For decades, Wasiu Alabi Ajibola Odetola aka Pasuma or Oganla has built one of the most successful and recognisable brands in Fuji music. From hit songs and sold-out performances to a catalogue that spans generations, the veteran entertainer has remained one of the genre’s most influential figures.
But the singer is now involved in a battle that has little to do with music charts and everything to do with ownership.
On June 5, 2026, Pasuma issued a formal cease-and-desist notice to 11 companies and individuals, accusing them of unlawfully exploiting his intellectual property.
While the dispute is centred on Pasuma and the entities named in the notice, it also highlights a growing issue within Nigeria’s entertainment industry: the struggle by artists to protect their music, image, and creative rights in an increasingly digital world.
What Sparked the Ultimatum?
The immediate trigger for Pasuma’s latest legal move was what he describes as the repeated and unauthorized exploitation of his intellectual property across digital platforms.
In the notice dated June 5, 2026, the Fuji star alleged that several companies and individuals had been using his creative works and personal likeness without obtaining his permission. According to the document, the alleged infringements extend beyond music recordings and include his musical compositions, visual recordings, image, name, and likeness.
Pasuma claimed that his intellectual property had been uploaded, hosted, distributed, and exploited across a wide range of digital services, including streaming platforms, video-on-demand services, app stores, lyrics websites, blogs, gaming platforms, virtual aggregation sites, and other internet-based platforms.
The singer argued that such use amounts to an infringement of his rights under the Nigeria Copyright Act 2022, particularly where there is no expressly written authorization or agreement permitting the use of his works.
As a result, Pasuma demanded that all affected parties immediately stop any unauthorized use of his intellectual property, remove existing content from circulation, and permanently cease the distribution, sale, or promotion of materials connected to his works.
He also requested that those involved provide a statement of account detailing any exploitation of his intellectual property and submit evidence of any authorization they may have obtained.
The notice named 11 companies and individuals: High Kay (Q) Dancent Ltd, Sarolaj Music & Films International, Role Model Entertainment Ltd, NextXtar, Stability Production, UMIJam, Moh Saheed, Role Model Entertainment Ltd, OgaNla TV, Monya Shau Films & Records (Q), and G3 Entertainment Limited.
To underscore the seriousness of the matter, Pasuma’s legal team gave the recipients 14 days to comply. The deadline was set for June 19, 2026, after which the singer warned that he could seek legal remedies including injunctions, damages, and other actions available under Nigerian law.
More Than Just Music: What Rights Is Pasuma Protecting?
At first glance, Pasuma’s dispute may appear to be about songs uploaded without permission. However, the notice suggests the issue is much broader than that.
The Fuji star’s complaint covers several forms of intellectual property, including his sound recordings, musical compositions, visual recordings, image, name, and likeness. In other words, the dispute is not limited to who can distribute his music. It also concerns who has the right to use his identity and creative works for commercial purposes.
For musicians, intellectual property is often their most valuable asset. Every song recording, music video, performance clip, photograph, and even an artist’s recognizable image can carry commercial value. When such materials are uploaded, distributed, monetized, or used to attract audiences without authorization, artists may lose control over how their work is presented and how revenue generated from that work is shared.
This appears to be the core of Pasuma’s argument. According to the notice, the alleged unauthorized use of his works spans multiple digital channels, including streaming services, video platforms, lyrics websites, blogs, app stores, gaming platforms, and other online distribution networks.
The inclusion of his image, name, and likeness is particularly significant. In today’s digital economy, an artist’s brand can be just as valuable as the music itself. A recognizable name or image can drive views, subscriptions, advertising revenue, and audience engagement, making questions of ownership and authorization increasingly important.
By demanding proof of authorization from the entities named in the notice, Pasuma is essentially seeking clarity on who has the legal right to distribute, host, or profit from his creative works. The outcome could determine not only how his catalogue is used going forward but also who benefits financially from years of artistic output.
Why Copyright Battles Are Becoming More Common in Nigeria
Pasuma’s dispute is far from an isolated case. Across Nigeria’s entertainment industry, artists are becoming increasingly protective of their intellectual property as more music consumption shifts online.
The rise of streaming services, video-sharing platforms, digital distributors, blogs, lyrics websites, and social media has created new opportunities for artists to reach audiences. At the same time, it has also made it easier for creative works to be copied, uploaded, distributed, and monetized without the direct knowledge or approval of their owners.
Recognizing these challenges, Nigeria introduced the Copyright Act 2022, a law designed to strengthen protections for creators in the digital era. The legislation expanded safeguards for copyright owners and performers while providing clearer mechanisms for addressing online infringement and unauthorized digital exploitation.
Under the law, creators generally retain exclusive rights over how their works are reproduced, distributed, communicated to the public, and made available online. Unauthorized exploitation of those rights can expose individuals and companies to legal consequences.
For established artists such as Pasuma, whose catalogue spans decades and exists across multiple formats, monitoring the use of intellectual property has become increasingly complex. Songs, videos, photographs, performance clips, and artist branding can appear on numerous platforms within minutes, sometimes generating views, engagement, and revenue far from the creator’s control.
As a result, more Nigerian entertainers are turning to legal channels to assert ownership rights, demand accountability, and ensure that those benefiting from their creative works do so with proper authorization.
What Happens After the 14-Day Deadline?
For now, the ball is in the court of the companies and individuals named in Pasuma’s notice. The Fuji star has given the affected parties until June 19, 2026, to comply with his demands. That includes ceasing any alleged unauthorised use of his intellectual property, removing content from circulation, providing statements of account relating to any exploitation of his works, and submitting copies of any agreements that may authorise such use.
Several outcomes are possible before the deadline expires. Some of the recipients may choose to remove the disputed content, while others could seek to demonstrate that they have valid agreements or permissions allowing them to use Pasuma’s material. There is also the possibility of private discussions or negotiations aimed at resolving the dispute without court proceedings.
However, Pasuma’s notice makes it clear that legal action remains an option if the demands are not met. According to the document, the singer may approach a court of competent jurisdiction to enforce his intellectual property rights and seek remedies available under the law.
Those remedies could include court orders requiring the removal of infringing content, financial damages, and other sanctions provided under the Nigeria Copyright Act 2022. The notice also references the possibility of criminal liability, particularly in relation to corporate entities and their directors where applicable.
Whether the matter ultimately ends in compliance, settlement, or litigation, the coming weeks could prove significant. The response from the entities named in the notice will determine whether the dispute remains a legal warning or develops into one of the most closely watched intellectual property battles involving a Nigerian music veteran in recent years.
Conclusion
At its core, Pasuma’s ultimatum is about more than a dispute with 11 companies and individuals. It is a reminder that in today’s digital age, an artist’s music, image, and creative works are valuable assets that deserve protection.
As the June 19 deadline approaches, attention will be on how the affected parties respond and whether the matter proceeds to court. Whatever the outcome, the case highlights a growing reality in Nigeria’s entertainment industry: artists are becoming increasingly determined to take control of their intellectual property and how it is used.
