Introduction

Creativity is no longer a side conversation in Nigeria; it is a major economic driver. From music and film to digital content, fashion, and visual arts, creative works now sit at the intersection of culture, commerce, and investment. As the sector grows, so does the need for legal structures that protect creators, reassure investors, and regulate exploitation. Nigeria, like many jurisdictions, has enacted laws to govern the creative and entertainment space, with the intention of protecting creators, consumers, investors, and other stakeholders alike.

Beyond statutes, contracts remain the primary vehicle through which parties structure their relationships. Nigerian courts have consistently affirmed that parties are bound by the terms of their agreements, provided such terms are not inconsistent with the law. Where rights are breached—whether contractual or statutory—the law provides remedies. In theory, therefore, the framework for protecting creators is robust. In practice, however, the problem is rarely the absence of law or contracts; it is enforcement. Piracy persists, contractual breaches are commonplace, and litigation is often slow, expensive, and commercially draining. These realities weaken creators’ confidence and, more importantly, discourage structured investment into the creative economy.

Contracts: Where Enforcement Begins—and Often Fails

In an era where creative output is increasingly commercialised, it is surprising that many creators still enter work arrangements without clear, professionally drafted agreements. A well-drafted contract clarifies ownership, revenue sharing, royalties, duration, and exit rights, and significantly reduces enforcement disputes. Conversely, vague or informal arrangements leave parties relying on implied terms and goodwill, both of which offer limited protection when disputes arise.

A recurring issue in creative contracting is the failure to clearly define ownership and royalty structures. This omission often leads to disputes over intellectual property, revenue entitlement, and control of works long after the relationship has ended. Equally problematic are so-called “backdoor agreements” and one-sided standard form contracts imposed by dominant industry players. These agreements may technically be valid but are structured to shift risk almost entirely onto creators, leaving them with limited bargaining power and little room to enforce their rights.

Even where contracts are properly drafted, enforcement remains a challenge. Delays in litigation, cost of legal representation, evidentiary burdens, and power imbalances between parties often mean that creators abandon valid claims. In effect, contractual rights exist on paper but are commercially difficult to vindicate.

Compliance: The Silent Weak Link

Nigeria has several regulatory and administrative bodies tasked with protecting and regulating creative works. These include the Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC), the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), and approved collecting management organisations. These institutions are designed to support enforcement through registration, licensing, monitoring, and rights administration.[3]

However, compliance remains weak on both sides. Many creators are unaware of registration requirements, collective management structures, or reporting mechanisms that could strengthen their enforcement position.[4] On the institutional side, enforcement agencies are often under-resourced and insufficiently accountable, resulting in inconsistent monitoring and limited deterrence against infringement.[5] Creativity may be artistic in nature, but it is also a commercial asset. Without a stronger compliance culture, neither creators nor investors can fully benefit from the value chain.

Why Court-Based Enforcement Is Often Unrealistic

Litigation has traditionally been the default mechanism for enforcing rights, but it is ill-suited to the realities of the creative industry. Despite reforms such as small claims procedures and specialised court divisions, court processes remain slow and adversarial.[9] Creative disputes often require urgent intervention—particularly in cases involving royalties, ongoing exploitation, or reputational harm. Prolonged litigation can outlive the commercial value of the work in dispute.

Additionally, public court proceedings may expose sensitive commercial information and damage business relationships. For creators whose careers depend on collaboration, reputation, and public perception, a legal victory may still result in long-term commercial loss.[10]

The Case for ADR in Creative Disputes

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) offers a more practical and commercially sensitive approach to enforcing creators’ rights. Mediation and arbitration allow parties to resolve disputes confidentially, efficiently, and with greater control over outcomes. In a relationship-driven industry, ADR preserves professional relationships while still providing enforceable outcomes.

ADR is particularly suited to creative disputes because of its flexibility. Parties can appoint neutrals with industry expertise, agree on timelines, and craft remedies that go beyond monetary compensation. Rather than a compromise, ADR represents a strategic enforcement tool that aligns legal protection with commercial realities.

Structuring Creative Deals with ADR in Mind

Effective enforcement begins at the contracting stage. Creative agreements should incorporate clear dispute resolution clauses that prioritise negotiation and mediation before escalation to arbitration or litigation. ADR mechanisms should also be considered during contract performance and not only after disputes arise. By embedding ADR into the lifecycle of creative transactions, parties create a predictable and investor-friendly framework for resolving conflict.

Recommendations

Strengthening enforcement in the creative sector requires a shift in mindset rather than wholesale legal reform. Creators must take contracting seriously and engage legal advice early, particularly on ownership, royalties, and dispute resolution. Regulatory agencies should adopt more transparent, technology-driven monitoring systems and actively promote ADR as a first-line enforcement mechanism. Investors and platforms, on their part, should prioritise fair contracting and compliance as part of risk management. Ultimately, a culture that treats creativity as both art and business will better protect rights, attract investment, and sustain growth.

Conclusion

Nigeria’s creative industry stands at a critical point. The laws exist, contracts are commonplace, and talent is abundant. What remains is the ability to enforce rights in a manner that is timely, commercial, and sustainable. By strengthening contracts, improving compliance, and embracing ADR, creators can move from paper rights to practical protection, and the industry can evolve into a truly investible ecosystem.

References

1. Copyright Act, 2022 (Nigeria). Provides statutory protection for literary, musical, artistic, audiovisual works, sound recordings and broadcasts, including civil and criminal remedies for infringement.
2. G. Rivers State v. A.G. Akwa Ibom State (2011) 8 NWLR (Pt.1248) 31. Authority on the sanctity of contracts and the binding nature of agreements freely entered into by parties.
3. Best (Nig.) Ltd v. Blackwood Hodge (Nig.) Ltd (2011) 5 NWLR (Pt.1239) 95.
   Reaffirms the principle that courts will not rewrite contracts for parties.
4. B.N. Ltd v. Ozigi (1994) 3 NWLR (Pt.333) 385. On freedom of contract and the enforceability of contractual obligations.
5. Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) – Establishment and enforcement powers under the Copyright Act, 2022.
6. National Film and Video Censors Board Act, Cap N40, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004. Regulates film and video content distribution in Nigeria.
7. Nigerian Broadcasting Commission Act, Cap N11, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.
   Governs broadcasting standards, licensing, and content regulation.
8. Arbitration and Mediation Act, 2023 (Nigeria). Provides the modern legal framework for arbitration and mediation in Nigeria and supports the enforceability of ADR outcomes.
9. Small Claims Court Laws and Practice Directions (Lagos State and other jurisdictions).
   Introduced to reduce cost and delay in litigation, though with limited applicability to complex creative disputes.
10. UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (as adopted in Nigeria).
    Influences arbitration practice and enforcement standards applicable to commercial and creative disputes.

Martha Osarugue Obakpolor is a results-driven legal practitioner and the Principal Partner of McCharis Legal Consult. She has built a reputation for providing strategic legal solutions in corporate and commercial transactions, compliance, ADR, and advisory services. With experience advising businesses, investors, and creatives, Martha is recognized for her ability to simplify complex legal issues, manage risk, and protect client interests while supporting sustainable growth.