Johannesburg — GALLO Africa, which owns rights to the musical Umoja, cannot rely on South African courts to sue other parties for infringement of copyright of its work in foreign countries, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled on Friday.

Gallo wanted to sue Sting Music, two other companies and three individuals for performing Umoja, making recordings and films and having the musical broadcast in SA and 19 other countries.

The appeal court ruled that South African courts had no jurisdiction to hear copyright infringement claims in respect of foreign copyright, and the fact that the claimants and defendants were residents of SA was irrelevant.

Gallo, part of Business Day co-owner Avusa, and four other parties issued summonses for copyright infringement against Sting Music and five others in the South Gauteng High Court last year.

They alleged Sting Music had infringed their copyright by performing Umoja in SA since 2001. They also alleged that Sting Music and others had committed acts of infringement in 19 other countries, including Japan and the US.

Gallo did not rely on the South African Copyright Act on the alleged infringement in the 19 other countries, but on the copyright laws of each of those countries. If the claimant had succeeded in its appeal against the three companies and individuals - who are all based in SA - they would have been saved the time and expense of pursuing individual copyright claims in each of the countries where its rights have been infringed.

The high court, however, upheld an exception made by Sting Music that Gallo's application on the alleged infringement of copyright in the other 19 countries was bad in law.

Appeal court deputy president Louis Harms said intellectual property rights were territorial in nature and said territoriality applied to registered rights such as patents and trademarks.

"The same applies to copyright. That (Gallo and others) appreciated this fact appears from the particulars of claim where the right to copyright and infringement was defined with reference to the laws of each particular jurisdiction," Judge Harms said. He said local courts did not have jurisdiction in respect of foreign copyright issues.

Mike du Toit, director of intellectual property at law firm Edward Nathan Sonnenbergs, said the judgment restated that copyright, as other intellectual property rights, was territorial in nature.

"It has to follow that Gallo ... would have to pursue the infringement, interdicts and damages in those foreign jurisdictions where the infringements took place," Mr du Toit said.