Hotel Association sues GHAMRO over unlawful royalty charges

The Ghana Hotels Association (GHA) has initiated legal action against the Ghana Music Rights Organisation (GHAMRO) and the Audiovisual Rights Society of Ghana (ARSOG), accusing them of imposing arbitrary and unlawful copyright fees on hotel operators.

According to court documents, the GHA is challenging the current model used by GHAMRO and ARSOG to assess and collect royalties from its members, describing it as inconsistent with Ghana’s copyright laws.

The association contends that the fees have been unfairly based on the number of rooms or the hotel’s classification (such as star rating), rather than the actual use of copyrighted material through public performance.

Dr. Edward Ackah-Nyamike Jnr., President of the GHA and a key witness in the ongoing case, told the court during cross-examination that the association's decision to seek legal redress followed deliberations by its National Executive Committee and was backed by 34 formal resolutions from its members. He rejected claims by the defendants that the lawsuit was driven by narrow or self-serving interests.

Legal Claims and Core Argument

The GHA is seeking a judicial declaration that, under Section 37 of the Copyright Act, 2006 (Act 690) as amended by Act 788 of 2009 and Regulations 36 and 37 of L.I. 1962, royalties must be assessed strictly based on usage or public performance of copyrighted works—not on the size or classification of hotel facilities.

The association is also asking the court to issue an injunction to prevent the defendants from continuing to assess or demand royalties using the current model, which the GHA says lacks legal basis. Additionally, the association is seeking legal costs, including attorney fees.

The GHA explained that it took legal action on behalf of its members after years of unresolved complaints. Since 2014, GHAMRO and ARSOG have allegedly demanded various sums from hotels, asserting authority under the copyright framework. GHA members, however, say they were not provided with any transparent or lawful method for calculating the demanded fees.

Efforts to resolve the matter through dialogue included engagements with the Ghana Tourism Authority and the Parliamentary Select Committee on Trade, Industry, and Tourism, but yielded no change, the GHA said.

Allegations of Harassment and Legal Threats

According to the GHA, its members have faced continued harassment from both GHAMRO and ARSOG, with threats of legal action and the issuance of demand notices for royalties purportedly due. In some cases, ARSOG has reportedly initiated lawsuits against hotels over non-payment of fees the GHA describes as “unilaterally and arbitrarily imposed.”

The GHA further argued that ARSOG’s actions—like those of GHAMRO—violated Section 37 of Act 690 and related regulations. The group emphasized that the imposition of royalties must be anchored in actual public performance or use of protected content, as defined by law.

Constitutional Inconsistencies

Beyond statutory breaches, the GHA claimed that the conduct of the two rights organisations also violated constitutional principles. Specifically, it cited Articles 23 and 296 of the 1992 Constitution, which prohibit arbitrary administrative conduct and require fairness and transparency in decision-making by public or quasi-public bodies.

“The ongoing royalty demands are capricious, lacking legal justification, and disregard both the Copyright Act and the Constitution,” the GHA stated in its pleadings.

The case is being closely watched by stakeholders in the hospitality, entertainment, and legal sectors, as it could significantly reshape how copyright royalties are determined and collected in Ghana’s hospitality industry.