King V and the Future of Intellectual Property in an AI Driven Africa
King V has landed and this
time, it doesn’t tiptoe around technology. I attended the Institute of
Directors South Africa’s premiere launch on Friday and am pleased to report that the new corporate
governance code from Africa puts AI and data at the centre of ethical leadership.
This is a signal that intellectual property
and information governance now live under the same roof. In other words,
how we create, protect and share ideas, from patents and trade secrets to
training data and algorithms, is now a boardroom
issue (as it should be), not just a legal one.
From Ownership to
Stewardship
King V reframes the
conversation. It treats “data, information and technology” as distinct but
connected fields, and insists that boards take responsibility for all three. AI
gets its own treatment: boards must establish accountability for the design,
use and outcomes of AI systems, guided by values like fairness,
transparency, privacy, explainability and human-centricity.
This is governance and IP language. If AI systems are built on data (and
most are), then those data are intellectual assets. Their ownership, control
and ethical use are as important as any patent or trade mark. Indeed, most exist as copyrights and know-how, creating an urgent need for registers to reflect this.
The shift from ownership
to stewardship is subtle but seismic. Organisations are now judged not
only by what IP they hold (which, from an African perspective, has always been neglected), but by how responsibly they manage and share it.
The New Currency:
Intangible, Intelligent, Invisible
King V recognises what African innovators have known for years: the real wealth isn’t in the factory, it’s in the file.
Algorithms, data sets, local knowledge systems, creative works are now the
levers of sustainable value creation.
Under King V, boards are
told to link their strategies to the “vitality of socio-ecological systems.” In
plainer terms: your business doesn’t exist outside the society and environment
that sustain it. That means IP portfolios can’t be hoarded in isolation. They
must contribute to broader resilience, climate, education, digital inclusion.
It’s a governance model
that works like Ubuntu for IP: we create because we exist.
AI, IP and the Duty to
Disclose
Another quiet revolution involves the concept of double
materiality. Companies must now report both how sustainability and technology issues affect
them and how their activities affect society. For IP teams, this invites
new questions:
- How do our licensing and enforcement policies impact
access to innovation?
- Are our data practices sufficiently fair and transparent?
- Does our AI deployment erode or enhance public trust?
Expect this to spill into integrated reporting and assurance. Auditors will soon be asking not only how many patents you have, but what those patents do to people and the planet.
Boards, Committees and the
IP Connection
King V also re-wires
governance structures. Risk committees must include independent members and so
must social and ethics committees. For IP intensive organisations, this can be quite something:
- Risk committees
should map and record IP exposure and ownership, from trade secret leaks to algorithmic bias.
- Social and ethics committees
should oversee how IP is used in society, whether your AI respects human
rights, diversity and access.
- Remuneration committees should rethink incentives by rewarding innovation that’s not only profitable but responsible.
It’s governance with conscience.
What This Means for
African IP Practice
For Africa’s IP community,
King V is both an opportunity and a challenge. It demands that lawyers, IP professionals and policymakers rethink IP as
governance infrastructure. That’s a big shift from drafting agreements or
filing applications. It’s about aligning IP strategy with ethics, AI governance, value and sustainability.
It also puts pressure on
boards to include IP literate voices i.e. people who understand how data
rights, algorithms and copyright intersect. If that doesn’t happen, companies’
risk being led by directors who can read a balance sheet but cannot read the
value of intangibles. This is especially a challenge in South Africa, where internally generated IP does not even exist on the balance sheet and therefore long awaited.
So, What Now?
A few practical take outs
for IP leaders:
- Put AI and data IP on your
board’s risk register.
- Build IP ethics into your
social and ethics committee mandate.
- Train directors on AI-related IP
risk authorship, bias, accountability.
- Rethink disclosure: create IP asset
registers - report how your IP both creates and impacts
value.
- And perhaps most importantly, design IP policies (including enforcement policies) that reflect Ubuntu, not just exclusivity.
Final Thought
 |
Darren Olivier
