Posts

Showing posts from 2026

Machines Do Not Author: The Copyright Tribunal’s First Word on Artificial Intelligence in Aryeh Movement Limited v Akoth & Another

AI & Copyright in Kenya · Tribunal Case E001 of 2025 AI & authorship in Kenya A reading of Tribunal Case E001 of 2025 [2025] AI governance copyright KECOT human authorship [2025] KECOT 6 (KLR) · Aryeh Movement Limited v Akoth & another · first Kenyan adjudicatory decision on AI-assisted creative work Abstract · On 22 August 2025, Kenya’s Copyright Tribunal handed down Aryeh Movement Limited v Akoth & another , the first Kenyan decision to confront the question the Copyright Act has never answered: can a work generated with the assistance of artificial intelligence attract copyright protection, and if so, in whom does that protection vest? This paper reads the judgment closely: a registration dispute between a commissioning company and a commissioned author, resolved principally on jurisdictional grounds before turning to what the Tribunal said and did not say about AI. The central fi...

WHEN HACKED EMAILS BECOME EVIDENCE

Forensic model · Manchester City & Football Leaks Digital Evidence Independence · Manchester City & Football Leaks Five‑dimensional forensic model · acquisition, authentication, integrity, provenance, attribution πŸ“… 2026 · analysis ⚖️ CAS / UEFA · CFCB πŸ“„ abstract + key sections πŸ“Œ Abstract Digital communications increasingly occupy a central position in investigations involving corporate misconduct, regulatory violation, and cybercrime. Email evidence presents a particularly difficult forensic problem because the evidential value of an electronic message depends not only on its substantive content but on separate and logically independent questions of acquisition, authentication, integrity, provenance and attribution. These questions become especially difficult where the party against whom the evidence is deployed disputes the legality of the process by which the material was obtained, while declining to...

Deactivating and Recycling Inactive Mobile Numbers: A Critical Review of the Communications Authority of Kenya's 2026 Procedural and Technical Safeguards

Number recycling & consumer protection · Kenya Guideline CA.G.520:2026 Number recycling & consumer protection Analysing Kenya’s Guideline CA.G.520:2026 — deactivation, whitelisting, and the fight against SIM-swap fraud Telephone numbers are no longer just routing identifiers. They are keys to financial inclusion, digital identity, and civic life. In September 2026, the Communications Authority of Kenya (CA) issued Guideline CA.G.520:2026 a detailed framework for deactivating and recycling inactive mobile numbers. This post unpacks the guideline’s lifecycle, its whitelisting provisions, and the technical safeguards that aim to balance resource scarcity with consumer protection. 1. Introduction Mobile numbers, governed internationally by ITU-T Recommendation E.164, are finite resources assigned temporarily to subscribers. Kenya’s numbering space is under pressure: a growing share of numbers lies d...

Part 7 : The Economic Logic of SIM-Boxing: International Bypass Fraud in Kenya

πŸ“„ digital forensics · telecom SIM-boxing & the economics of international bypass fraud Seventh instalment of a six‑part series on SIM‑boxing fraud in Kenya πŸ“Œ abstract · conceptual 🧾 economic arbitrage · forensic implications πŸ‡°πŸ‡ͺ Kenya regulatory context πŸ“‘ contents 1. Introduction 2. Call‑path transformation 3. Economic incentive 4. Arbitrage model 5. Who bears the loss? 6. Forensic problem 7. From motive to evidence 8. Conclusion 1. Introduction Parts One through Six of this series examined the technological foundations of SIM‑boxing, Kenyan case law, regulatory powers, tribunal decisions, AI‑based detection, and a proposed digital forensic framework. This seventh paper steps back from doctrine and technique to examine the economic mechanism that makes SIM‑boxing worth doing in the first place. Understanding that mechanism is not a perip...

Part 6: A Digital Forensic Framework for SIM Boxing Evidence in Kenyan Courts: Collection, Preservation, Analysis, and Presentation

SIM Boxing Forensics in Kenya Part VI · A four‑stage digital framework πŸ“„ Series conclusion · 3,300 words ⚖️ Evidence Act · KICA · CDR analysis Abstract This final paper draws together technical, evidentiary, and regulatory threads from Parts I-V into a proposed digital forensic framework for SIM boxing investigations in Kenya. It situates the framework within Kenya’s Evidence Act (sections 78A, 106A, 106B, and 48) and the regulatory architecture of the Kenya Information and Communications Act. The paper proposes a four‑stage framework collection, preservation, analysis, and presentation designed to produce SIM boxing evidence capable of withstanding certificate‑based admissibility and appellate scrutiny. 1. Introduction This series began by observing that SIM boxing investigations depend almost entirely on the correlation of telecommunications datasets, chiefly Call Detail Records. Part II ...

Part 5: Artificial Intelligence for Detecting SIM Boxing: Machine Learning, Graph Analytics, and Anomaly Detection

Automated detection of SIM boxing State of the art · machine learning, graph analytics & physical-layer signals · implications for Kenyan regulatory practice πŸ“„ abstract ⚖️ digital forensics πŸ‡°πŸ‡ͺ Kenya πŸ“‘ CDR analysis SIM Boxing Machine Learning Graph Analytics Anomaly Detection Call Detail Records Adversarial Evasion Digital Forensics Kenya Abstract Parts I through IV of this series established the technical mechanics of SIM boxing, its treatment as evidence in Kenyan litigation, and the layered regulatory-to-judicial process through which SIM boxing findings are made and reviewed. A recurring theme across Parts II and IV is that Kenyan regulators and tribunals have so far relied on comparatively simple inferential reasoning, most notably, the absence of expected international numbers in Call Detail Records to sustain SIM boxing findings, without the bene...