Why Nigeria’s music industry needs balance, not a revolt

Nigeria’s music industry has evolved into a global cultural powerhouse, producing Afrobeats superstars whose songs dominate international charts and streaming platforms. Yet, behind the glamour lies an uncomfortable reality (an increasing number of artists are abandoning record labels in pursuit of ownership of their master recordings). While the trend reflects a growing understanding of the business of music, it also exposes structural weaknesses in the relationship between artists and record companies.

The recent experiences of artists such as Crayon and Zinoleesky are only the latest chapters in a recurring story. After benefiting from the financial backing, marketing machinery and industry connections of their respective labels, many artists eventually seek independence, citing poor royalty payments, lack of transparency, limited creative freedom and contracts that leave them with little control over the music they created.

The debate, however, should not be reduced to artists versus record labels. Both sides have legitimate interests, and the future of Nigeria’s music industry depends on creating a system where those interests are fairly balanced.

There is no denying the value record labels bring to emerging artists. Breaking a new act in today’s highly competitive music market requires significant investment. Studio production, music videos, publicity campaigns, playlist promotion, tour support, branding, digital marketing and international distribution all require capital that many young musicians simply do not have.

Labels also absorb substantial financial risks. For every successful artist, several others fail to recover the investments made in them. It is therefore understandable that labels seek ownership or control of master recordings as a means of recovering their investment and generating profits.

Without these investments, many of Nigeria’s biggest stars might never have reached the global audience they enjoy today.

Indeed, the current model also has glaring shortcomings.

Many young artists enter contracts with little or no legal representation. Excited by the promise of fame, they often signed agreements they neither fully understood nor had the bargaining power to negotiate. Years later, after becoming successful, they discover that the recordings generating millions of streams belong almost entirely to someone else.

This has fuelled allegations of opaque royalty calculations, delayed payments, unequal treatment within labels and contracts that continue long after the label has recovered its initial investment.

The rise of streaming services has further complicated matters. While digital platforms have democratised music distribution, they have also highlighted how little many artists understand about revenue generation. Millions of streams do not necessarily translate into millions of naira, and ownership of masters alone does not automatically guarantee wealth. Without effective marketing, fan engagement and commercial exploitation, even a fully owned catalogue may generate modest returns.

This explains why complete independence is not necessarily the ideal solution.

Running a successful music career today requires far more than recording songs. Artists must manage branding, touring, merchandising, publishing, licensing, endorsements, taxation, legal compliance and global distribution. These responsibilities demand expertise that many creatives lack, making strategic partnerships indispensable.

The better approach is neither absolute label control nor complete artist independence. Instead, Nigeria should embrace a hybrid model built on transparency, shared ownership and long-term partnership.

The management structure behind Grammy-winning Tems provides an instructive example. Rather than surrendering permanent ownership of her masters, her team negotiated licensing arrangements that allowed co-ownership and included reversion clauses. Such agreements enable investors to recover their capital while ensuring that artists eventually regain ownership of the works that define their careers.

This model reflects international best practice and creates incentives for both parties. Labels continue to invest because they are assured of returns, while artists remain motivated because they know their intellectual property will ultimately revert to them.

Beyond contract reform, greater emphasis must be placed on education. Many Nigerian artists still enter the industry without basic knowledge of copyright law, publishing, royalty structures or intellectual property management. Entertainment law should no longer be viewed as a luxury reserved for established stars but as an essential part of every artist’s career development.

Government agencies, collecting societies, music associations and record labels themselves should invest in regular industry education programmes to reduce avoidable disputes and encourage informed negotiations.

Transparency is equally important, as labels should adopt clearer royalty reporting systems and review revenue-sharing arrangements as artists achieve commercial success. A relationship built on openness is more likely to produce loyalty than one sustained by restrictive contracts.

When artists retain meaningful ownership, labels receive fair returns on investment, and contracts reward growth rather than restrict it, Nigeria’s music industry will be better positioned to create lasting wealth for all stakeholders.