A Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja, has ruled that it is obligatory for all hoteliers to seek authorization from copyright owners if they desire to exploit such works in their business.
The ruling followed attempts by certain users of copyright works to stop Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) from licensing them. The attempts fell flat in their faces in the various court rooms across the nation.
One of such attempts was in the case of the Bolton White Hotels, Johnwood Hotels Limited and Bolton Apartment vs Musical Copyright Society Nigeria Ltd/Gte (MCSN) in which the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, presided over by Honourable Justice Emeka Nwite, ruled that the action was entirely incompetent and it was accordingly dismissed.
The Applicants, Bolton White Hotels, Johnwood Hotels Limited and Bolton White Apartments through Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/1840/2024 had obtained an interim order preventing MCSN from licensing them for use of musical works and sound recording in their hotels.
Plaintiff had asked the Court to restrain MCSN whether by itself, servants, privies, successor- in- title, or any one or organization/agency howsoever acting through them or on their behalf, from harassing, intimidating, threatening, and compelling the Plaintiff to enter into contractual relationship with them by forcibly subscribing and procuring from the Respondent, a Copyright Licence which the Plaintiffs do not need for the transaction of their business.
The Applicants also sought an interlocutory order of the Court restraining the Respondent (MCSN) whether by itself, servants, privies, successor-in-title or anyone or organization/agency howsoever acting through them or on their behalf from forcing or compelling the plaintiffs to submit to their demands to alltogether pay the sum of sixty-four million, four hundred and Tlthree thousand, six hundred and thirty-four naira, fifty-seven kobo (64,403,634.57) for which there is no basis.
Applicants in addition, want the Court to restrain the Respondents from carrying on any action whatsoever and howsoever to hurt/harm, embarrass or be detrimental to the Applicant’s business, reputation/integrity and incessant allegation of Copyright infringement and a daub of criminal liability for not subscribing to their copyright license.
The Applicants based their action on the fact that having subscribed or paid subscriptions to pay-tv, they require no further licence to use music received through pay-tv in their hotel business.
In reaction to the Motion on Notice, the Respondent’s counsel on February 3rd, 2025 filed 34 paragraphs Counter Affidavit and formulated a sole issue for determination, to wit: Whether having regard to the circumstance of the case, the Applicants are entitled to the reliefs sought?
However after the arguments, Justice Emeka Nwite, agreed with the Counsel to the Respondent and found the suit unmeritorious and consequently struck out the application.
In a similar suit No.FHC/ABJ/CS/1577/2024, another Federal High Court Judge of the Abuja Division shot down an attempt by Reiz Continental Hotels to prevent the Audio Visual Rights Society (AVRS) from licensing it for the use of works in its repertoire. The Plaintiff was of the firm belief that having paid for subscription to Multichoice Nigeria Limited (owners of (DSTV) with which it has a contract and the contract states that the copyrights to the content or broadcast by all the television and stations belong to Multichoice Nigeria Ltd who acquired them legitimately, it does not require taking a licence from the Defendant before it can entertain its guests with programmes from the subscription. That it is impossible for the Plaintiff, who only viewed a television set or listened to a radio broadcast, to be liable to pay copyright fees when the producers and broadcasters of what is described by the Defendant as “audiovisual works” are not liable to pay for copyrights.
The Defendant denied the averments of the Plaintiff and claimed that it was approved as a CMO for audio visual works in Nigeria by the Nigerian Copyright Commission pursuant to section 88 of the Copyright Act.
Section 88(1) of the Act provides for a CMO formed by right owners who may apply to the Commission for approval to operate in respect of any one or more categories of works. Section 88(7) of the Act defined a CMO to mean an organization representing copyright owners which have as its principal objective the negotiating and granting of licence, collecting and distributing of royalties in respect of copyright works. The Defendant also averred that in an ongoing litigation in Lagos Division in Suit No: FHC/L/CS/2421/22: BWC Hotels Ltd v Audiovisual Rights Society of Nigeria Ltd and Multichoice Nigeria Ltd, wherein the Defendant is a party and Multichoice Nigeria Ltd in an affidavit denied having issued any licence to any subscriber of its pay television services, for which the Plaintiff is among. The Defendant maintains that Multichoice does not have the right to authorize any third party to reproduce an audiovisual work to be seen or heard in public directly or by the aid of any device.
After argument and counter arguments, the Court presided over by Honourable Justice Obiora Atuegwu Egwuatu ruled that hotel owners and operators must seek and obtain licence of the right owners before using any copyright works in their hotel business even if such works were sourced from or supplied by a subscription-based pay-tv.
In dismissing the suit, Justice Egwuatu affirmed that Reiz Continental Hotels is obligated to seek for and obtain the licence of right owners before it can use any of the copyright works in their hotel business even if such works were sourced from or supplied by subscription based pay-tv such as DSTV or Multichoice.
Discussion about this post