A Nairobi court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Davidson Ivusa, a Kenyan innovator who accused Safaricom of copying his concept for its “Reverse Call” feature. The February 27, 2025 ruling seen by brings to a close a three-year legal battle over one of Safaricom’s core services, raising questions about how big corporations handle unsolicited ideas.
According to court documents, Ivusa claimed he pitched a “Jichomoe” proposal to Safaricom in 2010. He argued that Safaricom delayed the implementation of his concept—which allowed users to make calls even with zero airtime—and then launched it under a different name without his involvement.
Safaricom denied the claim, arguing that the “Reverse Call” service, launched in April 2019, was independently developed. The telco said the feature was developed to address a common user need: making calls without sufficient airtime.
Justice Mugambi determined that Ivusa’s concept was shared voluntarily, with no expectation of confidentiality or fiduciary duty on Safaricom’s part, saying “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.”
Ivusa’s lawsuit centred on claims of breach of trust, passing off, and loss of income. However, the court found no grounds to impose a constructive trust, a legal remedy for unjust enrichment.
“Proof of parties’ intention is immaterial; for the trust will nonetheless be imposed by the law for the benefit of the settlor,” Justice Mugambi ruled. “The plaintiff has not substantiated the claim of dishonesty on the defendant’s part.”
Safaricom did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
On copyright infringement, the court drew a sharp distinction between protecting an idea and protecting its execution. Justice Mugambi cited Kenyan case law and global copyright standards. “Copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not the ideas themselves,” he said.
Ivusa failed to provide detailed evidence of “Jichomoe’s” expression. He did not present a source code, diagrams, or prototype, only a concept note shared via email.
“Without evidence of the plaintiff’s unique implementation, it is difficult to establish that the defendant appropriated the plaintiff’s specific expression,” the judge said.
The court dismissed the claim of passing off, as Ivusa could not prove that “Jichomoe” had gained goodwill or market recognition before Safaricom’s launch.
“There was no proof that consumers or industry stakeholders associated Safaricom Reverse Call Feature with “Jichomoe”,” the ruling read.
The case shows the murky legal terrain where unsolicited ideas meet commercial implementation, a common dispute in markets like Kenya, where tech startups often pitch to dominant players.
