A Nairobi court has ruled against Kenyan innovator Davidson Ivusa in his lawsuit against Safaricom, where he alleged that the telecom giant copied his idea for the ‘Reverse Call’ feature.
The verdict, delivered on 27 February 2025, brings an end to a prolonged case over intellectual property rights and the handling of unsolicited ideas by large corporations.
Ivusa claimed that he pitched his concept, called ‘Jichomoe,’ to Safaricom in 2010. According to him, the feature was designed to allow users to make calls without airtime, an idea he believed Safaricom later adopted without his involvement.
Safaricom, however, refuted this, stating that its ‘Reverse Call’ service, launched in April 2019, was developed independently to address a widespread consumer need.
Justice Mugambi dismissed Ivusa’s argument, ruling that his idea was submitted voluntarily without any legal expectation of confidentiality or fiduciary obligation on Safaricom’s part. “The concept was sent unsolicited, and there was no evidence that the defendant undertook to hold it in trust or act in a fiduciary capacity,” the judge stated.
One of the key legal points in the case was the distinction between an idea and its execution. Intellectual property law, both in Kenya and globally, protects the expression of ideas rather than the ideas themselves. Justice Mugambi reinforced this principle, saying: “Copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves.”
Ivusa’s failure to provide substantial proof of how ‘Jichomoe’ was implemented weakened his case. He presented only a concept note shared via email, with no supporting source code, technical diagrams, or a prototype to establish a unique expression of the idea. Without these, the court found no basis for his claims of copyright infringement, misappropriation, or unjust enrichment.
This is not the first time intellectual property issues involving unsolicited ideas have surfaced in Kenya. In a similar case, former Equity Bank employee Christopher Mwakio sued the bank in 2016, claiming it stole his idea for a mobile banking product.
The court ruled against him, pointing to a lack of concrete evidence to prove ownership beyond the conceptual level. Globally, companies like Google and Apple have faced lawsuits over alleged idea theft, but courts often dismiss such cases unless clear contractual obligations exist.
Safaricom, Kenya’s largest telecommunications company, has previously faced accusations of appropriating ideas without compensating innovators. While no major ruling has gone against the company in such matters, these allegations have raised concerns within the country’s innovation ecosystem.
Many Kenyan innovators hesitate to pitch ideas to large corporations for fear of losing control over their intellectual property. This ruling could further discourage startups from engaging with industry leaders without legal protections, such as non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) or formalised partnerships.
Legal experts argue that the case highlights the importance of structuring idea submissions within clear contractual frameworks. “Unsolicited ideas, without agreements in place, are difficult to protect legally,” a Nairobi-based intellectual property lawyer explained. “Innovators must take proactive steps to secure their work before approaching corporations.”
