The long-standing legal battle between Nkosana Makate and Vodacom over the “Please Call Me” (PCM) service continues to dominate headlines as arguments intensify in South Africa’s Constitutional Court. On November 21, 2024, Makate’s legal team, led by Scott Stuart, criticised Vodacom’s attempts to downplay the value of PCM. This hearing marks 24 years since Makate, the service’s inventor, submitted the original PCM proposal in 2000, an idea celebrated as a groundbreaking innovation in African telecommunications.
At the heart of the case is Vodacom’s calculation of the compensation owed to Makate. Vodacom’s legal counsel, Wim Trengrove, argued that the value of PCM was diluted by MTN’s introduction of a similar service before Vodacom launched PCM. Makate’s team rejected this claim, highlighting inconsistencies in Vodacom CEO Shameel Joosub’s valuation method. According to Stuart, Joosub excluded revenues generated from contract customers and interconnection fees, significantly reducing Makate’s share. These exclusions, Stuart argued, were unjustified given that PCM drove traffic and revenue across all customer segments.
A History of Legal Wrangling
Makate initially approached Vodacom with the PCM idea as a 24-year-old employee in 2000. Despite its success in boosting Vodacom’s revenue, Makate has been embroiled in a compensation dispute for over two decades. The Constitutional Court ruled in 2016 that Makate was entitled to “fair compensation,” but disagreements over the amount have led to protracted litigation.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) ordered Vodacom to pay Makate a share of PCM’s revenue generated over 18 years, estimated to be between R28.99 billion and R55.37 billion. Vodacom, dissatisfied with the ruling, petitioned the Constitutional Court for relief. Meanwhile, Makate’s team has accused Vodacom of employing delaying tactics to stall payments.
Arguments Over Revenue and Timeframe
Makate’s legal counsel criticised Vodacom’s suggested five-year period for calculating compensation, arguing that PCM continues to generate revenue. The SCA previously endorsed an 18-year timeframe as a compromise, which Makate’s team estimates saved Vodacom R700 million. Stuart emphasised that the invention allowed Vodacom to monetise a previously untapped customer segment—those without airtime but needing communication.
This case has broader implications for intellectual property rights and corporate responsibility. Stuart underscored PCM’s significance, calling it one of Africa’s top innovations and comparable to global technological breakthroughs.
With the Constitutional Court deliberating, the public and legal experts are waiting to see how the court will decide on a case that could change the way companies recognise and reward new ideas.
