy alone. But neither can it afford to overlook a sector in which its people are already creating economic value every day.
The real opportunity is to make intellectual property work as an economic asset.
CONCLUSION: MAKING CREATIVITY WORK FOR THE COUNTRY
Actualising the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, 2018 is therefore not simply about protecting artists and authors. It is about creating an environment in which creativity can become enterprise, intellectual property can become income and creative talent can become a pathway to livelihoods.
Until next week,
God bless.
JOHN PIRES
Guest Writer
Feedback & Correspondence:
Email: johnpires@live.com
Mobile: +268 7606 5993
WhatsApp: +268 7602 7758
