The Dispute Over the Origins of 'Please Call Me' Service: Legal Expert Challenges Makate's Claim

In the ongoing saga of the 'Please Call Me' invention, a legal expert has stepped into the fray with a controversial statement that could turn the tide on what has become one of the most discussed topics in South African telecommunications history. Ari Kahn, a patent holder and legal expert who herself conceived the 'Please Call Me' idea, has starkly refuted claims that Kenneth Nkosana Makate is the originator of the service, suggesting instead that he should be rewarded no more than a single cent.

The dispute reaches back over two decades to the year 2000 when Makate, a Vodacom employee at the time, proposed a service named "Buzz." His idea allowed a user without airtime to give a 'missed call' to another user, signaling them to call back. Ari Kahn points out that the "Buzz" proposition was technically infeasible at the time, and therefore, could not be practically implemented as a service. The ability to call and induce a ringing state on the receiving end required the caller to have credit, a limitation that squelched the progress of Makate's concept.

Kahn emphasizes the distinction between "Buzz" and the 'Please Call Me' service eventually launched by Vodacom. The 'Please Call Me' service, she remarks, is rooted in her own innovation for MTN, which was not only technically sound but also successfully patented and deployed across MTN's network. This revelation draws a stark contrast between an unsuccessful pitch and a service that reached millions.

The timeline of events supports Kahn’s assertion: Only a week before Makate brought forward "Buzz," Kahn had conceived the 'Please Call Me’ concept and had already set in motion the patent application process. MTN officially filed for intellectual property (IP) protection on January 22, 2001 and had launched its 'Call Me' service by the next day, remarkably ahead of Vodacom.

Vodacom's version, identical in name and function to MTN's service when first released, faced an IP challenge right away. MTN’s swift notification to Vodacom about the infringement and the documented IP and patent filings established prior art, supported by the fact that Vodacom had not yet released its service to the public. Subsequently, Vodacom’s admission in 2019 that the 'Please Call Me' concept was MTN's brainchild further erodes Makate's position.

Dr. Kahn’s pointed analysis could shake the roots of any compensation expectations by Makate, as it heavily rests on the premise that Makate did not invent the service that Vodacom launched. Denying the validity of the Buzz concept, Kahn underlines a crucial distinction between having a mere idea and developing an invention capable of practical implementation, which she achieved on behalf of MTN. Thus, in Kahn’s view, the R47 million offered to Makate by Vodacom was excessively generous.

This controversy does not only affect the involved parties but sets a significant precedent for IP rights in South Africa, underscoring the importance of clear invention chronology and patent law understanding. The narrative presented by Kahn will likely reignite discussions about the true merit behind Makate's claims and the ethical considerations of rewarding innovative efforts in the highly competitive telecom industry.