Intellectual productivity otherwise known as research productivity or intellectual property or  publications  output could be described as the fruit of academic ingenuity that are produced in the academia  from time to time and over  a given period of time (Buttlar, 1991). Intellectual productivity (property) includes the following amongst others: literary work; invention; all intellectual activity in the industrial, scientific and artistic fields. Intellectual productivity is usually protected like any other property. Owners (holders) of intellectual property would do everything possible to ensure that their inalienable rights to their property are secured from all forms of infringement, abuse or theft. Protection of intellectual productivity remains the strongest antidote to its robbery or infringement. It is imperative to employ all the legal machineries to protect intellectual productivity from unauthorized users.

The exclusive legal right granted to an author, composer or artist with regard to the use, reproduction and exploitation of his created work is referred to as copyright. Fabunmi (2007) defined it as the law that gives the owner of a document, musical composition, book or other pieces of information right to decide what others can do with it. The “copyright” has three possible connotations. First, it suggests the right that a person has over the physical copy of his work. This was true in earlier times when the author of a work exercised effective control over his physical manuscript. The second idea conveyed is the right to copy. That is, the right the owner of a work has to make copies of his work. The third connotation is the requirement that a work must be copied “right”. This suggests a license to copy on the condition that the copying would be done in a manner prescribed or permitted by law, leaving the copyright owner to a right to be remunerated (Asein, 2012).

World Intellectual Property Organisation (1986) described copyright as the exclusive right granted by law to the author of a work to disclose it as his own creation, to reproduce it and distribute or disseminate it to the public in any manner or by any means and also to authorise others to use the work in specified ways. Copyright has been described as property in which an action to restrain the infringement of a right of property will lie even if no damage can be shown. Copyrighted materials retain their value in spite of their exploitation and accessibility to the consuming public. Unlike other assets that diminish with use, copyright is not necessarily adversely affected by repeated use. In fact, the commercial value of the work may appreciate as a result of its being frequently used. For instance, the commercial value of a published novel stands a good chance of appreciating as the readership increases (Asein, 2012).

It is a legal means of protecting an author’s work. It is a type of intellectual property that provides exclusive publication, distribution and usage rights for the author. This means whatever content the author created cannot be used or published by anyone else without the consent of the author. The length of copyright protection may vary from country to country, but it usually lasts for the life of the author plus 50 to 100 years. Many different types of content can be protected by copyright. Examples  include  books, poems, plays, songs, films and artwork. In modern times, copyright protection has been extended to websites and other online content. Therefore, any original content published on the web is protected by copyright law. This is important in the digital age we live in, since large amounts of content can be easily copied and pasted. Copyright provides a helpful means of protecting original content. It serves to give people credit for the work they do, which is something we can all appreciate.

Literary works, musical, aesthetic works, cinematography film, sound recordings and broadcasting are the recognized categories of works eligible for copyright (Ayanyemi, 2007). Summarily, copyright can be referred to as the protection that covers published and unpublished works that can be seen, heard or touched. Copyright is an incentive for authors to create new works. Copyright can be defined as the monopoly rights granted to authors and creators in order to make sure that adequate returns are made from their work so as to encourage that creation of further intellectual works. The socio-economic development of a country depends on a large extent on the creativity of her people and creative works cannot be encouraged without effective administration of copyright laws. In Nigeria, copyright laws are not effectively administered. This is the reason why notation of copyright laws still persists. This manifests in forms of plagiarism, photocopying and piracy.

One of the major avenues through which copyrighted materials are violated in Nigeria is photocopying. Photocopying puts succinctly is the making of copies by photographic process (Mason, 1968). It is negative or positive photographic reproduction of graphic matter (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary of English Language, 1986). It could also be viewed as an adaptation of photography whereby copies can be produced directly from the originals without need for re-creation of the image, for instance a master for subsequent reproduction (Nganga, 1984).

The photographic copying of books and other materials is a modern technique that started at the beginning of 20^th century. Since then, photocopying has remained the most popular technique of document reproduction. It has been of tremendous value to education and dissemination of information and documentation centres, archives, higher educational institutions, commercial enterprises, government and non-governmental organisations and so on. Photocopying services are not designed to compete or replace duplicating processes, but to complement its services through direct reproduction of documents. Photocopying services are very useful in copying from materials that are suitable for direct reproduction. These materials include published materials like thesis, dissertation, lecture notes, drawings, letters and certificates to mention but a few. The photocopying service no doubt is very popular among scholars because it makes it possible for them to have positive copies of any material conveniently  thereby saving  them  from  the  problem  of  having laboriously copy by hand what they need whenever they visit the library.

In spite of the usefulness of photocopying, authors and publishers have argued that photocopying poses a threat to the development and free flow of information. Photocopying could serve as disincentive to further productivity on the part of right holders (authors and publishers) especially where the concept of “fair use” is violated. The concept of “fair use” permits the use of about 10 per cent of the copyrighted works for such purposes of criticism, comment, teaching and research without permission of the copyright owners. However, the laborious nature of photocopying activities that take place in Nigeria especially in higher institutions of learning could stifle productivity if not properly checked. Illegal photocopying in higher institutions of learning in Nigeria could only be checked through adequate enforcement of copyright. Copyright enforcement against illegal photo-copying has the propensity of accentuating intellectual productivity. This is because if the right holders are sure that their works would not be copied or infringed upon by other people or group of people they are most likely to be encouraged to embark on further production of intellectual work. They are most likely to be motivated to embark on further productivity since they are sure that the more they produce the more income they are most likely to have all things being equal.  

As the realisation of economic development of any notation would be a mirage without strict control of economic pirates, so also would the enhancement of intellectual productivity results in an exercise in futility without strict control of intellectual pirates. It is a known fact that intellectual pirates stifle creativity, novelty and innovation. There is no producer (creator) of intellectual property who would be willing to embark on more productive ventures if he/she knows that there are pirates somewhere who would circumvent his effort and make undue profits from his fruit of labour and vice versa.

Copyright would under normal circumstances engender intellectual productivity, industry, creativity and profitability. If there is full protection for any intellectual property, the owner of such property would under normal circumstances be encouraged to work hard to produce more so as to get more profit from their fruit of labour. It is a known fact that intellectual pirates wreak havoc on copyrighted works in Nigeria and across the globe. The nefarious activities of intellectual pirates in Nigeria and globally are sources of serious concern to holders of copyrighted work as they serves as serious disincentive to intellectual productivity. It is hoped that if copyrighted works are protected from all forms of abuses, the owners of such works are most likely to be encouraged to embark on further productivity. Higher institutions of learning were so selected simply because photocopying of materials is not only popular but has become the norm among scholars in higher institutions of learning across the globe (Menziner, 1980;  Taylor,  1988).  Moreover,  all  the higher institutions of learning in Nigeria are littered with photocopying centres where all forms of legal and illegal reproduction of copyrighted materials take place every moment. In higher institutions in Nigeria, copyright holders are most likely to be encouraged to embark on further production of intellectual work if such copyright abuse especially in form of photocopying is stemmed if not completely eradicated. The paper therefore examined how intellectual productivity could receive a boost through copyright protection in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria.

 

Statement of the problem

It is a known fact that most of the higher institutions of learning in Nigeria are citadels where uncontrollable piracy on copyrighted works thrive (Igbeneghu, 2009). The commonest means of piracy on campuses is photocopying. On most occasions the whole text is photocopied or a substantial part of a text is photocopied. The cost of photocopying a whole text is usually very small compared with the price of the real text. Many people especially students would prefer to photocopy textbooks rather than buying them. Such duplication of texts are usually done at the expense of real owners of the materials. The economic, social, moral and psychological rights of the owners of such works are therefore usually overturned by the activities of pirates. Piracy of the intellectual property serves as disincentive to further productivity if not properly checked. The paper therefore, examined how intellectual productivity could be enhanced in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria through copyright.

 

Objectives of the study

The main objective of the study is to examine how intellectual productivity could be enhanced in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria through copyright. The specific objectives are to:

1. Determine the volume of copyrighted materials that are involved in abuse through photocopying in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria.

2. Find out the number of copyright owners whose works have suffered from copyright   abuse through photo-copying in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria.

3. Ascertain the extent to which the sales of copyrighted materials have been affected     due to abuse through photocopying in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria.

 

Research Questions

To   achieve    the    foregoing   objectives,   the  following research questions were asked and answered.

1. What is the volume of copyrighted materials that are involved in abuse through photocopying in tertiary institutions in Niger State, Nigeria?

2. How many copyright owners whose works have suffered from abuse?

3. To what extent does copyright abuse affect the sales of copyrighted materials?

 

Scope of study

Babalola et al. (2013) listed 12 higher institutions in Niger State. The researchers adopted purposive (judgemental) sampling technique to select seven (7) out of the 12 higher institutions of learning for the study. The institutions selected are: Federal University of Technology, Minna; Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University, Lapai; Federal College of Education, Kotangora; Niger State College of Education, Minna; Federal Polytechnic, Zungeru; College of Wildlife, New Bussa. The institutions were carefully selected for the following reasons. One, they are old institutions and there is no information that could be received in the other institutions which the selected institutions would not supply. Moreover, the depth of the academic activities that take place in the selected institutions is more than the ones that are not selected. The selected institutions also have more students population than the ones that are not selected. The institutions selected are, therefore, selected for the afore-stated reasons. The study covers the level of abuse on copyrighted materials in the selected institutions and the extent to which intellectual productivity could be enhanced if the rights of copyright holders are fully protected in the selected institutions. 

The research methodology used is survey. Purposive (judgmental) sampling technique was used to select seven (7) higher institutions in Niger State for the study. The researchers personally administered the two research instruments tagged “Enhancing Intellectual Productivity” questionnaire to the respondents – copyright holders and students. The first instrument tagged “Enhancing Intellectual Productivity O” was administered to 40 copyright owners while the second instrument tagged “Enhancing Intellectual Productivity S” was administered to 700 students. Data were presented with simple statistical tools of: percentages, frequency counts and graphs.

The collected data are presented and analysed in this section. It is obvious from Table 1 that 120 (80%) out of the 150 copies of the questionnaire administered to the students at the Federal University of Technology, Minna (FUT) were retrieved while seven (70%) of the 10 copies of the questionnaire administered to the copyright owners in the same institution were retrieved. In Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University (IBBU), Niger State Polytechnic, Zungeru (NPZ) and Niger State College of Education, Minna (COE) 90 (90%) of the 100 copies of the questionnaire administered to the students in each of these institutions were retrieved respectively. In College of Wildlife, New Bussa (CWL) 30 (60%) of the 50 copies of the questionnaire administered to the students and three (60%) of the five copies of the questionnaire administered to the copyright owners were retrieved respectively.

 

 

It is clear from Table 2 that 60 (50%) of the 120 student respondents are in 500L, while 10 (8.3%) of the student respondents are in 400L, 200L and 100L respectively. Majority of the copyright owners 4 (57.1%) are in the category of senior lectureship while 2 (28.6%) of the copyright respondents are Lecturer I. 

 

 

The demographic status of students and copyright respondents in Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida University, Lapai (IBBU) is not quite different from that of Federal University of Technology, Minna (FUT). In all other institutions, there is a preponderance of respondents at senior lectureship position than in any other academic positions. Senior lectureship position is always high compared with other positions.

In Niger State College of Education, Minna (COE), all the 4 (100%) copyright owner respondents are from the senior lectureship to the chief lectureship positions. Moreover, 35 (38.9%) of the students respondents from the same institution are from 200L and 300L respectively. In College of Wildlife, New Bussa (CWL) 20 (66.8%) of the student respondents are in 300L while 2 (66.7%) copyright owner respondents are in the senior lectureship cadre.

In Table 3, 16 (50%) of the copyright owner respon-dents stated that between 11 – 20 percent of their work have been involved in abuse in form of photocopying between 2009 and 2014; while 6 (19%) of the right owner respondents affirmed that between 21 – 30 percent of their work are involved in copyright abuse through photocopy (Figure 1).        

 

    

 

 

In Table 4, 24 (75%) of the copyright owners affirmed that their work have suffered abuse through photocopying between 2009 and 2014 while 6 (18.8%) respondents said their work have not suffered any abuse between 2009 and 2014 (Figure 2).

 

 

 

In Table 5, 20 (62.5%) of the copyright owners affirmed that more than 20 percent of their work have suffered low sale due to copyright violation between 2009 and 2014, while 5 (15.6%) respondents said that less than 10 percent and more than 30 percent of their work respectively have suffered lack of sale between 2009 and 2014 due to copyright violation (Figure 3).

 

 

 

 

 

k                                      

Findings of this study  show  that majority  of  the  student  respondents who are involved in copyright violation through photocopying are in the higher classes ranging from 300 level to 500 level, National Diploma (ND) 2 to Higher National Diploma (HND) 2, 200 to 300 levels in universities, polytechnics and colleges respectively. This authenticated the findings of Menziner (1980) and Taylor (1988) who affirmed that photocopying is the norm in higher institutions of learning across the globe. It also corroborated the findings of Igbeneghu (2009) who observed the wave of piracy that is on-going in form of photocopying. Moreover, most of the students that are involved in photocopying are probably doing it to optimise their research activities or looking for suitable or relevant materials for their project.

Furthermore, it is crystal clear from the research findings that majority of the copyright owners are from the positions of senior lectureship upward. However, there is a lop-sidedness of copyright owners at the senior lectureship position. This lop-sidedness of copyright owners at such academic position could have been due to the demands for promotion that are associated with such positions. Most of the new entrants into the academic profession in the positions of Graduate Assistants and Assistant Lecturer (in universities),

Assistant Lecturer and Lecturer III (in polytechnics and colleges) are most likely to attach little or no premium to publications. Graduate Assistants in the Universities in particular would want to get themselves busy and struggle to get their masters’ degree qualification so as to stabilise themselves on the job. Issues that affect writing and publications could be treated as secondary at this stage. Similarly, academic staff who are in the professorial or chief lectureship ranks are likely to exhibit little or no commitment to publications since they have reached the peak of their career. One of the major reasons why faculty publish is to earn promotion (Buttlar, Mularaki and Brandigan, 1991).

On the volume of copyrighted materials that are involved in copyright abuse, 27 (84.4%) copyright holder respondents affirmed that between 11 and 40 percent of their work are involved in abuse between 2009 and 2014, (see Table 3). This is a serious disincentive to intellectual productivity. There is high possibility that the affected copyright owners are going to be discouraged from further productivity of intellectual work. It would take personal determination and doggedness for the affected right owners to be willing to forge ahead with further productivity of intellectual work. Violation of copyright in whatever formats - illegal duplication in form of photocopying, piracy, etc – tantamounts to robbery of intellectual property. It is counter-productive too. Similarly, 24 (75%) of the right owners said that their work have suffered through photocopying between 2009 and 2014. Such illegal reprography and reproduction of intellectual work are economic termites that could wreck and destroy the economic foundation of right owners, the academia,   the   nation   and   by   extension   the  global  economy. However, Asein (2012), while drawing inference from the judgment passed in  the  United  State  Supreme Court on copyright violation argued that copyright violation is not  tantamount to  robbery or fraud as the owner is not  totally deprived of his right.

Moreover, 27 (84.4%) copyright holder respondents equally affirmed that more than 20 percent of their work have suffered low sale due to copyright abuse in form of photocopying between 2009 and 2014. It then implies that the copyrighted materials that have been produced were made to waste since no buyers were forthcoming. It equally means that if the copyright holders have borrowed money from the bank to produce their work, they would be paying the loan and the interest from a business that is bringing no benefit. In addition, other costs of maintaining and sustaining the business would also be running concurrently without anything to show for. For example, the variable costs (like payment of salary, transportation, fuel, etc) and the fixed costs (like house rent, security, electricity and sanitation) would be running and have to be paid in a  business  that  is  bringing  zero return. Copyright violation in form of photocopying is akin to thief of creativity, innovation and productivity. This authenticates the position of Babalola (2006, 2008) and Okwilagwe (2001, 2006). If intellectual productivity would receive a boost all forms of illegal reproduction of intellectual works must be properly curbed and controlled through the instrumentality of law – copyright. Copyright remains the sine qua non to intellectual creativity, innovation and productivity. Without full enforcement of copyright, all efforts to accentuate intellectual productivity in the academia would appear like a mirage. It is important to enforce copyright on copyrighted materials and make violators of copyright to face full wrath of the law. It is hoped that it is only then that the anticipated intellectual productivity in the academia would receive a boost.

It  should  be  added  that  if  the  work  of   majority,  27 (84.4%) of the copyright holders do not suffer low sale due to the illegal photocopying of their materials, the right owners would under normal circumstances make enough sale. In consequence, if they make enough sale, their per capita income (income per head) would definitely receive a boost. This increase in per capita income has the propensity of accentuating their zeal for further intellectual productivity. This is because they would be assured that the more they produce the more income they are likely to get. If the work of all the right owners in all higher institutions of learning in Niger State and by extension in Nigeria is protected from illegal reproduction in form of photocopying, one can now imagine the gamut of income that would accrue to the pocket of right owners across the nation. With such income, there is every likelihood that the right owners would receive enough motivation and encouragement to embark on further productivity. This is because money remains the major motivating factor why people work (Ngulube, 2000; Akintoye, 2000; Adeleke, 2001; Sakir and Fajonyomi, 2007; Senyah, 2012)

From the foregoing discussion, it is apt to conclude that copyright would enhance intellectual productivity in tertiary institutions in Niger State if properly handled. The following recommendations are made in the light of the study.

1. Intellectual property law should be made a core course that should be taught in all higher institutions in Nigeria. It should not be restricted to the Department of Library and Information Science alone. If this is done, it is hoped that it would not take time to enlighten majority of the student on the danger of piracy and on the need for fair use of information resources.

2. It is recommended that all photocopying centres in higher institutions in Nigeria should be made to open register for all the materials that are being photocopied and this should be monitored. Any photocopying of material that is more than fair use should be penalised and compensation paid to authors of such materials.

3. The Nigerian Copyright Commission (NCC) should also organise enlightenment workshops for all stakeholders - lecturers, researchers, students and photocopying            managers – in higher institutions of learning in Nigeria.

The authors have not declared any conflict of interests.