E.

Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 21

Protecting Copyright Owners in Nigeria:

A Panacea for Intellectual Development
Emmanuel Owushi*
*

A R T IC L E IN F O ABSTRACT

Article history: The paper looks at protecting copyright owners in Nigeria: a panacea
Received 08 September 2019 for intellectual development. A descriptive survey design was adopted
Revised 29 December 2019 in carrying out the study. The sample size for the study was 112. Three
Accepted 16 January 2020 research objectives guided the study. The study utilized a self-developed
questionnaire for data collection. A total of 112 copies of the questionnaire
were distributed to librarian and lecturers, out of which 108 copies
Keywords: were duly filled and returned, representing 96.4%. The collected data
Copyright, was arranged in frequency and analyzed using percentage and mean
Authors, score. The findings revealed that protection of copyright will encourage
Protection, creators of intellectual works, and that if authors are well remunerated
Remuneration, there is likelihood of adequate availability of various publications to
Violations meet information needs of Nigerians. The result showed that the right
to intellectual properties is one of the ways to encourage intellectual
development. The finding revealed that copyright protection provides
security for intellectual product and does not negatively affect the
availability of intellectual materials. Based on the research findings,
it was recommended that owners of intellectual property deserve good
earnings for their intellectual works in order to promote Knowledge
proliferation and availability so as to meet the reading needs of the
citizens at the various levels. The study also recommended that all
cases relating to copyright violation in our courts should be summarily
dealt with. The study advocated that the provision on the punishment
should be reviewed such that it could deter people from infringing
on authors rights.

1. Introduction

Intellectual property refers to creative works such as inventions; artistic and literary works. It
could be classified into patents, copyrights, industrial designs, geographical indications and trademarks.
However, this study is focused on how the protection of the copyright of owners can enhance
intellectual development. The law governing Intellectual Property ensures the security and enforcement
of legal rights of owners and punish those that violate such laws. One of the major intricacies

* Faculty of Law Library, University of Port Harcourt, Nigeria (emmaowushi@gmail.com)

International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology, 10(1): 21-34, 2020.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2020.10.1.021
 E. Owushi
22 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

of technologies of communication is the unlimited access they accord to users, which sometimes
result to unauthorized reproduction and duplication of intellectual properties. This constitutes a threat
to owners of intellectual properties. Anigilage (1997) averred that the speed and accuracy provided
by these technologies have facilitated the infringement of copyright law. The desire to protect a
man’s investment in the creation of a work, be it a literary work as in copyright, an invention
as in patents, distinctive trademarks as in trademarks from unauthorized economic exploitation by
another person, is the rationale for the protection of intellectual property (Nwadei, 2016). The author
further maintained that legislations appertaining to intellectual property are geared towards protecting
property rights, which incidentally, if properly promoted can impact technological transfer and in-
dustrialization in the country. Protection of copyright materials are not designed or meant to limit
public access but to protect the economic and rights of authors.
It was held in the case of Gero v Seven-Up Company that the goal of copyright protection
is not to inhibit the free flow of information but to encourage dissemination of ideas by protecting
the embodiment or expression of an idea in creative work and reserving the right in it to
the creator of the work. The establishment of some viable or appropriate structure and legal
framework in Nigeria (such as copyright act, patents, and industrial designs trademarks) is
aimed at protecting creators of intellectual materials. This makes it easy and necessary for
authors to institute legal action against any person(s) who reproduces or duplicates their works
without their consent.
It is against this backdrop that Adedeji (2007) documented that all over the world; the right
to peaceful enjoyment of property has been recognized as a fundamental right that citizens cannot
be deprived of. Stressing on the importance of protecting copyright owners, Aguda (1992) remarked
that law had given every member of the society the right of protection of his tangible or physical
property. It gives the owner, the exclusive privilege to control in some respect to the reproduction
of copies and the use of the original work or composition. It is on this note that Asein (1990)
opined that the protection accorded copyright holders rest primarily on the theory that a creator
should be entitled to the fruits of his labour. Adedeji also reiterated that all over the world, it
has been recognized that protection of copyright is the best means of promoting creativity, stimulating
men and women of talent to create further works, thus building up national heritage. The essence
of the copyright law is to protect the writers and artists from the unlawful use and reproduction
of material and as well helps to promote creativity’.
Considering the literatures presented above Adedeji (2007), Nwadei (2016), Anigilage (1997),
Ekpa and Kure (2015) and others, it is clear that the most of the authors recognized the need
to protect copyright owners to enhance intellectual development and for them to benefit from their
works. However, they did not provide possible solutions to the crux of the problem which is a
gap that demands attention. Therefore, this study is focused on filling this gap: to examine the
need for protecting copyright owners in Nigeria. The study, further investigate the effect of the
promoting copyright owners on availability of intellectual materials and suggest possible means
of ensuring the protection of copyright owners. The study equally examined the strength of the
punishment on copyright offenders under the copyright law in Nigeria.
The aim of the study is to examine the need for protecting copyright owners in Nigeria: a panacea
 E. Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 23

for intellectual development and suggest possible means of protecting copyright owners in Nigeria.
The specific objectives are to:

a) Find out if protecting copyright owners will enhance intellectual development in Nigeria.
b) Ascertain if protecting copyright owners will promote availability of intellectual materials.
c) Proffer possible suggestions for protecting copyright owners.

2. Literature Review

A considerable amount of efforts has been made by scholars expressing their views on the need
for protecting copyright owners. It is obvious that, authors are likely to take greater interest in
creativity if they are sure that they will be adequately remunerated and their rights are protected
by an enduring copyright system as documented by Okiwlagwe (2000). The author reiterated that
if this is upheld then, there is likelihood of adequate availability of various publications to meet
reading needs of Nigerians. It is against this background that Hassan (1976) noted that protection
of copyright is the best means of promoting creativity, stimulating men and women of talent to
create further works and thus building up the national heritage. Lack of protection kills talent and
even national prestige.
Writing on this, Philips in Umaru (2002) advocated that all the statutory protections given to
intellectual property are found on the principle that unauthorized use of another’s intellectual labour
is unfair exploitation of it, which the law should not permit. The author reiterated that another
reason given for copyright protection is that a man who has spent money, time and energy to
create a work from which the society benefits, is entitled to be rewarded or reciprocated by the
society by granting him monopoly over that work for limited duration. It is as a result of this
that Ekpere (2002) depicted that a complementary objective of copyright legislation is to foster
the growth of learning and culture for public good.
Okiwlagwe (2000) opined that copyright law is based on the assumption that an author is
more likely to be motivated to embark on continuous production of intellectual products, if there
is the assurance that another individual cannot claim neither the credit nor the profit economically
from the author’s effort. The author reiterated that copyright law does not protect ideas but
exists only when the ideas are put in tangible format such as written works or other forms of
expression.
Nwadei (2016) observed that it is essential to protect authors and inventors from the exploitation
of their works as it is essential policy of government to reward hard work and discourage laziness
and indolence. This is in agreement with Asein (1990) who remarked that it is unfair to allow
a man who has failed to harness his innate potentials or develop his skills and knowledge from
benefiting from the hard work of another person. The utmost aim of the copyright law is to protect
the property owner of a copyright work seeing that his labour is not unjustifiable expropriated
or reaped by people who are not the producers of such labour as recorded by Aboki (2002). The
author maintained that the economic bases of the copyright law is to make sure that people who
 E. Owushi
24 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

make inventions secure the pride, reward, encouragement and incentive of their labour. The author
therefore concluded that, it will amount to criminal, fraudulent and cheating to do any acts or
omission which will deprive an owner of a copyrightable work the benefit of his labour.
It is necessary to state that creating a system of rewards for creators of intellectual and artistic
work would encourage citizens to engage in creativity that would foster economic, scientific, social
and cultural development. John Locke in his book titled Treatises Government cited in Ashabi
(2007) said though the earth and all inferior creatures are common to all men, yet every man
has a property of his own person, this nobody has any right to but himself. This is in conformity
with Schlatter (1951) who said that the labour of his body, the product of his brains and work
of hands are properly his. Emphasizing on the need of protecting copyright owners, Eze (1990)
remarked that the value and relevance of any national copyright system has to be, therefore, judged
from its potency to stimulate intellectual creativity in local authors and creators.
Nnaji (1986) documented that without copyright protection, authors will be reluctant to engage
in the difficult working of writing as a reasonable hope of financial return will be lacking. The
author reiterated that few people will embark on the exacting work of writing if no restriction
exists to check intellectual banditry which will, in effect, minimize possible remuneration due
to their works. However, Section 6(1)(a) of the second schedule of the Copyright Act provides
that:

“the doing of any of the acts mentioned in the said section 6 by way of fair dealing for purposes
of research, private use, criticism or review or the reporting of current events subject to the condition
that, if the use is public, it shall be accompanied by an acknowledgement of the title of the work
and its authorship except where the work is incidentally included in a broadcast”.

The effect of this provision is that it allows researchers and students to reprint or quote portions
of intellectual property provided there is an acknowledgement of the title and authorship.
Guobadia (1998) did not quite agree with this. According to him, it is not sufficient to simply
acknowledge the endeavour. To him he sees no reason why an author should be prevented from
commercial exploitation of his creative work locally and internationally. He reiterated that if the
right to commercial exploitation of the product of man’s ingenuity is restricted to copyright disregard,
it may be major disincentive to authors, scholars and researcher because of the absence of material
rewards.
It is against this background that Ajetunmobi (2017) documented that it is equitable that the
creators be compensated for the exploitation of their works as a return for the labour and skill
they applied in creating their works. The author further maintained that creativity and invention
are the product of the human intellect and consequently creators and investors should have the
right to control their works. Though the law has helped to strike a balance between the interest
of innovators and public interest, providing an environment in which creativity and invention can
flourish, for the benefit of all which bothers on fair use principle.
Writing on the problems affecting intellectual property rights in Nigeria, Adeleye (2016) observed
that dates of enactment of principal legislations relating to intellectual property rights in Nigeria
 E. Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 25

clearly show that the laws were made long ago at a time that many of the current day development
were not in the consciousness of the legislators. The author lamented that the result of the use
of outdated legislations is that the protection offered in Nigeria is substandard in comparison to
the updated laws now operating in other jurisdictions. This means that there is need to review
the law to be in line with laws of other jurisdictions of other civilized nations. Furthermore, Opadere
(2011) lamented the diverse ways, works of which are subject to copyright protection have been
grossly abused by corporate entities and individuals alike, to the extent that it could hardly be
said that there is any impressive appreciation for arts in Nigeria. Despite that there are law enforcement
agencies, copyright commission set up to guard against infringement, it appears the law is still
far from being effective.

3. Methodology

This study applied descriptive survey design. According to Nworgu (2015) descriptive survey
design aims at collecting data on something and describing it in a systematic manner. The author
further explained that it is a plan or blueprint which specifies how data relating to a given problem
should be collected and analyzed. The study lends itself to descriptive survey, because the respondents’
description of the situation in protecting copyright owners in Nigeria. A total of one hundred and
twelve (112) copies of the structured questionnaire were distributed among the respondents and
one hundred and eight (108) were properly filled and retrieved making up a respondent rate of
96.4%. The researcher analyzed and interpreted the response using simple percentage, frequency
tables and means scores.

Table 1. Sample of the study

SN Profession Frequency Percentage

1 Librarians 61 56.5
2 Law Lecturers 47 43.5
Total 108 100

Table 2. Demographic characteristics of the sample

SN Respondents Frequency Percentage

1 BLS/LLB 21 19.4
2 LLM/MLS 51 47.2
3 Ph.D. 36 33.4
Total 108 100
* BLS/LLB: Bachelor in Library Science/ Bachelor in Law
** LLM/MLS: Master in Law/ Master in Library Science
*** Ph.D.: Doctor of Philosophy in either Library or Law profession.
 E. Owushi
26 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

4. Results

The findings from Table 3 shows that the respondents accepted all the items with high mean
scores, culminating to a grand mean of 3.38 (3.38 ≥ 2.50). This indicates that the protecting copyright
encourages intellectual owners in Nigeria. This gives credence to Okiwlagwe (2000) who earlier
remarked that authors are likely to take greater interest in creativity if they are sure that they
will be adequately remunerated and their rights are protected by an enduring copyright system.
This agrees with Nnaji (1986) who documented that without copyright protection, authors will be
reluctant to engage in difficult working of writing as a reasonable hope of financial return will
be lacking. This statement is confirmed by Asein (1990), that it is unfair to allow a man who
has failed to harness his innate potentials or develop his skills and knowledge from benefitting
from the hardwork of another. These goes to show that authors will do better if the law could
protect their works from infringement.

Table 3. Does protecting copyright encourage intellectual owners in Nigeria?

SN Item SA A D SD 
 SD Decision
1 Copyright protection would 57 41 4 6 3.38 1.3 Accepted
increase proliferation of (52.8) (38.0) (3.7) (5.6)
intellectual contents.
2 The right to intellectual properties 57 51 0 0 3.53 1.0 Accepted
is one of the ways to encourage (52.8) (47.2)
intellectual content owners.
3 Copyright protection caters for the 62 46 0 0 3.57 1.0 Accepted
intellectual product security needs (57.4) (42.6)
of intellectual property owners.
4 Copyright protection for individual 38 58 9 3 3.21 3.1 Accepted
content to owners is more (35.2) (53.7) (8.3) (2.8)
important than monetary benefit.
5 I am confident on the protection 40 54 11 3 3.21 3.3 Accepted
of my work with copyright (37.0) (50.0) (10.2) (2.8)
protection.
3.38 ≥ 2.50
* N=108

The respondents accepted all the items with individual mean as follows; item 1 with a mean
score of 2.19, item 2 with a mean score of 1.91, item 3 with a means score of 2.03, item
four with a mean score of 2.05 and item 5 with a mean score of 1.95, cumulatively, the five
items were responded to with a grand mean of 2.02 (2.02 ≤ 2.50) leading to the rejected of
the items.
 E. Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 27

Table 4. Protecting copyright owners and availability of intellectual materials in Nigeria?

SN Item SA A D SD 
 SD Decision
1 Copyright protection limits the 19 14 27 48 2.19 1.0 Accepted
usability of an intellectual content. (17.6) (13.0) (25.0) (44.4)
2 Copyright protection does not 18 7 42 41 1.91 1.0 Accepted
allow for flexibility on the use of (16.7) (6.5) (38.9) (38.0)
intellectual content.
3 Copyright protection does not 15 9 30 54 2.03 1.5 Accepted
support the open source/education (13.9) (8.3) (27.8) (50.0)
initiative.
4 Copyright protection delays 18 7 27 56 2.05 1.0 Accepted
replication of knowledge. (16.7) (6.5) (25.0) (51.9)
5 Copyright protection does not 14 8 35 51 1.95 1.0 Accepted
allow accessibility and availability (13.0) (7.4) (32.4) (47.2)
of information materials on the
web which is the primary sources
of information.
2.02 ≤ 2.50
* N=108

The implication of the result on Table 5 showed that all five (5) were accepted as possible
means of protecting copyright owners in Nigeria. The result showed that 89.8% agreed that Peer
review process manuscript publication was important to ensure originality of literal works. Over
94.4% agreed that strict punishment for crimes against copyright owners were required to protect
copyright owners in Nigeria This is in agreement with Adeleye (2016) who observed that dates
of enactment of principle legislations relating to intellectual property rights clearly shows that laws
were enacted long ago at a time that many of the current day development were not in the consciousness
of the legislators. Despite the presence of law enforcement agencies, copyright commission set
up to guard against infringement is weak and has not been effective. The punishment provided
for in the Act is not stringent enough to discourage infringers from committing copyright crimes.

Table 5. What are the possible suggestions to protecting copyright owners in Nigeria?

SN Item SA A D SD 
 SD Decision
1 Proper acknowledgment of 52 48 8 0 3.41 1.2 Accepted
materials source/authority and (48.1) (44.4) (7.4)
checking Plagiarism.
2 Publishing intellectual 49 48 10 1 3.34 1.0 Accepted
works/manuscripts through (45.4) (44.4) (9.3) (0.9)
recognized publication outfit
registered with National Library.
3 Strict punishment for crimes 62 40 6 0 3.52 1.3 Accepted
against copyright owners. (57.4) (37.0) (5.6)
4 Establishment of copyright 42 48 15 3 3.19 1.0 Accepted
National Guild. (38.9) (44.4) (13.9) (2.8)
5 Peer review process manuscript 50 47 11 0 3.36 1.0 Accepted
publication to ensure originality. (46.3) (43.5) (10.2)
* N=108
 E. Owushi
28 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

5. Discussion of Findings

5.1 The Copyright Law and Its Enforcement.

In order to achieve the noble objectives of protecting copyright owners in Nigeria. The Copyright
Act was enacted, in the words of Nwogu (2014) the Act not only created favourable conditions
for actualization of authors’ potentials through creative work, but also incorporated on establishment,
for the first time, machinery for the administration of copyright in Nigeria called Copyright Council.
This council was later in 1996 renamed Nigerian copyright commission as amended in the Copyright
Act in 2004. The commission is saddled with the following functions as contained in Section 34(3)
of the Act. These are to:

a) Be responsible for all matters provided for in this Act.

b) Monitor and supervise Nigeria’s position in relation to international conventions and advise
government thereon.
c) Advise and regulate conditions for the conclusion of bilateral and multilateral agreements between
Nigeria and any other country.
d) Enlighten and inform the public on matters relating to copyright.
e) Maintain an effective data bank on authors and their works.
f) Be responsible for such other matters as related to copyright in Nigeria as the minister, may
from time to time, direct.

Besides this legal framework enacted to protect copyright owners in Nigeria, authors have suffered
a lot as a result of the following problems. First among them is the provision on punishment under
the Copyright Act is not stringent enough to discourage people from the act of infringement. Section
20(2)(d) provides that any person who has in his possession, sells or lets for hire or distribution
for the purposes of trade or business or exposes or offers to sale or hire any copy of a work
which, if it had been made in Nigeria, would be an infringing copy. The provision went ahead
to state that unless he/she proves innocent infringing, is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction
to a fine of N100 for each copy dealt with, or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding two
years or in case of an individual, or both such fine and imprisonment. The infringers who make
fortune from the infringement do not see a fine of N100 as anything. The copyright law in Nigeria
is weak, couples with the delay in litigation in Nigerian judiciary. Some of the respondents decried
the weakness of the punishment of copyright offenders. The punishment of copyright offence under
Section 20(2)(a) of the Copyright Act is N100.00 only for every copy dealt in contravention of
Section 20(2)(a) of the Copyright Act. This punishment does not commensurate the degree of offense
appropriate for the infringement on the copyright of the intellectual property of someone. It does
not stringent enough to scare people and protect the copyright owners as such the law needs to
be reviewed to be in line with other jurisdictions of the world.
As demonstrated in the case Nigerian Copyright Commission and Ali Baba. The accused Ali
Baba was found with him an infringing copy of literary work in which the copyright subsists in
 E. Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 29

favour of the copyright owner without the consent and authorization of the copyright owner and
thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 20(2)(a) and 20(2)(c) of
the Copyright Act, Laws of the Federation, 2004. In spite of the plea of guilt made by the accused
and the exhibits tendered in support of the charge, the accused was convicted as charged. The
accused was sentenced to a fine of N100.00 or 3 months imprisonment on each of the two counts.
The sentences were to run concurrently.
In addition to this is the case of Nigerian Copyright commission and Michael Paul. The accused
(Michael Paul) had with him infringing copies of literary work in which copyright subsists in favour
of the copyright owner without the consent and authorization of the copyright owner and thereby
committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 20(2)(a) and 20(2)(c) of the Copyright
Act, Laws of the Federation 2004.
The Court having taken into account the plea of the accused person and the evidence plead
before the Court by the Prosecution witness. The Accused person (Michael Paul) was found guilty
of exposing for sale the purpose of trade or business fifty-one (51) copies of a literary work titled
ije ‘The Journey’ without the consent and authorization of the copyright owner an offence contrary
to an punishable under Section 20(2)(a) of the Copyright Act 2004. The Accused was also found
guilty of having in his possession other than his pirate and domestic use Fifty-One copies of the
said literary work, an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 20(2)(a) of the Copyright
Act and N100.00 for every copy dealt in contravention of Section 20(2)(a) of the Copyright Act.
That the infringing copied to be destroyed by the Nigerian Copyright Commission.
Also, of interest is the case of Nigerian Copyright Commission and Nworie Anayo. The accused
person (Nworie Anayo) had with him six Hundred and Thirty-One (631) infringing copies of works
in Digital Video Discs (DVDs) and Compact Discs (CDs) in which copyright subsist in favour
of the copyright owners without the consent and authorization of the copyright owners and thereby
committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 20(2)(a) and (c) of the Copyright
Acts, Laws of the Federation, 2004.
In the light of the plea of guilty made by the accused and the evidence made in support of
the charge before the court the accused (Nworie Anayo) was convicted as charged. The court held
that since the convict is an individual, he was charged to a fine of N100.00 per copy of the infringed
items i.e. 631×100 = N63, 310.00 naira only. He was also sentenced to six months imprisonment
commencing from the date of his arrest and detention 20th May 2011. The Court ordered that
exhibits B & C used in the course of the court proceeding be handed over to the prosecution/complainant
for destruction.
From the foregoing it is evidenced that federal high courts which have jurisdiction over copyright
matters as enshrined in our law have made concerted efforts in protecting copyright owners in
Nigeria but the law is not strongly enough to protect the copyright owners, encourage intellectual
development. Globally, copyright offences are considered as a criminal offence particularly in the
academic environment, lecturers’ loss their job, pay huge some as fine and face bans and much
more. Based on the data from the study, 94.4% (See item 3 in Table 5) of the respondents agreed
that the law was weak and require strict punishment for crimes against copyright owners to encourage
intellectual development both in the academic environment and the society at large. It is therefore,
 E. Owushi
30 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

recommended the copyright law be reviewed or amended with respect to international best practice
with weightier punishment. This will ensure and enhance the protection of copyright of owners
and intellectual development.

5.2 Effect of Corruption of Monitoring Agencies and delay in litigation in the Nigeria Judiciary

The agency responsible for enforcement of the copyright law is the Nigerian copyright commission
However, the effect of corruption in the system worsens the situation. Over 92% of the respondent
stated that the corruption of enforcement agencies such as the Nigerian Copyright Commission
(NCC) officials and the delay in litigation in the Judiciary impends the level of success in enforcement
of the copyright law, Corruption has become an endemic disease that has eaten deep into the affairs
of the Nigerian-State. Nwogu (2014) opined that some of the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC)
officials who are charged with the responsibility of carrying out raids on infringed works are corrupt,
so are compromised by the infringers. The author stressed that the officers at times have private
dealings or transactions with the infringers, and consequently, they deliberately refuse or find it
difficult to arrest infringers or pirates during regular raids. As such allow these evil doers to continue
with nefarious act.
Besides this is the delay in administration of criminal law system. A case which ordinarily shouldn’t
take three months in the Court, a matter that could be summarily dealt with, surprisingly lasts
up to two years in Court and in the process litigants get frustrated and abandoned such case in
the process the infringer is left to go free since the litigant has lost interest in the case. This discourages
copyright litigation and enforcement. Due to inadequate funding, the Nigerian Copyright commission
(NCC) is not living up to its expectations in discharging its responsibilities as such cannot carryout
comprehensive investigation and prosecute those found guilty of infringement. In order to perform
effectively the commission needs to be funded adequately.

5.3 Enforcement of Plagiarism

The data presented in Table 5 shows that 92.5% of the respondents (See item 1 in Table 5)
agreed that proper acknowledgment of materials source/authority and Checking Plagiarism is a possible
way of protecting the copyright of owners and intellectual development.
Plagiarism is the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one’s
own. The study found that the concept of plagiarism is not defined in any Nigeria law. It is only
by extension that the copyright law is been applied. Thus, the law is not specifically captured
in the Nigerian Law. However, some institutions in Nigeria have instituted it as a crime. The study
found that a possible way to protect copyright owners and increase intellectual development is
to review the copyright law to include plagiarism offences while all institutions in Nigeria should
as a matter of urgency fight plagiarism as this will enhance intellectual development, This finding
is in line with the words of Gokmenoglu (2017) who suggested that plagiarism is raising legal
and ethical concerns Turkish universities and around the world, which has negative impact on intellectual
development among teachers, students and the academic environment. Therefore, proper acknowledg-
 E. Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 31

ment of materials source/authority and checking Plagiarism would protect the copyright owners
and enhance intellectual development in Nigeria particularly in the tertiary institutions.

5.4 Effect of copyright protection on the availability of intellectual materials

The present study found that the protection of copyright of owners does not reduce the availability
of intellectual materials. This indicates that promoting copyright owners does not have negative
impact on the availability of intellectual materials in Nigeria. The copyright Act provides for exceptions
to the general use Ocheme (2000) to enable certain groups or organization and other times the
general society, to access and use people’s creative works under special conditions, without infringing
the authors right. Examples include uses for research and scholarship purposes Ocheme (2000)
which encourages availability of intellectual materials to the public.
This is enshrined in the second schedule to the Nigerian Copyright Act which deals generally
with exceptions to copyright control, paragraph (a) provides for fair dealing as follows:

The doing of any of the acts mentioned in the said section 630 by way of fair dealing for purposes
of research, private use, criticism or review or the reporting of current events, subject to the condition
that, if the use is public, it shall be accompanied by an acknowledgement of the title of the work
and its authorship except where the work is incidentally included in a broadcast.

However, the fair use doctrine in Nigeria needs to review to strike a balanced between owners
right and users right as reflected in the copyright laws of other countries such as Canada, United
of American and the United Kingdom. This will ensure the while creating a provision for a fair
use, the copyright owners are protected and remunerated.
This finding is in accordance with the works of Ekpa and Kure (2015), who opined that a legislation
that insists on a sum of money which must be paid as ‘royalty’ to owners of intellectual properties
such as literally works for the photocopy of works in any form. They further suggested that REPRONIG
(a copyright collective society) for authors of literary works or any other collective societies under
the Act, may by this legislation, be mandated to take on the issuance of this license and onward
delivery of the proceeds to authors (Ekpa & Kure, 2015) as obtained in other parts of the world
such as United States and Canada.

For instance, in CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada106, that

“The fair dealing exception, like other exceptions in the copyright Act, is user’s right. In order to
maintain the proper balance between the rights of a copyright owner and user’s interest, … Both
owner rights and user rights should therefore be given the fair and balanced reading that befits remedial
legislation.”

From the ongoing, the fair use doctrine ensures the availability of intellectual materials but should
also be reviewed in accordance with the best practices in the world as highlighted above.
 E. Owushi
32 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

6. Conclusion and Recommendations

Firstly, the study shows that protecting the copyright owners would enhance intellectual development
in Nigeria. The protection accorded to copyright owners rests solely on the theory that a creator
should be entitled to the fruits of labour, if this is assured then authors would be likely to take
greater interest in creativity so long they will be adequately remunerated and their rights protected
by the law. The courts have been of immense assistance in prosecuting culprits that have been
infringing on copyright law. Furthermore, the progress in technologies that has eased the task of
unauthorized reproduction and duplication of intellectual properties and infringement of copyright
law can be checked by improved legislation and effective enforcement by the Nigerian copyright
commission (NCC). The establishment of appropriate structures and legal frameworks in Nigeria
must be aimed at protecting creators of intellectual materials. The right to peaceful enjoyment of
one’s property has been recognized as a fundamental right that citizens cannot be deprived of.
However, owners of intellectual property deserve good earnings for their intellectual works in order
to promote book production so as to meet the reading needs of the citizens at the various levels.
The present study also showed that the protection of copyright of owners does not reduce the
availability of intellectual materials; the fair use doctrine ensures the availability of intellectual
materials but should also be reviewed in accordance with the best practices in the world as highlighted
above. In the light of the possible suggestion to protecting copyright owners, the study recommended
that the copyright law be revisited or amended with respect to international best practices with
weightier punishment and not just a 100 naira by copy not even per page when the defaulter could
sell a copy for 5000 naira and more depending on the quality and creative work or book. This
provision on punishment in the instant law is not stringent enough and should be reviewed such
that it deters people from infringing on authors rights. Adequate funding should be made available
to the Nigerian Copyright Commission to enable the Commission perform her statutory duties effec-
tively and the judiciary should ensure all cases relating to copyright violation in our Courts should
be summarily dealt with as quickly as possible to encourage the commission in discharging her
duties creditably.
Lastly, as a way of protecting the copyright owners and increase intellectual development, the
copyright law to be reviewed to include plagiarism offenses which is not defined in the Nigerian
law while all institutions in Nigeria should as a matter of urgency fight plagiarism. Based on the
findings of this study and previous studies, there is no doubt that protecting the copyright owners
is the panacea to intellectual development in Nigeria.

References

Aboki, Y. (2002). Economic and Cultural for Copyright Protection in Nigeria. In J. O. Asein, &
E. S. Nwauche (Eds.), A decade of Copyright Law in Nigeria. Abuja: Nigeria Copyright
Commission.
Adedeji, A. (2007). Protecting Copyright Owners in Nigeria. In A. Popoola, & A. Adodo (Eds.),
 E. Owushi
International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020) 33

Current Legal developments in Nigeria, Essays in memory of Professor J. D. Ojo. Ile-Ife:

Obafemi Awolowo University Press.
Adeleye, A. (2016). Intellectual property rights enforcement in Nigeria: regulatory agencies to the
rescue. http://pennjil.com/intelectual-property-rights-enforcement in nigeria
Aguda, A. (1992). The Nigerian Copyright law and its relevance to social change. In E. E. Uvieghara
(Ed.), Essays on Copyright law and administration in Nigeria. Lagos: the Nigerian Copyright
Council.
Ajetunmobi, A. O. (2017). Computers and the Law Handbook: a resource for lawyers and business
professionals. Ikeja: Princeton and Associates Publishers.
Anigilage, M. A. O. (1997). Photocopying laws: Legal implications and librarian’s Dilemma. The
Lagos Librarian, 18(1&2), 1.
Asein, J. O. (1990). Nigerian Copyright Law: an appraisal of recent innovations and implications.
The Calabar Law Journal, 3, 124.
Ashabi, V. O. (2007). Strategies action against piracy (STRAP): Revolutionizing the Nigerian Copyright
Sector in Cross-cutting issue in Nigerian Law. In O. P. Ojo (Ed.), Essays in honour of
Professor Funso Adaramola. Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press.
Ekpa, F. O., & Kure, B. R. (2015). Fair dealing as an exception to the infringement of copyright:
an obstacle to the effective enforcement of copyright claims in Nigeria. Idah Bar Journal
of Contemporary Legal Issues, 2, 245-270.
http://www.academia.edu/download/40898030/FAIR_DEALING_AS_AN_EXCEPTION_T
O_COPYRIGHT__AN_OBSTACLE_TO_THE_EFFECTIVE_ENFORCEMENT_OF_COP
YRIGHT_CLAIMS_IN_NIGERIA.pdf
Ekpere, J. A. (2002). Nigeria Copyright Law and National development: philosophical and economical
paradigm for the next millemium. In J. O. Asein, & E. S. Nwauche (Eds.), A decade of
Copyright Law in Nigeria. Abuja: Nigerian Copyright Commission.
Eze, O. C. (1990). Copyright Protection in Nigeria: Prospects for national development. The lawyers’
Journal, 1(2), 35.
Gokmenoglu, T. (2017). A Review of Literature: Plagiarism in the Papers of Turkish Context.
Higher Education Studies, 7(3), 161-170. http://doi.org/10.5539/hes.v7n3p161
Guobadia, D. (1989). Fair dealing and copyright in Nigeria. The gravitas review of business and
property law, 2(4), 40-45.
http://www.unesco.org/culture/pdf/antipiracy/nigeria_cp_en
Hassan, A. (1976). The book in multilingual. Paris: UNESCO International Publisher Association.
Nnaji, L. O. (1986). The Library in Nigeria. Enugu: Fourth Dimension Publishers.
Nwadei, H. (2016). The Protection of Copyright in Nigeria: re-evaluating subsisting instruments.
Port Harcourt Journal of Business Law, 2(2), 726.
Nwogu, M. I. O. (2014). The challenges of the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) in the
fight against copyright piracy in Nigeria. Global Journal of Politics and Law Research,
2(5), 22-34. http://www.academia.edu/download/55651602/01.pdf
Nworgu, B. C. (2015). Educational Research: Basic Issues and Methodology (3rd ed.). Nsukka:
University Trust Publishers.
 E. Owushi
34 International Journal of Knowledge Content Development & Technology Vol.10, No.1, 21-34 (March, 2020)

Ocheme, P. (2000). The Law and Practice of Copyright in Nigeria. Zaria: ABU Press Ltd.
Okiwlagwe, A. O. (2000). Copyright law and Book publishing Industry in Nigeria. Nigerian Education
law journal, 3(2), 71.
Opadere, O. S. (2011). Copyright protection as catalyst to economic Growth. University of Benin
Journal of Private and Property law, 2(1), 28.
Schlatter, R. (1951). Private Property the history of an idea. New Brunwick: New Jersey Rutgers
University Press.
Umaru, M. J. (2002). Nature, Subsistence and Scope of Copyright in Nigeria. In J. O. Asein, &
E. S. Nwauche (Eds.), A decade of Copyright law in Nigeria. Abuja: Nigerian Copyright
Commission.

[ About the author ]

Emmanuel Owushi is the law librarian in charge of the faculty of law library, University of Port
Harcourt in Nigeria. His academic qualifications include BLS (Hons) ABU (NGN) MPA, LLB
(Hons) LLM (Uniben NGN) BL law school Abuja (NGN) MLS (UNN) NGN) His research interest
is law librarianship. He is currently a doctoral student in the department of library and information
science at the Michael Okpara University of Agriculture, Umudike (NGN).