APOZ is not toothless!

However, since the formation of the Anti-Piracy Organisation of Zimbabwe there have been misconceptions regarding its mandate. Recently the board members resigned en masse over the alleged unprofessional conduct of the executive director, Innocent Matsengarwodzi. Our Entertainment Editor Ruth Butaumocho (RB) spoke to Matsengarwodzi (IM) to find out what went wrong.
RB: Can you tell us briefly about your life background Mr Matsengarwodzi?
IM: I am the executive director and one of the founder members of the Anti-Piracy Organisation of Zimbabwe commonly known as Anti-Piracy Inspectorate. I worked tirelessly for the organisation to be recognised nationally and internationally.
I am an ex-law enforcement agent who has vast knowledge in law enforcement strategies since I worked most of my life with the Criminal Investigations Department of the Zimbabwe Republic Police. When I was still serving as a member of the police force I was actively involved in enforcing the copyright law against piracy in 1997 whuile stationed at CID.
I also attended a Workshop on Counterfeit and Piracy accompanied by raids codenamed “Operation Zambezi” organised by Interpol Secretariat (France) in December 2009. I have vast experience in the enforcement of intellectual property laws in Zimbabwe and other regional countries through attending workshops on intellectual property enforcements and physically enforcing laws against piracy and counterfeit through co-ordinating with law enforcement agencies and the courts.
I crafted all the current six indictments (charge sheets) being used by courts for the prosecution of infringers and also co-ordinated a number of training workshops for law enforcement agencies, revenue authority officials and court prosecutors. I am a member of the Interpol Task Force Committee on Intellectual Property Issues and a member of the Business Against Crime Forum of Zimbabwe (Bacfoz).
RB: When was APOZ formed and what were the objectives of the organisation?
IM: Anti-Piracy Organisation of Zimbabwe was formed in 2008 and incorporated in 2009 as an Intellectual Property Rights Inspectorate to protect the rights of intellectual property owners. It was empowered by the Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs through a licence to inspect all who deal with intellectual property in Zimbabwe as to whether they are complying with the intellectual property laws which include Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act Chapter, 26:05, Patents Act Chapter 26:03, Trademark Act Chapter 26:04 and other intellectual property legislations such as industrial designs, inventions and geographical indications.
Our objectives in brief are:
l To disseminate intellectual property laws to the Zimbabwean public in order to create widespread awareness of rights and obligations of all parties.
l To educate all stakeholders within Zimbabwe on the effects of intellectual property rights infringements.
l To educate the public and lobby all levels of Government to recognise the role of intellectual property in social, economic and political development.
l To co-operate with law enforcement agencies in ensuring compliance with intellectual property protection laws.
l To carry out inspections on all who deal with intellectual property as to whether there is no infringement and to cause for the arrest and prosecution of the intellectual property rights infringers.
RB: Who are your clients and how big is your clientele base?
IM: Since we were registered and licensed by the Ministry of Justice and Legal Affairs to operate I can safely say all intellectual property associations are our clients. However, some are not yet members and we have campaigns lined up so that associations and holders of intellectual property will become full-time members of our organisation.
RB: Your organisation has been described as a toothless dog. You have on a number of occasions carried out raids of pirated music in and around Zimbabwe and yet no one has been given a custodial sentence. Why is that so Mr Matsengarwodzi?
IM: Yes some may say toothless organisation but magistrates’ courts around the country have felt that we have teeth because of influx in cases for infringements which were taken to court.
Before the organisation came into being even the law enforcers and the courts were not conversant with piracy. Piracy cases were treated as trivial cases like vending before our existence and pirates were being fined or sometimes warned and let loose.
In terms of custodial sentence this is not our problem since sentencing of offenders is done in accordance with the Magistrates’ Courts Act and depends on how the case was investigated and prosecuted as the law allows for a magistrate to listen to mitigations given by the offenders. We have statistics which we got from police and we have a number of these infringers who were sent to jail.
The concerned people are free to contact as and see our records. The other reason which makes us a toothless dog is that we are incapacitated in terms of resources as we survive mainly from subscriptions of willing members and donors who have never come by except Culture Funds Trust of Zimbabwe who donated funds towards purchase of computers.
The music stakeholders like ZARI who had promised to assist us in terms of financial resources were very reluctant to fund us. It is very difficult to have orange juice from lemons, Ruth.
RB: Despite what you have just been telling me, it appears that although you have been operating for years, your organisation is heavily misunderstood, because we have been receiving reports from the public and even musicians that you are actually on the forefront of “burning CDs” and the routine raids that you carry out are nothing but a farce?
IM: Yes, Ruth we have been operating effectively from 2008 to date and I can say in harmony with those who actually understand how we operate.
The general public which includes the intellectual property right holders does not have knowledge of us as most believe that we are representing the cause of musicians and their recording companies.
Whenever there is good things being done by others there is always criticism. It’s not new even in the Bible Jesus was being cursed by his kinsmen and countrymen but he was sent to save them from sin. Those who are saying that we are in the forefront of CD burning are put to proof thereof.
We commend the police very well for a job well done with minimum resources but have been able to stand up against piracy as evident by recent destruction by fire over one million infringing CDs/DVDs.
RB: Two weeks ago, the Zimbabwe Association of Recording Industries disengaged from APOZ, accusing your organisation of encouraging piracy. Can you shed light on this matter?
IM: It is actually our organisation, which disengaged from ZARI composed of a few players in the recording industry. We wrote to the president of the association on 16 May 2011 disengaging from a partnership which I could describe as a marriage of convenience because it was not working at all.
Their president ceased to be an ex-officio board member who had been invited to represent their association (Copies of our letters to ZARI, dated 16 May 2011 can be provided by us or by ZARI).
ZARI after being infuriated by our disengagement tried to influence other associations in the music and arts industry and demonise us as encouraging piracy using the media which we dismiss as malicious and false.
What ZARI said when they wrote to newspapers and to us on 24 May and 26 May 2011 concerning what they describe as their mandate is dismissed because we were mandated through licence in 2009 by the Government before ZARI was formed.
Ruth, anyone can carry an investigation as to when ZARI was formed. It was formed through our call last year in February and we participated and helped them to formalise. ZARI is not expanding at all since other players who were part of its formation withdrew and others are watching because they are citing monopoly. ZARI wanted to tame APOZ and become immune to inspections as their dealings are not transparent at all. ZARI’s continued pegging high prices of CD/DVDs is fuelling piracy and killing the beneficiary, the right holder, when it comes to sales.
ZARI is associating with international intellectual property thieves who claim exclusive rights of all Hollywood and Nollywood films yet some have non-exclusive big screen agreements which does not give them powers to stop others to deal with these works (See Section 49 (b) of the Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, Chapter:26:05).
RB: But if your organisation is not promoting piracy, Mr Matsengarwodzi, why would they single it out?
IM: Our organisation is not promoting piracy at all but coming up with ways of ensuring maximum protection of our local artistes, in film, music and international music for the sake of ZARI and other members who are not in ZARI as well as ZIMURA.
l [email protected]