Takedown Notices and the Responsibilties of Internet Service Providers Under the Copyright Act 2022 (Nigeria)

By Chisom Eze

Abstract

The regulation of online content in Nigeria has become increasingly significant with the
rapid expansion of digital platforms. Takedown notices have emerged as a practical, though
not fully codified mechanism for addressing unlawful online content, including copyright
infringement, privacy violations, defamation, and harmful speech.

While the Copyright Act, 2022 introduces elements of a notice-and-takedown and safe
harbour framework, Nigeria still lacks a comprehensive and unified intermediary liability
regime comparable to the United States Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

Consequently, enforcement remains fragmented across intellectual property law,
cybercrime regulation, data protection legislation, and private platform governance.

This article critically evaluates Nigeria’s evolving legal framework, identifies key regulatory
gaps, and argues that although takedown mechanisms are essential for digital
accountability, their effectiveness is constrained by procedural uncertainty, jurisdictional
limitations, and constitutional concerns relating to freedom of expression.

1. Introduction
The evolution of digital communication platforms has fundamentally reshaped public
discourse in Nigeria. Social media platforms now serve as dominant channels for
communication, commerce, and civic participation. However, this transformation has also
amplified legal challenges relating to unlawful content, including intellectual property
infringement, defamation, misinformation, and privacy breaches.

A takedown notice is generally understood as a formal request directed to an intermediary
such as a hosting service provider, social media platform, or search engine seeking the
removal or disabling of access to content alleged to be unlawful.

This article interrogates whether Nigeria’s current legal architecture sufficiently supports an
effective and constitutionally compliant system for regulating online content.

2. Legal and Regulatory Framework in Nigeria
2.1 Copyright Act, 2022
The Copyright Act, 2022 constitutes the principal statutory framework for addressing online
copyright infringement in Nigeria. The Act strengthens protection for rights holders in the
digital environment and introduces provisions that approximate a notice-and-takedown
regime.
Notably, the Act:

• Affirms that copyright initially vests in the author;
• Permits enforcement through civil remedies and administrative mechanisms; and
• Recognises the role of intermediaries in the dissemination of infringing content.

Although the Act does not replicate the detailed procedural architecture of the DMCA, it
provides a statutory basis for rights holders to issue infringement notices to Internet Service
Providers (ISPs) requesting removal of infringing material.

2.2 Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, 2015
The Cybercrimes Act criminalises a range of online misconduct, including identity theft,
cyberstalking, and unlawful interception of communications. While it does not expressly
establish a takedown regime, it provides a complementary enforcement framework where
unlawful online content amounts to criminal conduct.

2.3 Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023
The Nigeria Data Protection Act (NDPA) introduces a comprehensive regime for the
protection of personal data. It is particularly relevant in cases involving privacy-based
takedown requests, such as the unauthorised publication of personal data or images.

Data subjects may exercise rights to erasure or restriction of processing, which may, in
practice, translate into content removal obligations for data controllers and processors
operating digital platforms.

2.4 Platform Governance and Contractual Enforcement
In practice, most takedown requests in Nigeria are enforced through private platform
mechanisms rather than direct statutory procedures. Social media platforms and hosting
providers operate internal reporting systems governed by terms of service.

These contractual frameworks often function as the de facto enforcement mechanism for
content removal, sometimes with greater immediacy than formal legal processes.

3. Types of Takedown Notices
3.1 Copyright-Based Notices
Issued by rights holders alleging unauthorised use of protected works such as music, films,
photographs, or literary content.

3.2 Defamation and Harmful Content Requests
Requests aimed at removing content that allegedly damages reputation. These are
governed largely by common law principles and state defamation laws.

3.3 Privacy-Based Requests
Grounded in the NDPA, these relate to unlawful processing or publication of personal data.

3.4 Government and Regulatory Requests
Regulatory authorities may request removal of unlawful or harmful content, subject to
constitutional safeguards, particularly the right to freedom of expression under Section 39
of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

4. Procedure for Takedown Requests
Although platform-specific, a valid takedown request typically includes:

• Identification of the protected work or offending content;
• The precise location (URL) of the material;
• The legal basis for the complaint;
• A statement of good faith belief;
• Contact details of the complainant.

Platforms may remove the content, request further information, or reject the notice where
it is insufficiently substantiated.

5. Responsibilities of Internet Service Providers (ISPs)
The Copyright Act, 2022 introduces defined obligations for ISPs, shifting them from purely
passive conduits to regulated intermediaries within the copyright ecosystem.

5.1 Obligation to Act on Infringement Notices
ISPs are required to:

• Receive and process valid infringement notices;
• Act expeditiously to remove or disable access to infringing content.

Failure to act may expose the ISP to liability.

5.2 Notice-and-Takedown Procedure (Section 57)
The Act contemplates a structured process whereby:

• A rights holder issues a notice of infringement;
• The ISP notifies the alleged infringer (subscriber/user);
• The ISP may remove or disable access to the content;
• A counter-notice mechanism may be invoked by the user.

This framework seeks to balance enforcement with procedural fairness.

5.3 Safe Harbour Protection (Section 54)
ISPs benefit from limited liability where they:

• Act expeditiously upon receiving notice;
• Lack actual knowledge of infringement;
• Do not derive direct financial benefit from infringing activity where they have

control.
Compliance with these conditions is essential to maintaining immunity from damages.

5.4 Repeat Infringer Policy (Section 61)
ISPs are required to adopt and implement policies for terminating accounts of repeat
infringers. This obligation introduces a preventative dimension to enforcement.

5.5 Cooperation with Regulatory Authorities
ISPs must cooperate with the Nigerian Copyright Commission in:

• Investigations;
• Enforcement actions;
• Compliance monitoring.

6. Key Challenges
6.1 Fragmented Legal Framework

The absence of a unified intermediary liability regime creates uncertainty and inconsistent
enforcement outcomes.

6.2 Risk of Abuse
Takedown mechanisms may be weaponised to suppress lawful expression, including
journalism and political speech.

6.3 Jurisdictional Constraints
Most major platforms operate in Nigerian jurisdiction, limiting direct regulatory control and
making enforcement dependent on foreign corporate policies.

6.4 Limited Procedural Safeguards
There is often inadequate transparency, weak counter-notice systems, and limited avenues
for appeal.

7. Recommendations
Nigeria should adopt a comprehensive intermediary liability framework incorporating:

• A codified notice-and-takedown system;
• Clear safe harbour provisions;
• Robust counter-notice and appeal mechanisms;
• Defined timelines for compliance;
• Strong constitutional safeguards to protect freedom of expression.

8. Conclusion
Takedown notices have become an essential tool in Nigeria’s digital regulatory landscape.
However, their effectiveness is constrained by structural and procedural deficiencies.

While the Copyright Act, 2022 represents a significant step forward, a more coherent and
unified framework is required to balance the rights of creators, intermediaries, and users.

Ultimately, sustainable digital governance in Nigeria must align enforcement mechanisms
with constitutional protections, ensuring that the regulation of online content does not
come at the expense of fundamental freedoms.