Posts in category: Blog

IPTLC: Good day sir, can you please introduce yourself?

TOMI: My name is Kolawole Tomi, a co-founder and CEO at Vinsighte Technology, I’m a final year medical student of the University of Ibadan. Also, I’m an entrepreneur and a digital health technologist. I love sport and I’m a Chelsea fan, I watch football, boxing and Basketball.

IPTLC: It’s such an honour to meet you. You mentioned in your introduction that you co-founded Vinsighte Technology, tell us about Vinsighte Technology.

TOMI: Vinsighte basically, is a digital world venture which uses technology to aide those who are visually impaired to be able to read and navigate their environment independently. What we did is that we developed an artificial intelligence software that reads to visually impaired persons or simply put it helps blind people to read. As at now, we have about 1000 visually impaired users, and we’ve been able to generate revenue of over $30000 in the past 12 to 16 months.

IPTLC: Wow, you’re doing an amazing work over there! We truly need more people like you in our world. I am particularly fascinated by the revenue part. Who came up with such a brilliant Idea?

TOMI: I did. In 2018.

IPTLC: I can safely say that I am interviewing a great man. Look Mama, I made it!!! So what was the process like? Tedious? Below what you expected? Or just as you envisaged it would be?

TOMI: Actually, the process was not easy, it took us about two years to develop the final product that we put into the market. It was however a whole lot of work as it is not a technology that is so easy like that; we had to develop artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms. The technology was also not a familiar one in Africa.

IPTLC: 2 years? That’s a pretty long time. I thought since the idea was already on ground, it wouldn’t take more than a few months to execute. I really do appreciate the resilience and determination you and your team put into this, its highly commendable.

TOMI: We have prototypes that we were piloting and testing for those two years and we were making money from, but because of the delicate nature of the kind of product we are trying to release into the market for blind persons, we could not just launch like that until we ensure that our product was 100% so that’s why it took two years. Initially we were building hardware but had to switch to software at a point. So, it was a whole lot work to ensure that we are trying to bring out something perfect. Plus, it was not a familiar or an easy kind of technology so we had to be extremely careful, and that’s why it took that long. Eventually all paid off and the good thing is that before we launch, we were able to make money from what we had and partnership.

IPTLC: Considering the amount of work, you’ve expended on this great invention, where do you see the company in 5 to 10 years?

TOMI: Well, I see us being a massive company, a global brand in 5 to 10 years from now. But the funniest thing is we may not be with the name Vinsighte because we might have changed our mode of operation as well as a bit of our market to be able to expand and reach out to more people. As a group, I see us being able to reach out to various people not just the visually impaired, other market segments and I see us creating technology products that we can use in other spaces like finance and the likes because our goal is to be a constant developing and innovative company that solves variant problems within the african demography.

IPTLC: Do you know what Intellectual Property is and if you do, how do you think IP can help build your company into a stronger, resilient and more competitive one, is there a way you think IP can help you generate more revenue?

TOMI: Basically, our IP is structured on our technology, and that IP is the new concept and innovation we are able to develop around our technology, making it unique from other people’s own. It is more structured on the algorithms that we wrote to build our technology that’s where our IP is embedded. The truth is in Africa really, IP doesn’t really help to generate revenue, as much as in the developed countries. For instance, whenever Microsoft develops a new kind of algorithm or technological structure, for like 3 to 5 years they have exclusive right on it and nobody gets to use it and when people want to start using it, they start paying what is known as royalties. But in a place like Nigeria, people hardly make any form of revenue or profit from IP. We just register rights for registration sake really, because the IP regulations are not so strong. However, its always preferable to register any IPR for in case somebody comes to say why are you doing what I’ve already done and things like that. We actually have a few IP but we didn’t really register them. But in the long run especially when you’re building a global product, IP can be very important.

IPTLC: It is interesting to know you have knowledge of what IP is. And as you’ve rightly said, Nigeria is a little backward when it comes to Intellectual Property. Notwithstanding, it is important to register your rights in your works. There are different rules guiding the protection IP rights in various countries. And considering the fact that you’re going beyond the shores of Nigeria to promote your invention and generate funds for the production, it is advisable to patent your invention. You can also trademark your logo as well as the name of your product. There different rights embedded in the invention which can come in handy now and in the future. This rights although intangible are invaluable. Finally ,it is my pleasure to tell you also that the Intellectual Property and Technology Law Club is always available for any advice or information on IP. We look forward to hearing from you soon!
Thank you so much for your time, it’s been an honour interviewing you and sharing your story on our platform. We wish you greater success.

TOMI: Thank you…It’s a great pleasure 🙇🏾

When I was 15, I was a staunch communist. I loved using the “Two Cows” concept to explain my ideology. I didn’t care that it was cliched. I loved Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, and then I’d come to love Lenin, the Bolsheviks, and the sound of Russian philosophers. I adored Nikolai Gogol, and Leo Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoyevsky. I’m still a sucker for Dostoyevsky.

At the height of my cynicism, I felt that everything meant for the good of man, or for God, should be free. So, I would occasionally rant about how religious leaders sold books. And yes, there was a time when GMusicPlus didn’t put up gospel songs for free again. Trust me, I cancelled them immediately. I mean, why should you hoard inspirational songs? Freely you have received, freely give, innit?

I guess I wasn’t the only one caught up in that line of thinking. More often than not, our subconscious (despite not being sent on an errand by anybody) pushes us to mark some items as public and free. In other words, we tend to see certain creative works as not possibly having or even needing copyright protection. If “see finish” had an IP application, this would be it.

For example, who cares that the copyright to the Happy Birthday song y’all throw around is worth US$5 million? Let’s just sing it, drink booze, and do one or two. YOLO.

The result of intellectual see finish is that you think you can claim a creativity that’s not yours, The English man likes to complicate everything with grammar so he calls this act plagiarism. Now, that doesn’t sound strange, does it? What’s strange is how much we plagiarize without even realizing. And plagiarism isn’t restricted to dissertations and assignments, you know. Some of you even plagiarize jokes. Well, we know they are plagiarized anyway – your sense of humor that can’t even shine in 1am darkness. Lol.

Plagiarism is the act of stealing and lying at the same time. You take what does not belong to you and technically lie that it’s yours. You don’t need to explicitly say that the stolen work belongs to you. As long as you don’t give the real owner(s) credit, you may as well be the reason Ajebo Hustlers sang “Barawo.”

Plagiarism is pervasive. By 2023, I predict that WIPO will announce that the world suffers from a plagiarism pandemic. Let’s talk academic plagiarism for a while, shall we? You’ll relate well with that one I presume.

A study by McCabe involving 70,000 students in 24 United States high schools revealed that about 95% of these students admitted that they had engaged in some form of cheating (including copying on assessments and plagiarism). 58% of them didn’t mince words – they accepted that they plagiarized. In context, those are figures from folks below the age of 18. Now, let’s talk big guns. A study revealed that 85% of college students believe that plagiarism is necessary. After all, they won’t get jobs without a little cheating here and there. Worse still, a US News and World Report Survey made it clear that 90% of students “didn’t think they would get caught for plagiarism.” Sounds like you, Shalewa, don’t it?

Asides from academic circles, there have been countless other examples of plagiarism. About four years ago, the incumbent President of Ghana Nana Akuffo Addo plagiarized speeches by George W. Bush and Bill Clinton in his inaugural address. Thankfully, he replaced Americans with Ghanaians. He couldn’t get any more thoughtful than that.

There’s another president who has been involved in some form of plagiarism. No, not his WAEC result. Even that wasn’t plagiarism, just pure fraud. Anyways, in 2016, a certain BuBu of Aso Villa was reported to have plagiarized two paragraphs from a speech made by Barack Obama. Funny enough, the speech was to launch his “Change Begins with Me” project, an initiative targeted at stopping civil servants from collecting bribes, among many other commendable white elephant initiatives.

Just recently, news broke accusing the renowned RCCG Praise Team of plagiarizing an entire song and adding it to their album. They are currently said to be facing a ₦350 million copyright infringement suit. In a closely related event in 2004, a preacher at a mega religious institution resigned his position after acknowledging that he had plagiarized several sermons over the course of his active ministry.

An Indian beauty queen, Vasuki Sunkavalli, was also mudded a few years ago after she plagiarized seven tweets from a Wall Street Journal columnist. That’s proof that you can plagiarize social media content, and further proof that it’s okay to stick to posting slay pictures if you don’t have hot intelligent takes.

What do we learn from all these stories? A vast majority of people who have been indicted of plagiarism either said they weren’t aware that such practices are wrong, or that they thought that such materials could be used without permission or risking an ethical/legal issue. Intellectual see finish with the audacity of Zlatan Ibrahimovich. We’ll correct that in a few paragraphs.

Basically, every original picture, social media post, literary piece, musical combination is protected by copyright once it is expressed in tangible form (something you can either see, listen to, touch or share). A plagiarized content could also be protected by a trademark. So, copying someone’s work or mark may amount to both copyright infringement or trademark infringement and plagiarism.

What then is the difference between infringement and plagiarism?

Well, plagiarism is broader than copyright and trademark infringement primarily because you can also plagiarize creativity that cannot enjoy such IP protections. For example, copyright protection does not extend to ideas but you can plagiarize an idea. So, if you copy a movie plot, change character names, and even change some sequence, you’re plagiarizing. You can plagiarize research ideas, examination responses, and even a lecture plan.

Can you go to jail for plagiarism?

I’m glad you ask the right questions, Nnamdi. As it stands, you can’t end up in any Nigerian prison for plagiarism. That’s because plagiarism isn’t even considered a crime in any law. But most academic institutions consider it an offence and take internal punitive measures. In other cases, you may sue for copyright infringement or trademark infringement instead, where it applies. However, if someone plagiarizes your idea, chances are that they wouldn’t probably be held accountable for their wrongdoing. Plagiarism, as serious as it is, appears to be reduced to a mere ethical issue, a plague that should be avoided only if your conscience pricks you.

Plagiarism just like every act of copyright infringement denies creatives of the moral and economic rights to their original ideas and products. Whether you’re a millennial or Gen-Zer, you’re the creative future of the nation you identify with. You simply can’t mess it up by suppressing the amazing ideas you have built up and instead copying existing ideas you should challenge with newer concepts.

Here’s the final charge: Be original, and where you can’t, be honest. No one ever died of acknowledging you cited a source. Your girlfriend won’t love you less if you crack a joke and tell her you got it from Akpors Jokes on Facebook. Cite sources of your pickup lines too. And trust that IPTLC is ready to stand with you.**

*Fun Fact: Many countries celebrate National Awkward Moments Day and National Lazy Day, but there is yet no National Anti-Plagiarism Day.
**Only as it concerns knowing about, monetizing and protecting your intellectual property rights.

Sources

1. https://skillscouter.com/plagiarism-statistics/
2. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ghana-politics-idUSKBN14S0VD
3. https://fij.ng/article/rccg-facing-n350m-lawsuit-over-copyright-infringement-by-national-praise-team/
4. https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/news/local/pastor-of-huge-nc-church-resigns-admits-he-plagiarized-sermons/83-403963883
5. https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/210515-nigerias-president-buhari-in-fresh-plagiarism-scandal-of-obamas-speech.html

Author
Olamilekan Adebanjo is a Canadian stuck in a Nigeria by birth. He tries to convince himself everyday that he is a law student of the University of Ibadan. Intellectual Property subjects are the only articles he writes for free. No much talk, here’s a link to his abandoned LinkedIn (no pun intended) if you have a crush: https://www.linkedin.com/in/olamilekan-adebanjo-9062a9176

Omosexy was up to something very profitable in the days post-Valentine. Imagine being in Lagos on Sunday, and booking the next flight to Garki, Abuja on Monday, laced with the regular Cash Madam conventionalities. Who would blame her? She understands more than most of us that registering for anything online in Nigeria asides from JAMB is the cheapest way to salty tears.

Signed, sealed, delivered! Tuesday morning, Instagram must hear of this. She pumps up three IG posts. The first signals that something is about to hit us. The next, something more of the aspire to misfire vibe (trust Nigerians to load the comments with love, fire, and “do giveaway”). And finally, the big deal – Dr. Omotola Jalade-Ekeinde announces that she has trademarked the name “Omotola.”

In split seconds, fans by the name Omotola were scared for themselves. And you could see them wondering in the comments sections what this development meant for their future. Change of name? New WAEC Certificates? Three court affidavits and five passport photographs, again? Those boyfriends who had promised their lovers that any other Omotola was a counterfeit were in the mud too. Another own goal against the patriarchy. Sigh.

There have been so many questions about what this novel event means for trademark law and names in Nigeria. We’re here to break down the legalese for the average Nigerian, student or otherwise.

So, here’s it.

Omotola Jalade-Ekeinde, MFR recently registered a trademark for her first name. However, the Trademark Database we could access didn’t have info beyond December 2020 (COVID-19 clogging the updates, apparently. Asides from this inefficiency, the Nigerian government is doing well). But from the little we can glean from the Nollywood actress, the trademark for “Omotola” falls under Class 41.

Now, there’s a lot to say here. And we’ll leave no one behind. Trademarks are intellectual property assets that cover the exclusive rights of a person or entity to a design, symbol, phrase, or word. Generally, trademarks exist with the intention of connecting the marks to a brand for commercial purposes.

That way, instead of a fairly-bitten apple reminding you of Adam and Eve, you’d rather imagine what to expect from the iPhone 13. And when someone mentions the name “IBM,” you’ll think of one of the world’s largest tech companies instead of how you couldn’t remember the full meaning during Primary 6 common entrance (you still can’t remember the full meaning, yeah? No hard feelings, just make sure you take Junior to a secondary school where they teach Computer).

Nowhere in the world does trademarks come on a platter of gold. There are a couple or more requirements to fulfil. First, it must be distinctive. A trademark shouldn’t expressly describe its brand. For instance, Screens can’t be a trademarked name for a company that produces TVs and Monitors.

In addition, the trademark must be used in commerce. There must be a use for the name either for a product or a service rendered.

Nigerian laws also prevent you from registering a mark that runs contrary to public policy and morality. If your guess is good as mine, you probably can’t trademark a brand name that speaks ill of cattle and bandits since they run contrary to Nigeria’s public policy. Follow peace with every of God’s creation, especially animals.

Moving on, trademark have classes. According to a classification system called the Nice International System of Classification, you can register your trademark in a specific group or area of commerce. There are 45 of them, ranging from chemical goods to legal services.

Back to your WCW. Her trademarked name actually is a service mark. That’s because it falls under Class 41 which covers educational and training services, entertainment, recreational, cultural, literary, and sporting services. It’s plenty, innit?

Well, the implication of this action is that no one can engage in commercial activity in any of these industries. By extension, you can’t name a movie by a title having any bearing to “Omotola.” You can’t have a stage name related to “Omotola.” Neither can a media house, educational or cultural agency go by the name “Omotola” except they are connected to Omotola Jalade-Ekeinde, that is.

You can’t even own a domain name with the trademarked identity; that will amount to cybersquatting. But there’s no problem if your birth certificate carries Omotola; we doubt you are capable of creating a confusion with the famous actress, in form and in substance.

Omotola is probably the first Nigerian celebrity to trademark her name, as far as we know. In the US, there’s a long list of professional entertainers who’ve got their names trademark – Morgan Freeman, Meryl Streep, Kylie Jenner, Beyonce, Jay-Z and the entire Carter family. This action makes big business sense because entertainers can prevent everyone else from using it across these industries. For Omotola, she can wake up one morning and decide to open Omotola Film Studios or Omotola Tutorial Centre or even Omotola Zoo & Museum. She will still be within her limits.

Can you trademark your own name?

We must clarify here that not everyone can get away with Omotola’s actions. The primary reason we believe her name was granted was based on the name’s popularity and “uniqueness.” Any random mention of the name Omotola in Nigeria would naturally create an impression of the actress. So, it makes her trademark application for the name quite easy.

By the way, we think Omosexy would’ve made much more sense as it is more unique. Apparently, the actress claimed in an Instagram comment to her post that trademarking “Omosexy” is in the works but according to her, “the Nigerian Govt is scared of an Omosexy name not sure why.”

But for you, Tunde, your name is scattered all over the place; everybody who knows you has three other “Tundes” in their life (if we add Tunde Ednut, that makes four, lol). The same goes for Michael, Favour, Amaka, Ahmed, and especially Ife (there’s an Ife within 100 metres of your location, we can bet our life savings). No one can reasonably connect the name exclusively to you.

What’s more? Your name is not even connected to anything capable of bringing in commercial value (there are a lot of us on this table, so hold back those tears).

However, once your name gains sufficient popularity in relation to a service or becomes attached to a brand, you can go ahead to trademark your name. Until then, keep telling people to call you Shegz or BisolaBaby and be wondering why you haven’t blown.

Disclaimer: This is not intended to serve as legal advice. Kindly contact a qualified legal professional for advice. Also, the use of names and events are purely fictional and not targeted at specific persons.

P.S. And yeah, we didn’t see Omotola travel from Lagos to Abuja but story no dey sweet without jara.

Oloture – A Breaking Point for Copyright Claims in Nigeria’s Movie Industry

If we’re keeping it a buck, the past three years have not only brought multi-million naira grossing movies. But we’ve also seen the Nigerian movie industry at its peak – in terms of directing, cast, location, and proper budget-spending. And while we still have Chidinma the Village Water Fetcher and Alani Saheedi Adigunjale in their tens and hundreds, Nollywood is making considerable progress.

Then there’s Netflix, the world’s largest movie streaming service. While Netflix has been steadily stacking up Nigeria movies, Lionheart endeared most Nigerians to the subscription service. To this writer, the film was subpar for a Netflix Original. But it’s Nigerian, so yaaayy! We did it.

And then we have adaptations—the worst tasting substance since oatmeal. Every movie industry has had its fair share of the good, the terrible, and the ban-worthy. Except for Nigerian adaptations like Saworoide and Beast of No Nation being fairly remarkable, others like Half of a Yellow Sun didn’t give that orgasmic pleasure (Hopefully, Americanah will be worse, so we can finally legislate against impulsive adaptations).

And then we have Oloture, a movie that ticks all three boxes. It’s a great movie, but Netflix won’t let us know how much it grossed. Also, I feel Oloture is an adaptation of a literary project. If you find any of the information strange, sit still, we’ll crunch the data for you.

Immediately after the release of Oloture in October 2020, Tobore Ovuorie took to Twitter to lament how Mo Abudu, Ebony Life, and the film’s crew robbed her of copyright to the story behind the movie. It was 2020. We had seen enough clout and craze throughout the year, so not many of us took it seriously. Until Tobore threatened to introduce “legal steps.”

According to Tobore, she validly stated that she was the undercover journalist who took the dangerous initiative to tell the story of sexual exploitation and trafficking in Nigeria. ICYMI, Oloture tells the story of a journalist going undercover to expose human trafficking syndicates, the ills of the mafia, and the complicit status of Nigerian and foreign authorities.

To be fair, Oloture tells a verisimilitude of Tobore’s real-life story as captured within the print and online pages of Premium Times and Zam Chronicles. Who would have thought that a movie on such sensitive issues will turn out to be this controversial? Definitely not me.

Before you become judge, jury, and executioner based on those facts, let’s answer some legal questions.

Was Oloture merely inspired, or was it an adaptation?

WIPO generally understands adaptation in one of its many publications to be the “modification of a work to create another work.” With copious examples like adapting a novel to make a film. In Nigeria, an adaptation “means the modification of a pre-existing work from one genre of work to another and consists in altering the work within the same genre to make it suitable for different conditions of exploitations and may also involve altering the composition of the work.” (Copyright Act, Section 39[1])

For anyone who has read Inside Nigeria’s Ruthless Human Trafficking Mafia, you’d discover the journalistic piece narrates the idea behind what we watched behind our screens for 1 hour and 46 minutes. The main idea is the same: an undercover journalist goes to uncover a sexual trafficking mafia.

However, you can’t ignore the differences – the prostitution ring subplot, Chuks, how Oloture met the “Madam” etc. This form of adaptation is known in the literary world as “loose adaptation.” The central storyline is maintained, but several subplots are inserted for plot elongation or cinematographic effects.

These minor edits are a no-brainer – we all copy and paste assignments, so we know how well this works. Without a doubt, Oloture is an adaptation. Claims that it is a work of fiction is entirely fraudulent. The closing credit given to Tobore and the striking semblance between both pieces negates any arguments of a fictional nature.

Who owns the copyright to the story?

Now, this is a big deal. There’s a lot to say, really. First off, you don’t go on adapting a work without seeking permission from its copyright holder. However, the lines between the conflicting copyright claimers (Premium Times and Tobore Ovuorie) are quite blurry.

Nonetheless, Section 9(3) of the Copyright Act has been bursting bubble since the days of Jollof spaghetti. The entire section generally places copyright in the author but makes a very compelling exception.

It states that in instances where the author of a work publishes a piece during employment (notwithstanding if it’s a contract of service or an apprenticeship) for a newspaper or magazine, the copyright belongs to the newspaper or magazine.

However, the law limits the newspaper’s copyright claim only to the extent of publishing the work in that periodical. Outside the purposes of publishing the work in the periodical, the copyright automatically belongs to the author.

In Oloture’s case, Tobore was a freelance journalist before her employment contract with Premium Times in 2013, the investigation’s onset. According to Nigerian law, the employer-employee relationship between both parties makes the contract a contract of service. And that’s precisely what the Copyright Act recognizes.

If the law is anything to go by, as it should, the copyright for publishing and reproducing the work in Premium Times periodicals and Zam Chronicles belongs to Premium Times. However, beyond the reproduction of the work in a written investigative reporting format, all copyright belongs to Tobore Ovuorie. If no agreement exists to the contrary, which is highly doubtful, Tobore was the right party to seek permission from before EbonyLife made Oloture into a movie.

Does Tobore have a claim?

I’m tempted to say as sure as the heavens are far above the earth! However, there are so several factors to consider. First, is the movie sufficiently original to be an original piece on its own? The answer to this question may well be a resounding no. The movie fits together to be merely inspired by the journalistic work. From the orgy to the final stop at the outskirts of Lagos, so many parts were significantly reproduced.

Let’s add some case law drama before I sign out. In Daly v. Palmer, the US court laid down an ordinary-observer test to detect if an adaptation infringed on its original piece. The test outlines that if an ordinary man after watching the movie can have an “unmistakable impression” that it is a copy.

Lastly, in Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp v Zee Telefilms, the court held that if the presentation was entirely new, but the theme was the same, it will not suffice for an infringement.

Sadly, these are boxes Oloture didn’t tick. It made an “unmistakable impression” that the substance of the article was copied. Moreover, copyright permissions were gotten from the wrong person, technically. All these arguments tend to favour Tobore Ovuorie.

Regardless of the monetary benefits she’s been offered; she still has a claim as her work was not duly recognized in opening and closing credits. But won’t 5 million dollars be too much to ask? Well, that’s for the court to decide. Let’s pray and fast that this isn’t a typical Nigerian threat to take legal steps – otherwise na Supreme Court of Twitter go settle am las las! !

Author: IP Research Team

Copyright Protection for Text and Multimedia Messages over Social Media

The 21st Century came with a great deal of potential intellectual property issues. From patents for artificially intelligent machines to trademark licensing for transnational corporations, IP stands central to human interactions. Social media and its attendant instant messaging is also one of the best gifts of this age to mankind. According to recent statistics by DataReportal, 3.8 billion people actively use social media. That is approximately half of the world’s population and 63% of the world’s population old enough (13 years and above) to use social media. Apparently, with this multitude of people texting, tweeting and “captioning”, there cannot be a want of intellectual property concerns. Put perspective into proper perspective, are messages shared over WhatsApp, Messenger or Telegram, for example, copyright protected? Or do tweets and captions on the other hand enjoy copyright protection?

In the past centuries where personal letters were the main medium of communication, these letters enjoyed copyright protection as they fulfilled all requirements –they were intrinsically creative/original and were fixated. This rule is more complex than we imagine when social media is involved. The general rule for instant messaging is that there is a possibility of copyright protection provided the text, irrespective of how short, satisfies the presence of original content. The author of such text should normally hold the copyright but in instances where the originality of the text is conversational and dependent on response from the other party, it is proposed that copyright be jointly owned. By implication, the author(s) have the right to use, reproduce and gain commercial benefit. It is understood however that messaging occurs within apps and social media platforms and these platforms have Terms of Use or Privacy Policies which determine who owns copyright and how the content may be used.

WhatsApp, the third most used social media platform has a strict privacy policy that ensures security of conversations from third parties – including WhatsApp, and Facebook. In essence, WhatsApp determines that you own copyright to original texts you put out in a conversation or otherwise on a text status update and they will not be shared to others on WhatsApp or Facebook or third party apps and individuals. WhatsApp’s terms of service however provides that you grant them “a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicensable, and transferrable license to use, reproduce, distribute, create derivative works of, display… information that upload, submit, store, send or receive on or through our services”. Your fears are allayed as this legalese simply means that you grant WhatsApp limited rights to hold your content (text and non-text) for smooth running of WhatsApp operations like delivery up of your text and multimedia messages, putting up of your profile picture etc. With regards to Intellectual Property generally, WhatsApp frowns at the infringement of their intellectual property and those of other users. Infringers risks termination of their accounts. However, the general public can use or share your original texts under the fair use doctrine or where such is used with your permission.

The same rule for text messaging applies to Instagram and Facebook. Nevertheless, it is important to know that once you sign up for Facebook and Instagram’s services, you license to them basically all your right to text and multimedia content you post publicly (non-exclusively). This means that they do not claim ownership of your content (that’s indispensably yours) but you grant them permission to use it; a very wide permission. Instagram is owned by Facebook and Facebook’s Data Use Policy enables it to share your data with other companies that Facebook owns. Again, you are solely responsible for the content you put out on these platforms. It is against their terms of use for you to post content infringing another’s IPR (copyright or trademark). You could be asked to take down the offending content once an Intellectual Property Infringement report has been made. For repeat offenders, their accounts may be suspended. There is also a provision to report Intellectual Property Infringement on WhatsApp.

Author: Ibukun Adisa-Simon