



































EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, Number 1,  May, 2020


EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 96 

 

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, ETHICS AND VALUES IN 

NIGERIA: A CRITICAL INVESTIGATION  

 

Dr. Felix Chukwuma, Aguboshim1 and Obiokafor, Ifeyinwa Nkemdilim2 

 
1Principal Lecturer, Department of Computer Science, Federal Polytechnic, 

Oko, Nigeria. 

Email: felixaguboshim@gmail.com 
2Lecturer, Department of Computer Science, Anambra State Polytechnic, 

Mgbakwu, Nigeria. 

Email: ifykems@gmail.com 

 

Abstract 

Intellectual property (IP) right protection is of significant importance globally. 

However, Intellectual property rights (IPRs) protection in Nigeria has become 

ineffective partly because IP laws are not harmonized locally or 

internationally due to varied cultural backgrounds, and partly because there 

are no uniformity in the enforcement of IPRs, ethics and values to protect 

against IP theft, especially in Nigeria where IP theft or piracy is prevalent. 

This study highlights the challenges created by poor IP laws, ethics and values 

in Nigeria. It also unravels the challenges that militate against IPRs of creators 

and inventors in Nigeria. In this study, the authors explored a narrative review 

of prior research that focused on the theoretical underpinnings of vast works 

of literature that revealed significant information on challenges of IPRs that 

negatively affect the promotion of creative innovation by inventors, and 

strategies to close these gaps. The authors identified the benefits of IPRs 

protection and the challenges contributing to poor IPRs enforcement in 

Nigeria. Results show that IPRs, ethics and values are crippled by out-dated, 

non-sustainable or virtually non-existent policies, and anti-piracy system. 

Findings from this study may encourage proper awareness of IPRs, 

implications of IP theft, and effective enforcement of IPRs of creators and 

inventors in Nigeria. 

 

Key words: Ethics; Intellectual Property; IP theft; Innovation; Rights; Values 

 

 

Introduction 

Intellectual property rights (IPRs) in research innovations can be defined as 

the right to assign the research results to its originator, not limited to time and 

space, and non-transferable (Sargolzaei&Fateme, 2017). Intellectual property 

is usually divided into two branches, namely: (i) “industrial property”; and (ii) 

copyright and the rights which neighbour upon copyright. Piquero (2005) 

simple defines intellectual Property (IP) as the creative ideas or innovations 

that result from intellectual activity and creation. In research novelties, two 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 97 

 

points of view can be deliberated for copyrights:(a) as incentives for creative 

production, and (b) as a product for the consumer, who seeks to use it for free 

or at a negligible cost While advanced countries are struggling to secure the 

first view, the evolving countries attempt to reach a second view to have 

access to the copyright easier and at a lower cost. According to the 

International Telecommunication Union (ITU), IPRs are legal rights designed 

to protect creations and inventions resulting from intellectual activity in 

education, industrial, scientific, literary, or artistic fields (ITU, 2017).  

Intellectual property rights usually give the originator or the creator exclusive 

use of their creation for a specified period of time. 

 

In relation to IPR, information security has been defined from a several 

perspectives (Narain, Gupta, & Ojha, 2014), and with a holistic method that 

enlarges beyond the technical security (Perez, Branch, &Kuofie, 2014), to 

comprise the environment, the technology, ethics and values, and the people 

(Stallings & Brown, 2012; Taylor & Robinson, 2015). Noticeable amount of 

empirical researches, point to the fact that humans appear to be the most 

significant links to the information security of any organisation, and 

consistently constitute the highest risk to the information integrity and 

information security measures of any organisation (Stallings & Brown, 2012). 

This is because of the differences in behaviour, ethics, and values regarding 

the intent to perform security measures or administrative errors (Komatsu, 

Takagi, & Takemura, 2013).  Information security is the procedure by which 

an establishment protects and secures systems, media, and facilities, policies, 

ethics, and values that process and maintain information.  Key elements of any 

security program must address the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of 

the organisation resources: hardware, software, data, and communication lines 

and networks in relation to the organisational ethics and major ethical 

principles (Stallings & Brown, 2012).   

 

Information security within the IPR has never been more essential than it is 

these days: not only in how it can protect and encourage research innovations 

by granting successful originators temporary monopoly power over their 

innovations data or systems, but how it can enhance secure information 

exchange between trusted partners. Universities and public research 

institutions through research innovations are the factories of the knowledge, 

economy growth, and job creation (Blakeney&Mengistie, 2011). This is 

because Innovation drives economic growth and job creation. The 

International Property Rights Index adopts a substantial correlation between 

the protection of private property rights and a nation’s innovations and 

economic growth. It has also been observed that there is a remarkable causal 

relationship between Intellectual Property (IP), technology transfer and 

development (Neba, 2013).Therefore, protection of Intellectual Property (IP), 

through patents, trademarks and copyrights, good ethics and values, is critical 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 98 

 

to ensuring pursuit of innovation, economic growth, and technology transfer 

and job creation. Intellectual property rights are therefore the changing face of 

research innovations. As a crucial factor of national innovation systems, IPR 

systems are expected to play a catalytic role in motivating innovation and 

successful technology transfer from research and higher education institutions. 

However, the building capacity for IP policy formulation (in general) which 

includes building institutional (university/research institute) dimensions, as 

well capacity for IP policy formulation among government officials are 

farfetched. This is because technological capabilities are now more widely 

diffused and production more globalized, and concerns relating to inadequate 

enforcement of IPRs, in particular patents and trademarks, have increased. 

 

As a result, information security and research innovations, especially in 

tertiary education in Nigeria, are tremendously challenged due to poor IP 

policies, ethics and values, inadequate enforcement of IPRs, inadequate 

awareness about copyright piracy and its ills. Researchers and innovators, 

especially in education, now find it difficult, if not impossible, to attain their 

ultimate goals or create added value through their work, knowledge, and 

ideas. Despite this, IPRs encourage researchers to engage in innovative 

activities by protecting their knowledge and open access to knowledge and 

technologies contributing to sustainable development. This is why World 

Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) states that IP systems foster 

environments in which creativity and innovation can flourish(WIPO, 

2017),this flourishing of creativity and innovation is hinged of good IP 

policies, ethics and values. The general idea is that IPR will give incentive to 

researchers and investors to devote time, effort, and money to work on 

innovations and then share their ideas with society. In return, creators get a 

monopoly or some other form of protection for their idea for a limited time 

span. The purpose is to maximize economic growth while balancing the social 

costs to a manageable level, and at the same time build a pool of knowledge 

and ideas that other researchers and scientist can make use of to take greater 

and faster strides in innovation.  

 

Problem Statement 

 

Appropriate IP policies, ethics, and value systems to monitor or empower 

IPRs and for assigning research results to its creator, within any time and 

space, are poorly implemented by the IP owners and Law enforcement agents 

in Nigeria. The general IT problem visible in this study, is the poor 

implementation and monitoring of IPRs, ethics, and values for information 

security, and research innovations in Nigeria. These are due to lack of 

monitoring ICT systems and establishment of ethical practices and policies. 

However, the specific IT problem is that some managers and stakeholders of 

organisations lack strategies, policies, laws, guidelines, and value systems for 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 99 

 

monitoring and implementation of IPRs, ethics, and values for information 

security, and research innovations in Nigeria. 

 

Literature Review 

Intellectual Property (IP) according to Blakeney (2005) can be defined 

as those creations of the mind in relation to which the state or country confers 

upon individuals a statutory monopoly for a prescribed term to prevent their 

unauthorized exploitation.  Intellectual property is usually divided into two 

branches: industrial property and copyright and the rights which neighbour 

upon copyright. Piquero (2005) simple defines Intellectual Property (IP) as the 

creative ideas or innovations that result from intellectual activity and 

creation. Nigeria is ranked among countries in Africa where Intellectual 

Property (IP) theft or piracy is prevalent. It was 82% in 2007, 83% in 2008, 

83% in 2009, 82% in 2010 and 82% in 2011 (Business Software Alliance, 

2011). According to the report, IP theft or piracy also blossoms in other 

African countries, including Zimbabwe (92%), Libya (90%), Algeria (84%), 

Cameroon (83%), Egypt (61%), Ivory Coast (81%), Kenya (78%), Mauritius 

(57%), Morocco (66%), Senegal (78%), Tunisia (74%), Zambia (82%); while 

South Africa (35%) had the least piracy rate (BSA, 2011). Theft or Piracy in 

this context include among others, IP distributed without authority, packaged 

to resemble the original as closely as possible; or copied or distributed without 

authority (Adedej, 2011a). According to World Intellectual Property 

Organization (WIPO), intellectual property included the rights relating to: 

literary, artistic and scientific works; performances of performing artists, 

phonograms, and broadcasts; inventions in all fields of human 

endeavour; scientific discoveries;  industrial designs;  trademarks, service 

marks, and commercial names and designations; protection against unfair 

competition; and all other rights resulting from intellectual activity in the 

industrial, scientific, literary or artistic fields.  

 

Several researchers have indicated possible reasons for IP theft. Some 

researchers claimed that the  main obstacles to getting rid of IP theft or 

counterfeiting and piracy are not to be sought in the substantive law per see, 

rather in the legal means to recover the rights and penalties available (or not 

available) to stop and deter counterfeiting and piracy (Afolayan, 2020; 

Olubiyi, Adaji, & Adetula, 2020). Other maintained that IP thefts are due to 

the ineffectiveness of enforcement IP ethics, rights and value systems related 

toa lack of human resources, funding and practical experience in intellectual 

property enforcement of relevant officials, including the judiciary (Deep & 

Saradindu, 2017; Osunde, 2017),  insufficient knowledge on the side of right 

holders and the general public, concerning their rights and remedies(Afolayan, 

2020); and systemic problems resulting from insufficient national and 

international coordination, including a lack of transparency (Olubiyi, et al., 

2020).Besides, the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 100 

 

(TRIPS) agreement suggested some best practices related to national 

cooperation and coordination, including international cooperation, public 

awareness and cooperation, right holder cooperation, judicial enforcement, 

administrative enforcement, border control, criminal procedures, and right to 

information to help curtail the problem (Blakeney, 2005). Interestingly, the 

last best practice, “right to information” was pointed out as having good 

impact against counterfeiting and piracy because it allows the rights holder to 

identify the chain of distribution (Blakeney, 2005). This notwithstanding, 

other researchers are of the opinion that with the rise of new digital 

technologies and file-sharing networks, it has definitely become difficult, if 

not impossible for organisations or individuals to protect their intellectual 

property (IP).  According to the FBI (2013), this is made even harder by the 

fact there is no uniformity in the enforcement of laws that are designed to 

protect against IP theft, especially in developing countries.  Also, there are 

usually large organised crime syndicates behind the IP theft which makes it 

harder to curb. 

 

There are a few techniques and technologies that are recommended to help 

protect IP data. However, no technique or method is completely foolproof 

(Bode, 2013). Hackers have proven their ability to eventually circumvent 

many safeguards. New protections are always being considered to better 

protect data. Digital data can usually be encrypted and rendered unbreakable 

without the appropriate key to unlock.  Intrusion detection and prevention 

systems are also employed to prevent unauthorised access to organizations or 

individuals’ IP networks.  Appropriate access controls can be used to trace 

activity on a network in the event of a data breach.  According to Stanley 

(2011), this is helpful when it comes to tracking down the culprit in any 

prosecution efforts especially when more security measure are built into 

smartphones often used to hold sensitive data. Despite the innovative plans by 

software developers and device manufacturers to better protect their IP, IP 

theft has been at a high rate and might continue to be an issue for years to 

come (Stanley, 2011). On the other hand, the entertainment industry (i.e. 

movie and music) has requested that they be allowed by law to use 

“ransomware” to protect their IP from illegal download and distribution by 

pirates.  While Adedej (2011b), suggested the inclusion of malware within 

their files that would lock down the computer of any unauthorized person 

illegally downloading movies or music files, Adewopo (2008), gave an 

approval, adding that the only way to unlock the computer of such culprit 

would be to contact law enforcement for the password thus admitting that the 

culprit committed the illegal act and thus subjecting same to any penalties or 

fines.  Furthermore, the entertainment industry also wants permission to be 

able to retrieve their IP from a hacker’s network by any means necessary 

including destroying all information within a hacker’s network as well as the 

network itself (Bode, 2013).  However, other researchers are of the opinion 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 101 

 

that this may be going too far because it might arise to cases where other 

innocent people’s computers may be set up as bots that are part of the hackers 

network (Tade&Akinleye, 2012; Taylor, & Robinson, 2015).  According to 

Tade and Akinleye (2012), it would not be fair if their computers are 

destroyed as a result of someone else’s misdeeds. 

 

In other research findings, Chaudhry, Zimmerman, Peters, and Cordell (2009) 

claimed that public awareness and cooperation with IP ethics and policies can 

improve the effectiveness of anti-counterfeiting tactics to preserve intellectual 

property rights. The authors argued that in order to deter counterfeit and 

piracy, a program can be implemented which will specifically manages the 

registration ofall trademarks and patents in key markets, establishes a 

company-based enforcement team, monitors the growth of fakes through a 

central information repository, develops a multi-pronged action plan, and uses 

investigation to fights piracy in collaboration with local law enforcement 

(Chaudhry et al., 2009).For anti-piracy tactics to be effective, Appleyard 

(2015) in other hand suggested that some aspects should be acknowledged as 

lessons learned from the music industry such as changing consumer 

expectations, the negative impact of legal recourse, the pervasiveness of new 

technology, the de facto stalemate of piracy, and the importance of networks. 

Overall, technologies alone, will never be sufficient to curtail counterfeit and 

piracy(Carolan, 2016). The problem is already perceived as global 

phenomenon and therefore should be addressed as such. It will require a 

global cooperation and harmonization of laws and treaties to be able to find a 

sustainable solution (Coronado, 2013). As the first lesson learned from 

Appleyard (2015) highlighted it, consumer expectation are paramount 

especially with regard to technologies related techniques used to enforced 

copyrights laws. Properly put by Appleyard (2015), consumers do not have 

rights, they have expectations. Therefore these consumer expectations should 

be married in and effective manner with IPRs, ethics and values for 

sustainable enforcement of IPRs of creators and inventors in Nigeria. 

 

Enablers of IPRs 

Two major enablers of IPRs are; sustainable information and communication 

technology (ICT), and research database repository. ICT can be simply 

defined as the physical devices and infrastructures used for the collection, 

storage, processing, and disseminating of all forms and formats of data and 

information, and the required platforms or means for the transmission and 

disseminating of same (Oladimeji & Foltyn, 2018; Olise, 2010 ). Sustainable 

ICT is what defines sustainable research database repository (Oladimeji & 

Foltyn, 2018), and occupies a significant key position in leveraging 

sustainable IPRs (Olise, 2010). A significant relationship therefore exists 

between sustainable ICT and research database repository (Bennett, 2017).On 

the other hand, appropriate databases repositories are required to enforce 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 102 

 

IPRs. Where sustainable ICT, with appropriate databases required to empower 

sustainable research database repository are not in place, sustainable IPRs will 

be farfetched. This is why effective IPRs is next to zero in Nigeria because 

ICT technological innovations, as enablers of sustainable research database 

repository and IP ethics, values, and policies are not respectfully adopted. The 

value placed on any technological innovation is measured by its adoption, 

embedded ethics, values, acceptance, and sustainability (Hoffman, Singh, & 

Prakash, 2015). Sustainable ICT therefore, plays an important role in 

sustainable research database repository and IPRs implementation (Oladimeji 

& Foltyn, 2018). This is because ICT is a major enabler of sustainable 

research database repository and IPRs (Toyo & Ejedafiru, 2016). 

 

Basically, ICTs are driven by appropriate ethics, values and policies. There is 

so much technological failure around us because most technological 

innovations in Nigeria ignore ethics, values, and policies required to drive ICT 

and IPRs. For instance Traffic lights in Nigeria are not properly driven or 

implemented on sound ethics, values and policies. Hence they are not 

adequately or properly put to use. How can one run an automated traffic 

system without proper documentation of vehicles and of owners? Rather 

police and other touts are used to check traffic light offenders, when the same 

traffic light is embedded with a monitoring camera.  What a waste of 

resources. The same is applicable to other establishments such as NRSC, 

Police, and Ministry of Justice etc. Our ICTs are not used because appropriate 

ethics, values and policies to drive them are not in place.  It therefore takes 

appropriate implementation of ethics, values, and policies to adopt or use 

technology, and to sustain it (Ogutu, Okello, &Otieno, 2014). 

 

However, corruption resulting from absence of relevant ethics, values, and 

policies appears to be the major hindrance to ICT required driving IPRs in 

Nigeria. Technology does not have attitude or designed to exhibit attitudinal 

behaviour. Computers and ICT innovations are not designed to have attitudes 

butare driven byethics, values, policies, programs and protocol. When ICT 

innovations are subjected and corrupted with human emotions, behaviour and 

thoughts, they become useless, unimpactful and their outputs nonsensical.This 

is because they operate without the required ethics, values and policies. We 

have witnessed abuse of ethics, values and policies where some so-called 

honorable men in the society break the traffic light and use the exit door for an 

entrance. This abuse is also visible in their use of personal vehicles with 

Government registration numbers even when they have left the office. For 

instance, some police man, soldiers and others, do not even need to renew 

their vehicle particulars because the so-called ICT in place has been subjected 

to attitude (without a functional ethics, values, and policies). This is a big slap 

on the face of technology and the major hindrances of maximal impact of ICT 

in Nigeria. However, ICT can be made to drive IPRs for sustainable 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 103 

 

information security and research innovations in Nigeria if appropriate ethics, 

values, and policies are perfectly put in place to expose corruption and drive 

ICT that enables IPRs. 

 

Methodology 

In this study, we adopted a narrative review methodology, where analysis and 

synthesis of different and related research findings are required to draw 

holistic interpretations or conclusions based on the reviewers’ own 

experience, existing theories and models (Hill & Burrows, 2017). A narrative 

study approach is best suited for a descriptive or explanatory study (Bell, 

2017), where results from such narrative studies are of qualitative rather than 

quantitative in nature (Scarnato, 2017). Narrative studies exhibit significant 

strengths in that they have ability to provide platforms for comprehension of 

diverse and numerous understanding around scholarly research findings, and 

the opportunity to make reflective practice and acknowledgement of 

researchers’ views and knowledge (Scarnato, 2017). 

 

Findings  

Adopting appropriate and effective ethics, values, and policies to drive ICTs, 

that in turn, drives IPRs, are good innovations for creating patent and 

copyright monopolies, as well as other forms of intellectual property rights. 

Findings have shown that a country’s optimal IPRs depend on its level of 

technological development, adoption and sustainability in anon-monotonic 

way (Stewart & Lacey, 2012). This points to the importance of appropriate 

ethics, values, and policies in driving technological innovations for 

sustainable IPRs in Nigeria. Chen and Puttitanun (2005) find out that lower 

IPRs encourage imitations or theft of foreign technologies, which reduces the 

market power of foreign innovations, and benefits domestic consumers. On 

the other hand, a developing country may also need to increase IPRs in order 

to encourage innovations by domestic consumers (Chen&Puttitanun, 2005). It 

was noted that innovation in a developing country increases with the 

protection of IPRs. Findings confirmed that relevant ICT ethics, values, and 

policies are empirical evidences of both the positive impact of IPRs on 

innovations in developing countries and the presence of a U-shaped 

relationship between IPRs and information security and research innovations 

for economic development. 

 

Conclusion and Recommendations 

A country’s optimal IPRs depend on its level of technological development 

and sustainability. The level of technological development and sustainability 

however depend on sustainable ICT ethics, values and policies. IPRs impact 

on research innovations highly or lowly depending on the level of protective 

IPRs. As a developing country, Nigerian may have to increase IPRs in order 

to encourage innovations by domestic consumers. Nigeria should also 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 104 

 

develop an indigenous law that will address basic ICT ethics, values and 

policies on IPRs that will in turn positively address its economy and social 

cultural environment. The tight restrictions that digital content owners place 

on their products coupled with poor implementation of ICT ethics, values and 

policies have encouraged even more pirating and plagiarism. Reid (2012) 

explains that as the industry played hardball with violators, people became 

more adapt at illegally distributing IP content, and are morally comfortable 

with them in the absence of any legal alternative. In essence, the legal 

prosecution backfired and started more illicit distribution of protected 

material. Therefore, the most effective method for copyright holders to use in 

protecting their property is by offering it at competitive rates through 

distributors like Amazon, Apple, national and international journal bodies or 

other online services where probably, more effective ICT ethics, values, and 

policies are practiced.   

 

 

References 

Adedej, A. (2011a). Combating piracy through optical Disc plant regulation in 

Nigeria: Prospects and challenges. Journal of Intellectual Property 

[NJIP], Maiden Edition, 1-12.  

Adedej, A. (2011b). The Strategic Action Against Piracy (STRAP) Policy in 

Nigeria, Research Papers from the WIPO-WTO Colloquium for 

Teachers of Intellectual Property Law 2010. (Geneva: WIPO-WTO, 

2011), 107-118. 

Adewopo, A. A.  (2008).  The Gain is More than the Pain: Cost Benefit 

Perspective of the Regulation and Control of Copyright Based 

Industries in Nigeria?. International symposium on economic crimes. 

Jesus College University of Cambridge United Kingdom. 

p.6http://www.nials-nigeria.org/journals/Wole%20Adedejinjip.pdf 

Afolayan, O. T. (2020). Intellectual Property Rights Protection in 

Nigeria.International Journal of Library and Information Services, 

9(2), 51-57. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijlis.2020070103 

Appleyard, M. (2015). Corporate responses to online music piracy: Strategic 

lessons for the challenge of additive manufacturing, Business 

Horizons, 58(1), 69-76. doi: 10.1016/j.bushor.2014.09.007 

Bell, E. E. (2017). A Narrative Inquiry: A Black Male Looking to Teach. The 

Qualitative Report, 22(4), 1137-1150.  

Bennett, S. (2017). What is information governance and how does it differ 

from data governance? Governance Directions, 69(8), 462–467. 

Blakeney, M. (2005).  Guidebook On Enforcement Of Intellectual Property 

Rights. Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute Queen 

Mary, University of London. Retrieved from: 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/ 2005/ april/tradoc_122641.pdf 



EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 105 

 

Blakeney, M., &Mengistie, G.  (2011).  Intellectual Property and Economic 

Development in sub-Saharan Africa. Journal of World Intellectual 

Property 14(3/4): 238–264. doi: 10.111/j.1747-1796-00417.x 

Bode, K. (2013). Hollywood Wants Right to Use Malware Against Pirates  

Retrieved from http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Hollywood-

Wants-Right-to-Use-Malware-Against-Pirates-124388 

Business Software Alliance (2011). Shadow Market. In 2011 Global software 

piracy study.  Ninth Edition, May, 2012 

Carolan, E. (2016). The continuing problems with online consent under the 

EU's emerging data protection principles. Research funded by Irish 

Research Council (R12963). Computer Law & Security Review, 32(2), 

462-473. doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2016.02.004 

Chaudhry, P. E., Zimmerman, A., Peters, J. R., & Cordell, V. V. 

(2009).Preserving intellectual property rights: Managerial insight into 

the escalating counterfeit market quandary, Business 

Horizons, 52(1), 57-66. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2008.04.003 

Chen, Y., &Puttitanun, P. (2005).Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation 

in Developing Countries.Journal of Development Economics, 78(1), 

474-493. doi:10.1016/j.jdeveco.2004.11.005  

Coronado, A. S. (2013). Computer Security: Principles and Practice, Second 

Edition. Journal of Information Privacy and Security, 9(2), 62-65. 

doi:10.1080/15536548.2013.10845680 

Deep, J. F., &Saradindu, B. (2017). Intellectual property rights, social values, 

and innovation: a cross-country simultaneous equations model. 

Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 1-

22.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599.2019.1700607  

FBI. (2013). It’s an age-old crime: stealing. Retrieved 

from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar/ipr/ipr 

Hill, C., & Burrows, G. (2017). New voices: The usefulness of a narrative 

approach to social work research. 

Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice, 16(2), 273-288. 

doi:10.1177/1473325017689966 

Hoffman, D. D., Singh, M., &Prakash, C. (2015).The Interface Theory of 

Perception Psychonomic.Bulletin& Review, 22(6), 1480-

1506.doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0890-8 

ITU (2017).Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), International 

Telecommunication Union, Retrieved  May 22, 2017, from  

http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/ipr/Pages/default.aspx. 

Komatsu, A., Takagi, D., &Takemura, T. (2013).Human aspects of 

information security.Information Management & Computer Security, 

21(1), 5-15.doi:10.1108/09685221311314383 

 

 

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/white_collar/ipr/ipr


EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 106 

 

Narain, S. A., Gupta, M. P., &Ojha, A. (2014).Identifying factors of 

"organizational information security management.  Journal of 

Enterprise Information Management, 27(5), 667-

644.doi:10.1108/jeim-07-2013-0052 

 Neba, A. (2013). IPR systems and technology transfer at research institutions 

in southern Africa. Regional and Thematic Papers  on Research 

Management 2009–2013 

Ogutu, S. O., Okello, L. J., &Otieno, D. J. (2014). Impact of Information 

and Communication Technology-Based Market Information Services 

on Smallholder Farm Input Use and Productivity: The Case of 

Kenya. World Development, 64(1), 311–321.  

 Oladimeji, T. T., &Foltyn, G. B. (2018). ICT and Its Impact on National 

Development In Nigeria: An Overview. Research & Reviews: Journal 

of Engineering and Technology, 7(1), 1-10. 

Olise, F. P. (2010). Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and 

Sustainable Development in Africa: Mainstreaming the Millennium 

Development Goals (MDGs) into Nigeria’s Development 

Agenda.Journal of Social Sciences, 24(3), 155-167. 

Olubiyi, I. A., Adaji, A. E., &Adetula, A. F. (2020).Increasing the commercial 

value of image rights in Nigeria: legal possibilities.Journal of 

Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 15(3), 193–

197.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpz177 

Osunde, C. (2017). Small and Medium Enterprises: Management of 

Intellectual Property Rights in Nigeria. Intellectual Property Rights, 

5(1), 1-12.  https://doi.org/10.4172/2375-4516.100080 

Perez, R. G., Branch, R., &Kuofie, M. (2014).EOFISI Model as a Predictive 

Tool to Favor Smaller Gaps on the Information Security 

Implementations.Journal of Information Technology and Economic 

Development, 5(1), 1-20. 

Piquero, N. L. (2005). Causes and prevention of intellectual property 

crime.Trendsin Organized Crime, 4(1), 40-61. 

Reid, R. (2012). What to Do When Attacked By Pirates. Wall Street 

Journal.Retrieved 

from http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303552104577

438212250619458 

Sargolzaei, E., &Fateme , F.  (2017). Examining software Intellectual 

Property rights. (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced 

Computer Science and Applications, 8(11), 594-600. 

Scarnato, J. M. (2017). The value of digital video data for qualitative social 

work research: A narrative review. Qualitative Social Work: Research 

and Practice, doi:10.1177/1473325017735885   

Stallings, W., & Brown, L. (2012). Computer security: Principles and 

practice (2nd ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 

 

javascript:;
javascript:;
javascript:;


EVAIA: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ETHICS AND VALUES Volume 1, NO. 1,  July, 2020 

 

Aguboshim and Obiokafor                                                                                                                                  Page 107 

 

Stanley, N. (2011). Intellectual Property Theft: Protecting Data Against Cyber 

Criminals. Retrieved 

from http://www.bloorresearch.com/analysis/11762/intellectual-

property-theft-protecting-data-cyber.html 

Stewart, G., & Lacey, D. (2012),"Death by a thousand facts", Information 

Management & Computer Security, 20(1), 29-

38.doi:10.1108/09685221211219182 

Tade, O., &Akinleye, B.  (2012). ?We are Promoters not Pirates?: A 

Qualitative Analysis of Artistes and Pirates on Music Piracy in 

Nigeria. International Journal of Cyber Criminology, 6(2). Retrieved 

from: http://www.cybercrimejournal.com/ Tade& 

Akenliye2012julyijcc.pdf 

Taylor, R. G., & Robinson, S. L. (2015).  An information system security 

breach at First Freedom Credit Union 1: what goes in must come 

out.  Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies, 21(1), 

131-138. 

Toyo, O. D., &Ejedafiru, F. E. (2016).Utilization of Information  and 

Communication Technologies (ICTs) for Sustainable 

EconomicDevelopment in Nigerian. International Journal of 

Ergonomics and Human Factors, 12(2), 22-34.  

WIPO (2017), based on data from the World Bank (top), October 2011 and 

Pinkovskiy and Sala-i-Martin (2009). 

 

http://www.bloorresearch.com/analysis/11762/intellectual-property-theft-protecting-data-cyber.html
http://www.bloorresearch.com/analysis/11762/intellectual-property-theft-protecting-data-cyber.html

