COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND PLAGIARISM

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT AND PLAGIARISM


credits: slideshare.net
With the recent brouhaha following Linda Ikeji’s blog being
temporarily shut down by Blogger, many writers/bloggers/online content marketers
are frantically praying searching for information regarding copyright
infringement in order to ensure the devil does not send a MrAyedee into
their life
they don’t run fowl of the law and also have their blogs shut
down. While copyright laws regarding the internet are well established in
foreign jurisdictions, in Nigeria we jus dey open eye, blogging just
blew up in Nigeria a little over 5 years ago. But you can always catch our blog
post on copyright
laws.
 
People tend to get a little
protective of their stuff because there are many unscrupulous people out there
who take content and pass it off as their own. Having done all that hard work
with none of the credit is totally not cool!

Copyright
infringement occurs when any person uses any of your work – no matter how small
it is – for any of his/her personal benefits irrespective of whether or not he
gives you the attribution, unless that person has a written permission from you
. Content could
be in many forms such as text, artwork, sound and video (including animations),
ideas, inventions or symbols.
Once your work is published – irrespective of
whether on paper or digital media – you own the sole rights to: use the work;
allow reuse; allow derivatives and allow others make profit from your work.
 If you are
the copyright holder
, it means that ONLY YOU are allowed to make copies
of the work and should you wish – others and only the ones to whom you give
written permission can use the work. At this point it is important to note that
the saying “because it’s posted on the
internet, then it’s free
” is totally misleading and untrue. 
credits- dearauthor.com
Plagiarism on the other hand is “the use of another’s
information, language, or writing, when done without proper acknowledgment of
the original source.” However, the critical element of it is the final part.
The one thing that ties all plagiarism together is going beyond merely
duplicating the work, but also not crediting the source and thus taking the
material for yourself. However, not all incidents of plagiarism are considered
copyright infringement. Plagiarizing works in the public domain, though
unethical, is not considered copyright infringement.
Plagiarism is an ethical concern that may have other elements
of intellectual property theft tied with it. Copyright infringement, on the
other hand, is illegal and carries with it potentially significant
consequences. Plagiarism can be avoided by providing attribution and giving credit,
copyright infringement cannot. So how can one be sure not to plagiarize or
infringe on another’s work? Simple: 

  • If you took the photo or created the graphic and are not
    subject to a Work For Hire agreement, then you own it. Taking another person’s
    image or graphic and giving them a “shout out,” linkback, or any other type of
    attribution does not negate copyright infringement. Copyright law gives the
    copyright holder the right to decide where their work is published and maybe
    they don’t want their work on your site, in your book, included in your
    newsletter or distributed to your social media network.
  • Ask people for the rights to use their work, it is either
    they say yes or no. It may be acceptable to use an image, as is, on your blog,
    but you may not have the right to use that same image in a paid newsletter,
    book, video or other type of work. Unless the image is in the public domain or
    you are the copyright holder, you have to consider the use(s) granted by the
    copyright holder or license. A copyright holder may be agreeable to certain
    uses but not to others. Also when you take part of a person’s written/published
    work, it is important that you write the reference properly in other to avoid
    plagiarism allegations. 
     

 Adedunmade Onibokun
@adedunmade
DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR FOR SOLDIERS/SERVICE MEN

DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR FOR SOLDIERS/SERVICE MEN

Credit- bioreports.net 

This blog post is the second of a
series relating to crimes and punishment under the Armed Forces Act, Cap C20, Laws
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). Last time, I wrote a piece on the
offence of Mutiny
under the Armed Forces Act

Scenario 1
Philip is in a big hurry to get to his interview, he has been invited by a
busy CEO to come in at 12, for a personal interview and he is stepping on the
accelerator, heading fast to Victoria island on the 3rd mainland bridge,  when suddenly, the commercial bus – driver in front of him makes an unexpected
swerve into his lane, he tries to avoid a collision, steps on his breaks and
drives straight into the Peugeot 206 on the left lane. Philips looks ahead at
the badly damaged 206 through his cracked windscreen and is quietly giving
thanks for being alive, when 4 kacki dressed soldiers jump out of the 206,
before he can say Jack Robinson, 2 soldiers are beside his window, one dishes
him a hot slap while the other drags him out through the window, Philip begins
to shake and stammer , he knows he is in big trouble.   
Scenario 2
Two area boys beat – up a soldier while others cheer in the Onitsha motor-park
because he slapped one of them who had earlier driven his commercial bus into
the soldier’s Toyota Camry,  he angrily speeds
off towards the barracks and 15 minutes later, two trucks carrying about 40
soldiers drive into the park, solders disembark quickly and  horse-whips begin to crack on the backs of any
and all bus drivers/park touts in the garage. 
Today’s post is on disorderly behaviour
among the ranks of the Armed forces or persons subject to service law (service
law means the Armed Forces Act and it includes the military, naval, or air-force
laws of any allied forces.  Members of
the armed forces are required to be of lawful and responsible behaviour always.
Incidents involving vandalism, street fighting and acts of public nuisance are strictly
under the purview of area boys and touts, not for our highly trained, highly
skilled and honourable service men. 
In the past, we have had instances
where soldiers behaved unruly in public, a recent incident happened on Ikorodu
road in Lagos where it was reported that soldiers burnt a Lagos owned BRT
commercial bus and allegedly beat a few BRT drivers/ members of the public,
though military authorities denied the involvement of soldiers in the mayhem.
If you have lived in Nigeria for a while, it’s kind of a default attitude to
life to stay out of the way of service men, there is an aura around them that
oozes “you don’t want to mess with me”, LOL. Especially, if you run into a
military convoy on the road with menacing looking solders holding machine guys,
swinging kobokos horse whips chasing you out of the way. 
Credit- Bellanaija.com 

Fighting, quarrelling and disorderly
behaviour is provided for under Section 55 of the Armed Forces Act, it states
that: A person subject to service law under the Act who –

  • Fights, quarrels or behaves in a disorderly manner with any other person,
    whether subject to service law under this Act or not, or

  • Uses threatening, abusive, insulting or provocative words or behavior
    likely to cause a disturbance,

Is guilty of an offence under this section and liable, on conviction by a
Court- Martial, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or any less
punishment provided by the Act. 
This must be an eye – opener for most
people, service men breaking the above mentioned law is not a new thing, ask
the danfo-drivers and motorists who have been victims of severe beatings and
bullying by service men. Though, i know sometimes the motorists could be at
fault, inflicting physical pain on them in my opinion is an abuse of power.
Next time, you happen to be around when another person is getting bullied or
beat-up by any service man, let them know they are in breach of the law. There are
always exceptions though, for example in instances where service men are
ordered to restore the peace during a riot or where jihadist and oil bunkering
thieves are being challenged, now that’s a different ball game altogether. 
 Adedunmade Onibokun, Esq
@adedunmade
Adedunmade is a legal practitioner in Lagos, Nigeria and publishes the
law blog “Legalnaija”.
MUTINY UNDER THE ARMED FORCES ACT

MUTINY UNDER THE ARMED FORCES ACT



Scenario
Its 4am at the military base in the northern part of Borno
state, the camp commander has just received intelligence that heavily armed
insurgents have been spotted advancing into a neighbouring town. The commander immediately
rallies the troops and orders an immediate assault on the convoy of insurgents.
However, several soldiers in the battalion refuse to engage the enemy because
they believe the insurgents have superior fire power and refuse to obey the commander’s
orders. Tempers flare, a brawl ensues among the troops and the commander is
shot at by a junior officer spear heading the conflict. The military police
have however calmed the situation and the officer who shot the pistol during
the brawl has been arrested and will be facing a Court-Martial.
THE LAW
This blog post is the first of a series relating to crimes
and punishment under the Armed Forces Act, Cap C20, Laws of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria (2004).  Currently, over 200
Military personnel are undergoing a Court-Martial for several offences including
mutiny, assault, misconduct and tampering with military property. Though some
are being tried for lesser offences, about 12 have been found guilty of the act
of mutiny and sentenced to life imprisonment, a punishment that was commuted
from the initial death sentence handed down for shooting at a vehicle conveying
their commander.
     

     Mutiny is provided for
under Section 52 of the Armed Forces Act. According to the law mutiny means a
combination between 2 persons who are subject to service law to

  • Overthrow
    or resist lawful authority in the Federation.
  • Disobey
    authority in such circumstances as to make the disobedience subversive of
    discipline, or with the object of avoiding any duty or service against, or in
    connection with operations against the enemy; or 
  • Impede
    the performance of any duty or service in the Federation or in any arm of
    service of the Armed Forces or in any force cooperating with the armed forces
    or in any part of the armed forces.
The law further provides in the same section that any person
who takes part in a mutiny involving the use of violence or the threat of the
use of violence or having as its object or one of its objects the refusal or
avoidance of any duty or service against, or in connection with operations
against the enemy, or the impeding of the performance of that duty or service
or anyone who incites other persons who are also subject to service law to take
part in a mutiny, whether actual or intended is guilty of an offence under the
law and liable on conviction by a Court-Martial to suffer death.
Furthermore, any person not falling under the above, who
takes part in a mutiny, or incites any person subject to service law to take
part in a mutiny, whether actual or intended is guilty of an offence and liable
on conviction to life in prison. 
Adedunmade Onibokun, Esq
@adedunmade  
WHO IS AFRAID OF BEING DEFAMED by Collins Arikor

WHO IS AFRAID OF BEING DEFAMED by Collins Arikor

Man hates (despises) the truth because it exposes him for what he is and it troubles what still remains of his conscience.”-Paul Washer.
Abiding by elements in the perceptual manifold, our country is in a bad-news default mode. In giving systematic judgements to daily events, each breaking of the sun brings us with yet another ‘new’ problem and issue to deal with, which sadly, we can’t seem to confront, thus, compounding our woes.
The grave situation of the Nigerian polity and the graver and darker consequential character awaiting its socio-political shorelines forecast by many regarding its guaranteed existence as an indivisible entity continue to hedge closer towards fruition. Political transactions, as of late have all contributed in no small account to the veritable stance that the country is more than fast sloping down the hill of crisis and meltdown. Yet, time after time, we have found it hard to boldly face and tackle our problems, not because we couldn’t do such or lacked the requisite will to do it, but because we are always afraid of rising up and facing our problems with the intent to at least frontally confront or fight them. Needless to say, corruption has found its strongest potency to deeply thrive in the Nigerian atmosphere. It is no longer news that politics and the rule of law are dead in Nigeria. In their place we now have blatant money laundering, large-scale looting, outright stealing and outrageous illegality. The befetting requisite appendage of the country would therefore be ‘The World Capital of Lawlessness’. Due process is now an alien and scare commodity in the country. At every yearly rating by Transparency International (TI), Nigeria finds herself ‘proudly’ jostling top positions with other corrupt countries in the world. Successive Governments of the day would boast of how far good and well they’ve been able to fight corruption, but the evident truth remains that their efforts can be compared to trying to stay clean in a muddy pool while engaged in fierce fighting with your staunch enemy. Enough being said about the grave situation of the Nigerian polity. But it certainly needs no saying, verification or validity that Nigeria is corrupt, and most Nigerians are corrupt. This clearly cannot amount to defamation.
The tort of defamation arises where an individual’s reputation or image is being tarnished by another. That is to say, where one person through the instrumentality of words uttered or words written reduces or ridicules the worth of another before right-thinking members of society, such person has committed the tortious  act known as defamation, and consequently has incurred some tortious liability on himself. The redress by law given to a defamed individual is awarding monetary damages to such defamed individual from the pockets of the defaulting party, in so much as such damages seek to restore the defamed party to his former high-ranking position and standing in society. However, surrounding factors come into play when accessing the claim that an individual has been defamed by another. That said, who then can be defamed? Of course, every member of the society can be defamed. For everybody has a right to protect his good name, whenever he feels his name is being dragged into the mud.
Thus, applying an objective and simple understanding of the tortious act of defamation through a psychological investigation to the overt manifestations of our leaders or as can be inferred from their implicit thought-processes, can it be said without a cloud of controversy that any person who therefore pronounces that our leaders are corrupt is defaming them? First of, who is afraid of being defamed? From earlier established findings, only the one who has an upright and unblemished reputation can be afraid of the reward of defamation hanging over his head. Where a leader has resorted to, after careful consideration, align himself with lawlessness and perversity, what reputation is there to protect when somebody else decides to point it out? Better put, what ‘good’ image and name is there to protect, starting from the Presidency, down to most of our Governors, Local Government Chairmen and Councillors? It is quite common knowledge a present-day Nigerian politician is incompatible with a good name and reputation. After leaving office, if a former public officer fails to be rich in falsely-acquired real estates and  looted wealth, I am sorry to say, that such official was outrightly stupid! To give an outstanding example, former Delta state Governor James Ibori, is currently serving jail term in the UK for money laundering committed while in office as Governor. Could the prosecuting lawyer in the Ibori case be said to have defamed Ibori when he called Ibori a common thief? 
The Abacha family were reported to have shamelessly declared that should the Nigerian government recover all their (Abacha’ family) stolen loot, they would never be as poor as Dangote! In the same unsavoury manner, Rt.Gen. T.Y Danjuma, a former military Chief of Staff ingloriously uttered, probably in a state of stupor, that he was so rich and was bereft of what to do with money! Perhaps, these people were prompted to make those declarations by that indifferent silence particular of the Nigerian arena. The disinterestedness of many Nigerians towards political happenstances has made political office in the country a ‘loot-as-you-like’ affair. Not surprisingly though, Nigerians are still living in silence as to the whereabouts of the fuel subsidy loot, the CBN’s missing #20 billion (or is it #10 billion, as they later admitted), the Aviation Ministry’s #225 million used for procuring bullet proof cars, the unaccounted-for amount realised from the Immigration Exam Scam, and many other similar scenarios of monumental sums missing from government coffers…meanwhile, millions of the half-interred Nigerian populace don’t even have the slightest intimation of where their next meal might come from. Could anybody who portrays this truth be then said to have defamed the ‘vested interests’ concerned?
Truthfully, however, there is no exclusivity to the fact that the Nigerian society is bipolarized into the corrupt few and docile majority. That of course, is coming on the heels of the glaringly-unfact that the country has sadly been balkanized along the lines of religious zealotry and bigotry. On many occasions than necessary, the high and mighty in society had exhibited acts which brazenly negate the rule of law, but all that could ever be gotten from Nigerians was silence. Would those who choose not to remain silent by pointing out such ‘vested interests’ then be said to have defamed such ‘vested interests’? Judge for yourself. The un-peculiarity and incoherence that characterizes the momumental corruption resident within public service in the country defies any attempt at adequate description or precise classification. But, this attempt at classifying the decay in Nigerian political office is achieved at the price of the over-simplified word: ‘corruption’. And in a vaguer perception, corruption in the country has gradually and consistently become purposive without purpose. The wide and unlimited realm of corruption in the country has now made it even difficult to mentally conceptualize the antinomy called corruption.        
The crux of this piece would chiefly then appear thus: since Providence had been at least gracious to hand down the natural law that, ‘reactions must follow actions’, it is only probable and conceivable that when some ‘high and mighty’ in the society choose to poison our spirits by engaging in irregular, illegal and unlawful acts, those of us who have chosen not to remain silent- not withholding our imperfections-will have no option than to spew up defamatory words (if they so view it). For one should not be afraid to spit out ‘poisoned’ words (and in the process, offend others), how much more when shit is forced into our mouths? He who has no skeleton in his cupboard would not be apprehensive at the mere mention of skeletons, and as such, should not be afraid of being defamed.