“When the comes to become, what becomes of the come.” — Kingsley Ozumba Mbadiwe
In my poem: “You Will Not Rule Forever”, I reflected on the transience of power
“Power is nothing without control. Sometimes it is like fire on petrol. You better renovate the prison. Life is a complex prism”
That warning is timely! The recent remand of Blord at the instance of VeryDarkMan (VDM) over what appears to be an image rights and identity dispute, forces us to revisit first principles; both legal and moral.
Advertisement
1. The Law: Passing Off is Not Impersonation
While I hold no brief for Blord or his legal team, we must separate law from mob sentiment.
Two landmark Nigerian cases are instructive: ‘Niger Chemists v Nigeria Chemists’ and ‘Hearts v Sweet Hearts’.
Both affirm that the unauthorized use of another’s name or brand for commercial gain is the civil wrong of passing off. It is actionable in damages and injunction. It is not a criminal offence.
Impersonation is different. It occurs when a person fraudulently assumes the identity of another to commit fraud. For impersonation to stand, key ingredients must exist:
Legal exclusivity of a juristic personality — a natural person or creation of law.
Identity known to law — not a social media alias like “VeryDarkMan” or “Blord” that exists only in the court of online trends.
These are not registered names under any institutional nomenclature, authenticating body in Nigeria.
So when VDM claims to have trademarked “Blord”, the question must be asked: would VDM himself then be liable for impersonation? The law does not bend to clout.
2. The Moral Angle: Power, Precedent, and the Crab Mentality
Beyond the legal technicalities lies a moral question: What kind of society are we building if we criminalize civil disputes because one party has social media leverage?
• Transience of Power: Today it is Blord in custody. Tomorrow it could be VDM, or any of us, if we normalize using state machinery to settle brand disputes. Power without restraint, is again, “fire on petrol.”
• Due Process vs Mob Justice: Social media outrage is not evidence. Turning civil wrongs into criminal spectacles erodes public trust in our courts and emboldens a culture of “crab mentality” — pulling others down because we can.
Advertisement
• Rule of Law for All: What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander! If we applaud the remand today because we dislike the defendant, we surrender the principle that should protect us tomorrow.
3. Why This Matters for Public Debate
1. Business & IP Education: Nigerian creators, influencers, and startups must understand the difference between passing off, trademark infringement, and impersonation. Ignorance creates victims and villains where proper contracts and civil suits should exist.
2. Misuse of State Power: Remanding citizens over what is essentially a commercial dispute sets a dangerous precedent. The police and courts are not debt collectors or brand enforcers.
3. Social Media’s Shadow Legal System: We are witnessing a parallel “court” where followers, clout, and hashtags decide guilt. If unchecked, it will weaken the real judiciary.
4. The Way Forward
A. Civil Remedies First: Disputes over names, images, and brands should go through the Federal High Court as passing off or trademark claims, not police cells.
2. Register, Don’t Rant: If your brand matters, register it with the Trademarks Registry. A tweet is not a title deed.
3. Moral Restraint: Influence is a public trust. Weaponizing it to criminalize opponents today creates the noose that hangs us tomorrow.
The VDM–Blord saga is not just gist. It is a stress test of our commitment to law over clout, and to principle over personality. Do not be part of the social media mob. Choose rationality over sentiments.
Because power, indeed, is transient. You may have today, but you do not have tomorrow.
It was Dr. Franz Frannon that said: When consciouness power meets powerless consciousness, the result is double tragedy.
Written By Douglas Ogbankwa Esq.
douglasogbankwa@gmail.com
Sponsored Content
About the Author
