Protecting IP rights and brand value amid an AI revolution, legal vacuums, and a fast-evolving modern world

This year’s INTA Annual Meeting in London provides an exciting, unparalleled opportunity for African IP practitioners and businesses to engage with global conversations that will shape the future of brand protection, and discuss emerging issues such as the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and IP regulation, trademark infringement on social media and online marketplaces, and influencer marketing, say William Maema, SC, Olufunmilola Binuyo, and Florence Brazil of DLA Piper Africa. 

“It is also a forum for building the cross-border relationships with counsel in other jurisdictions that are essential for the kind of coordinated international enforcement actions that increasingly characterise effective brand protection,” says Binuyo, a Legal Director in the IPT+ and Employment practice at Olajide Oyewole LLP, the Nigerian member firm of DLA Piper Africa. “We welcome the opportunity to connect with fellow INTA attendees whether to discuss a specific IP challenge, explore what a cross-border brand protection strategy might look like for your business, or simply to exchange perspectives on where Nigerian and African IP law is heading.”

One of the key challenges facing IP professionals in Africa and globally will be a hot topic at INTA 2026: how AI is transforming brand protection strategies and reshaping both creation and enforcement. In-depth sessions on AI tools and the evolving legal landscape will be on offer for the more than 10,000 IP professionals in attendance. 

The impact of skyrocketing AI use

“The rise in the use of AI has sparked debate both globally and regionally on the extent to which the existing IP legal frameworks can regulate AI generated works,” says Maema, a Senior Partner who leads the Commercial, Employment and IPT Practice Group of DLA Piper Africa, Kenya (IKM Advocates). “As AI continues to advance, it will continue to test the limits of current IP frameworks, necessitating ongoing legal adaptation and reform. Future IP laws will need to balance the promotion of innovation with the protection of rights in a way that is ethically sound and economically viable.”

In Kenya, notes Brazil, the National AI Strategy 2025-2030 recognises that while existing legal frameworks can provide guidance, they are insufficient to address the complexities of AI. Last year, the Kenyan Copyright Tribunal noted the Copyright Act has not provided for or addressed matters of copyright and AI-generated works. The Copyright and Related Rights Bill, 2026, which seeks to modernise Kenya's copyright frameworks, has faced criticism for failing to address authorship of works generated through the use of AI, and the Artificial Intelligence Bill, 2026, currently before Senate, does not specifically address IP rights, raising concerns on ownership. 

The pace at which AI has embedded itself into creative processes has been nothing short of transformative, notes Binuyo, and for IP practitioners, it has generated a set of legal questions that existing laws were simply not designed to answer.

“The central tension in almost every jurisdiction is one of authorship,” adds Binuyo. “IP frameworks, whether copyright, patents, or design rights, are built on the premise of a human creator or inventor. Once you introduce a machine that can, with minimal human direction, generate an image, compose a score, or draft a patent application, the foundational logic of those frameworks begins to strain.”

Nigeria underwent landmark modernisation of a copyright framework that had been largely unchanged since 2004, when the Copyright Act 2022 came into force on 17 March 2023, introducing important reforms around digital distribution, open fair dealing, and enforcement powers for the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC). 

What it did not do, notes Binuyo, was address AI specifically: it contains no provisions addressing AI-assisted or AI-generated works, no guidance on ownership, and “leaves a legal vacuum that has real commercial consequences” for Nigerian technology companies, content creators, and investors in the creative economy.

“Across Africa, the picture is broadly consistent with Nigeria's approach,” says Binuyo. “Courts in Kenya and South Africa have affirmed human authorship requirements, meaning that purely AI-generated works are unprotected on the continent.”

No African jurisdiction has enacted a dedicated AI Act yet. Nigeria has developed a National AI Strategy, signaling a move toward risk-based regulation domestically. South Africa recently withdrew its own Draft National AI Policy, due to hallucinations. 

“What this means for Nigerian and African businesses is that the AI-IP interface requires active, expert management. The law is unsettled, it is evolving at different speeds across jurisdictions, and the commercial consequences of getting it wrong, whether as a creator who loses the ability to protect AI-assisted work, or a deployer who inadvertently infringes third-party rights during training can be severe.”

Further IP challenges in a fast-moving world

“AI uptake outpacing legal frameworks is not the only challenge facing African businesses and IP practitioners,” note Maema, Brazil, and Binuyo. “Counterfeiting and rampant piracy continue to be a key issue in our digital age, along with weak enforcement and inadequate deterrents; outdated and fragmented legal frameworks; trademark squatting and cybersquatting; low IP awareness, particularly among SMEs; cross-border and territorial limitations; and resource constraints at IP registries.”

Enforcement of IP rights is inconsistent across Africa, notes Maema. “There is no single uniform IP system or laws across the continent. Clients therefore face a fragmented, under-resourced IP ecosystem that hinders the protection and enforcement of IP. 

The territorial nature of IP rights exacerbates such issues in a continent of more than 50 nations and many languages and legal systems. A Nigerian trademark registration provides no protection in Ghana, Kenya, or South Africa, and vice versa, says Binuyo. For businesses expanding across Africa, this means IP protection must be built jurisdiction by jurisdiction, a costly and administratively intensive exercise. 

In terms of harmonisation, the African Regional Intellectual Property Organisation (ARIPO) provides a single filing route for patents and, to a more limited extent, trademarks in member states (Nigeria is not currently an ARIPO member for trademark purposes), while the Organisation Africaine de la Propriété Intellectuelle (OAPI) serves a group of French-speaking West and Central African countries. The AfCFTA IP Protocol, adopted in 2023, creates a longer-term framework for harmonisation, but implementation across Africa remains uneven, adds Binuyo. 

Protecting IP and brand value in an evolving landscape

Despite such challenges, and how quickly the creative and commercial worlds appear to be evolving with AI and other tech leaps, there is still much that can be done to protect, enforce, and monetise IP, say Maema, Binuyo, and Brazil. For a variety of businesses, ranging across technology startups, media companies, fintechs, and creative enterprises, intellectual property rights go far beyond a peripheral compliance matter; they can often be the most valuable things the business owns.

Failing to understand, protect, and manage IP assets - from brands to code, content, data sets, algorithms, and trade secrets - is not merely an oversight, it’s a strategic error with commercial consequences, adds Binuyo. “These are the assets that investors are buying, partners are licensing, and competitors are trying to replicate.”

Strong IP-backed branding also fosters customer trust and loyalty, notes Brazil, driving long-term business growth. “Licensing, royalties, merchandising, franchising, and adaptation rights can generate significant revenue streams for creators. In a continent where many creatives struggle with inconsistent incomes, effective IP protection can transform artistic pursuits into viable, lucrative careers.”

At a time when IP enforcement in Africa is at an inflection point, and legislative reforms have not caught up to technological advancements, creatives, innovators, and businesses should engage legal experts at every stage of the IP protection process, and not just leave things until a later date. Specialist legal advice and pro-active risk management remain indispensable, say Maema, Binuyo, and Brazil. 

The cost of addressing IP issues proactively at an early stage is invariably a fraction of addressing them reactively after something has gone wrong, adds Binuyo. 

“At DLA Piper Africa we provide end-to-end support,” says Maema, “which entails reviewing clients’ IP portfolios, advising on the most appropriate form of protection under local laws, undertaking registration of the IP rights at relevant registries, preparing pleadings for contentious IP matters, and preparing legal opinions on all aspects of IP including advising on registrability of their IP among other services.”

Leveraging deep local expertise across 20 African nations combined with the global IP and technology law practice of more than 500 dedicated specialists worldwide, DLA Piper Africa’s hybrid model delivers integrated, cross-border advice tailored to Africa’s realities enabling clients to protect, enforce, and monetise their IP amid fragmentation, while capitalising on technology-driven opportunities.

“We combine local knowledge with global resources to deliver IP strategies that are both technically sound and commercially practical,” says Binuyo. “Whether the challenge is a Nollywood piracy crisis, a trademark squatting dispute, an AI-IP due diligence exercise for a tech investment, or a multi-jurisdictional brand protection programme for a multinational entering African markets, our teams have the experience and the network to deliver.”