AN EXAMINATION OF THE NIGERIAN COPYRIGHT ACT IN THE LIGHT OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES BY AWUESE LEONTINA IORCHOR.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Copyright and technology have a long and intertwined history during which both have felt their influence on each other. Throughout history, copyright laws have had to adapt to the new methods that technological innovation manage to develop for the production and dissemination of copyrighted works. It has been hard, if not impossible, for the law to predict in which way innovation would turn as well as what the impact of new technology might be in the world of copyright. These two conditions which have also been described as legal delay and legal uncertainty have a profound impact on copyright law.

 Over time the right of control over a piece of work given to creators of artistic works have changed. Modern national copyright legislation has evolved with different influences throughout history. However, as the world continued to develop and cross-border activity flourished, national copyright legislation was not sufficient to govern what had become a global concern. Countries began to realize that national legislation was not enough to cover the new aspects of copyright that were fast becoming the current trends. International legislation was therefore resorted to and was developed over time to cover the new aspects of copyright which was largely influenced by technology.

Certain conventions such as the Berne Convention ( which is the most important international legislation with regards to Copyright) have influenced the growth of various national laws.

The word copyright means the exclusive legal right, given to an originator or an assignee to print, publish, perform, film, or record literary, artistic, or musical material, and to authorize others to do the same. The Black’s Law Dictionary further defines copyright to mean the right to copy: specifically a property right in an original work of authorship (including literary, musical, dramatic, choreographic, pictorial, graphic, sculptural, and architectural works; motion pictures and other audiovisual works; and sound recordings) fixed in any tangible medium of expression, giving the holder the exclusive right to reproduce, adapt, distribute, perform and display the work.

 Although the Copyright Act gives a vague meaning as to the term copyright, it can be deduced from the wordings of the Act that the meaning of copyright in Nigeria is limited to the scope of activities covered by the Act.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines technology as the branch of knowledge dealing with the practical applications of the mechanical arts and the applied sciences

1.1 TECHNOLOGY AND THE NIGERIAN COPYRIGHT ACT.

Copyright, in general, seeks to protect works created by persons through the use of their intellect. Section 1 of the Copyright Act provides the scope for copyright in Nigeria to the following;

1.    Literary works

2.    Musical works

3.    Artistic works

4.    Cinematograph films

5.    Sound recordings and

6.    Broadcasts

The wordings used in the act are clear and it is safe to say that the act does not contemplate any other addition to the scope other than the list of items already provided for.

According to Jeremy Phillips and Alison Firth., “intellectual property has both a colloquial and a legal connotation. The first refers to the product of the exercise of the human brain – the property that comes from the intellect, such as ideas, inventions, and poems. The other, which is a legal construct, refers to a legal description of the rights which a person enjoys over a product of the mind”.

Suffice it to say that the mere fact that something was created from a person’s intellect or as a result of a person’s creativity does not automatically give the person protection over such invention or work.

Therefore, to claim full ownership over such work, such a person must take the required steps provided by the law to grant him exclusive rights over it.

The copyright Act provides in Sections2, 3, 4 the conferment of this right on owners.

A mere glance at section 1 of the Act may give a reader the impression that the Copyright Act did not contemplate computer programs as part of its scope. However, section 51 (1) of the Act which is the interpretation section of the act, makes references to, cable programs, cinematograph films, computer programs e.t.c   In fact, computer programs are listed as part of the scope covered by ‘literary work” as defined by the Act... It provides;

“Literary work includes irrespective of literary quality, any of the following works or works similar thereto- …

d. computer programs”

 This provision among others brings to our awareness the fact that the Copyright Act contemplates technological inventions.

 It is also worthy to note that the advancement of technological development would have an effect on copyright. This is because, with the advancement of technology, there has been an increase in the infringement of copyright all over the world. Certain features such as ‘copy and paste’ features on our computers make it easy for works of authors to be reproduced without their consents and such works can be edited to look exactly like the original that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish an original work from the pirated version.

Free applications can be downloaded from the internet that will get around most measures employed to secure the digital content from being copied. There are also many applications that will connect home computers to peer networks that give them access to find and share virtually limitless content directly with other internet users without the need for any central web service. This has had a profound and obvious impact on the rights of copyright holders, the governing laws and their jurisdictions as well as the general public. 

Technology has also provided ways to checkmate the infringement of copyright works especially literary works. Certain applications have been developed with time to check works that have been pirated. In a way, this has helped to cushion the adverse effect technology had in the area of literary works.

As technology continues to advance, the methods and ease through which copyright infringement is effected are becoming of more concern than the infringement itself because the means to copy protected works as mentioned previously are cheap and easily available. The printing press as the pioneer of technology used for the mass reproduction of works was never a concern because it was an expensive technology that was accessible to very few people and hence infringement through it was easy to control. In this information age, however, millions of people now have the ability to not only mass copy but to also distribute digitized works through computers and the networks that connect them. 

The Copyright Act, however, confers upon the author of an original work the exclusive rights to reproduce, prepare derivatives, distribute, perform and publicly display their works. However, this protection afforded by the law should not be understood to be solely in the interests of the artist. The rights granted to the producers of original works serve to provide an incentive for their continued creative efforts that will in turn enrich and ultimately benefit society.

Exceptions to copyright infringement have also had to develop with technology in order to maintain the balance needed for sustained technical innovation. Section 6 of the Copyright Act provides a list of exceptions to the rule of copyright. Some of these exceptions include reproduction by libraries, transfer of legitimate copies of phonograms, certain performances and displays, secondary transmissions, etc.

New technology, however, often brings the necessity to broaden the scope of allowed infringements with it.  The internet, for example, by the very nature of its internal mechanics is a vast duplicating platform. In reality, when you view a webpage, your computer actually downloads a copy of the webpage and not the original and, therefore, if an exception was not made for its workings, it would not be possible for it to function without it violating the basics of copyright law and it would bring the greatest innovation of modern times to a grinding halt.

 1.2 CONCLUSION

While we acknowledge the provisions of the Copyright Act with regards to technological advances, it is also obvious that the Act needs to be amended to cover the growing technological advances we have in Nigeria. More provisions should be included particularly in respect to the scope of copyright and the exceptions to the copyright rule

1.3 REFERENCES

1.  Copyright Act CAP C28 LFN 2004.

2. The Berne Convention.

3. Jeremy Phillips & Alison Firth, Introduction to Intellectual Property Law, 3rd ed., (London, Butterworths, 1995) p. 3.

4. J.O Asein Nigerian Copyright Law & Practice 2015.

5.. https://www.academia.edu/37567515/The_Effect_of_Technology_on_Copyright