Abstract

Ownership in the Nigerian music industry is widely misunderstood. Many artists assume that performing a song automatically confers full ownership. In reality, music rights are layered and often shared among songwriters, producers, performers, and record labels under the Copyright Act, 2022. While copyright typically vests in the creator at inception, contractual arrangements frequently alter this position.

This article examines the legal framework and industry practices governing music ownership in Nigeria, with particular emphasis on the interplay of overlapping rights. It argues that improved legal awareness and carefully negotiated agreements are essential for protecting artists and promoting fairness within the industry.

Introduction

Tunde had just signed his first record deal, and everything seemed to be falling into place. The label promised to finance studio sessions, promote his music, and amplify his reach. In return, though he paid little attention to the fine print, the contract granted the label ownership of the master recordings, while other rights remained subject to sharing arrangements with producers and songwriters.

One night, in a modest Lagos studio, Tunde recorded a song he believed would change his life. As the track gained traction, however, competing claims emerged. The producer asserted rights over the beat, the songwriter claimed ownership of the lyrics and melody, and the label maintained control over the master recording.

Confused, Tunde wondered: how could one song belong to so many people?

The answer lies in the dual nature of music ownership, where composition and sound recording are treated as distinct legal rights.

Legal Framework Governing Music Ownership in Nigeria

Music ownership in Nigeria is primarily governed by the Copyright Act, 2022, alongside general principles of contract law and judicial precedent. Under Section 28 of the Act, copyright initially vests in the creator of the work. However, Sections 30–32 recognise that these rights may be assigned or licensed through written agreements.

Nigerian courts have consistently upheld the sanctity of contracts in this regard, as illustrated in Orient Bank (Nig) Plc v. Bilante International Ltd (1997), reinforcing that negotiated terms will often determine the true locus of ownership.

The Dual Copyright Structure

The Copyright Act, 2022 establishes a dual structure for music rights:

• The Musical Composition
  This includes the lyrics and melody. Copyright initially vests in the author and confers exclusive rights such as reproduction, distribution, and public performance (Sections 2 and 11).
• The Sound Recording (Master)
  This refers to the recorded version of the song. Ownership typically vests in the producer or record label responsible for financing and producing the recording (Section 28), granting control over its commercial exploitation.

This bifurcation means that a single song may have multiple rights holders, each controlling different aspects of its use. As such, contractual agreements become the decisive tool for defining ownership, revenue sharing, and control.

Conclusion

The Copyright Act, 2022 makes it clear that music ownership in Nigeria is not absolute but fragmented. While creators enjoy initial rights, these rights are frequently reshaped by contractual arrangements.

Tunde’s experience reflects a broader industry reality: what appears to be a personal artistic achievement is, in law, a bundle of divisible rights. Performance alone does not equate to ownership.

Ultimately, the Nigerian music industry does not reward assumptions, it rewards clarity. Ownership, control, and long-term value are determined not by who sings the loudest, but by who negotiates the smartest.

When next you enjoy that melodious gbedu, remember: the contract, not the chorus, defines ownership.

References

• Copyright Act, 2022 (Nigeria)
• Orient Bank (Nig) Plc v. Bilante International Ltd (1997)
• Nigerian Copyright Commission Guidelines
• LawClan Nigeria (2024)