Zimbabwe’s music copyright dispute has intensified after the Zimbabwe Music Rights Association (ZIMURA) rejected claims

• By Staff Reporter
• |
• 987
• |
• September 10, 2026

ZIMURA blows apart In Total band’s US$150 licence defence as Zimbabwean artists revolt

Zimbabwe’s music copyright dispute has intensified after the Zimbabwe Music Rights Association (ZIMURA) rejected claims that In Total Band holds continuing permission to commercially perform local artists’ work.

In a statement dated 9 September 2026, ZIMURA said a circulating US$150 licence receipt covered one event for one day and did not provide the band with permanent or unlimited authority to exploit Zimbabwean music.The intervention follows complaints from musicians including Chimurenga legend Thomas Mapfumo, gospel star Fungisai Zvakavapano Mashavave and Dino Mudondo, who have accused other performers of commercially using their music without adequate permission or compensation.

ZIMURA rejects blanket licence claim

ZIMURA said its available records showed that In Total had not maintained a general licence covering the commercial use associated with its performances, tours and events beyond the single-event permit.

The organisation stressed that the receipt did not authorise unlimited future performances, recordings, distribution or commercial appropriation of composers’ catalogues. Nor did it waive the moral or economic rights of copyright owners or replace consent where an artist’s specific approval was required.

“A licence is only valid within the scope, period and conditions under which it was issued,” ZIMURA said.

The association also said it had no record of royalties being paid specifically to Fungisai from In Total’s commercial use of her music. It added that it had received no royalties from the Ecobank Legends Night tours.described as false any suggestion that the band had continuously obtained licences, accounted for performances and remitted royalties to composers.

Music producer Clive “Mono” Mukundu, speaking in defence of In Total, had previously maintained that the band was licensed by ZIMURA and operated within the law.

Fungisai wins backing over intellectual property

Fungisai alleges that performers have copied more than her songs, accusing them of imitating her voice, image, clothing, dance routines and mannerisms for commercial benefit without her consent.

She has argued that this amounts to impersonation rather than an ordinary cover performance, saying: “They stole my face, my voice, my everything!”

ZIMURA said Fungisai was its member and was entitled to representation and protection of her intellectual-property rights.

“The Organisation cannot and will not endorse the commercial exploitation of a member’s copyrighted works in circumstances where the copyright owner has expressly objected and where the necessary rights, permissions and licensing requirements have not been properly addressed,” it said.

It backed her right to protect her work while cautioning that its position should not be interpreted as deciding any dispute that could eventually come before a court.Dino Mudondo has also entered the controversy after reportedly arriving for a wedding engagement to find The Travellers Band had already performed his songs Chirangano, Makoikoi and Jatropha.

Mapfumo dispute opened wider battle

The controversy follows Mapfumo’s decision to prohibit his nephew Kurai Makore from performing, recording, streaming or commercially exploiting songs controlled by Chimurenga Music Company without permission.

Mapfumo’s company said Makore had never been authorised to use the catalogue and rejected reports portraying him as the musician’s designated heir. Makore had previously said Mapfumo gave him permission to perform the songs, leaving their accounts in dispute.

Constitutional lawyer Fadzayi Mahere said Zimbabwe’s Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act automatically places copyright in the owner of an original musical work and gives that owner authority over its performance in Zimbabwe.

Addressing arguments raised by Mukundu, Mahere wrote on X: “This is not quite correct. Passing off remains unlawful as does copyright infringement. For the record, copyright protection is automatic upon the creation of an original work. Official registration is not required (unlike a patent).

“They’re walking a tightrope here.”

ZIMURA said musicians were entitled to control their intellectual property, challenge unauthorised exploitation, demand proper licensing and accounting, receive applicable royalties and pursue legal remedies where their rights were infringed.

• Category:
• News
• General

• Share: