UK-based Ghanaian music publisher Mark Darlington Osae has shared his opinion on the ongoing copyright row between dancehall artiste Shatta Wale and producer MOG Beatz.

The dispute erupted after MOG claimed that Shatta Wale failed to pay him for production work on two of his albums. 

He further alleged that Shatta Wale had taken credit as producer of some of the songs in order to profit from catalogue sales. The producer consequently moved to have some of the works pulled down.

Sharing his thoughts on Facebook, Mark Darlington described the matter as part of Ghana’s long-standing intellectual property (IP) challenges. He said industry structures had failed to protect creators and added that misunderstandings of this nature would continue if systems remain weak.

Below is Mark Darlington’s full post:

“My take on:

MOG BEATZ & SHATTA WALE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (IP) ISSUES

I have been a staunch advocate for IP rights in Ghana and have always made my voice heard on these matters. I am not surprised by this Shatta Wale/MOG Beatz impasse at all, as such misunderstands have been ongoing in our space in Ghana for a considerable length of time. You know I don’t shy away from such matters. I have too much passion for this to overlook it.

Our music IP-related institutions have been ineffective in taking charge, educating, and operating to standard levels to protect IP owners/creators. The systems simply either do not exist or do not work to today’s standards.

MOG is accusing Shatta Wale of taking credit as a producer for some of his works in order to sell some of his (Shatta’s) catalogs. This is a very serious allegation leveled against undoubtedly one of the biggest artists currently in the country. If MOG’s allegations are founded, then that is a very bad look and very unethical. If they are unfounded, then that is a bad PR move that puts MOG’s credibility in jeopardy and, in a worst-case scenario, may require him to answer in court if Shatta takes him on.

When music is created, there are two elements: the composition and the lyrics. Usually a producer creates (composes) a beat/instrumental with the artist in the studio (custom-made). However, these days it is common for producers to create a full beat and send it to artists. The artist adds lyrics to the beat/instrumental to create a “derivative” work. (I say “derivative” because instrumentals could stand as a wholly-owned piece of music on its own).

The artist and producer now co-own the rights to the new work or song created, since they are both contributors. In terms of composition, it is split based on contribution to the creative process or by agreement. Where a producer sends an already completed beat to an artist to create lyrics for it, the usual industry recommendation is a 50/50 split in terms of composition. This is where publishing/mechanical rights come into play.

Now the completed song or “derived” work is called the “master.” This is owned by whoever finances the production—usually a record label or artist. However, unless the producer has agreed to waive his producer points by taking a monetary payment and signing an agreement to that effect, payment for a beat or studio sessions is usually just an advance on producer points. Unless otherwise agreed, a producer’s composition rights have nothing to do with that payment. He or she still retains that right.

Now this is where it gets interesting! If the producer is not paid (this is called an “advance”), or no agreement is made in relation to producer points, the producer becomes the owner of the master if they own the studio or paid for the session/studio booking. By industry standards, it is assumed that the producer becomes the financier of the project.

With that cleared, the questions are:

What was the agreement between MOG and Shatta Wale?

In terms of composition rights/publishing, was there a contract/split sheet agreed upon and signed, and what were the terms?

Did MOG register his shares with his publisher and his PRO/CMO? Did he register his works with a copyright office?

In terms of advance (regarding producer points on the master recording), did money exchange hands, or did Shatta do some favors for MOG to cover this? Was there an agreement to this?

Did MOG agree to waive his rights to the masters by taking some sort of payment, cash or otherwise?

Was MOG given his agreed credits, producer points, and his publishing share, and later revoked by Shatta in order for Shatta to “sell” his catalogs as he is alleging?

What actual rights did Shatta actually “sell” as alleged to a third party?

Were all interested parties informed about the potential sale of the catalogs/works, if they actually had interest in the works?

What are the legal implications?”

The disagreement between Shatta Wale and MOG is not new. In 2021, MOG publicly accused Shatta Wale of not paying him for producing ten tracks on the Reign and Wonder Boy albums. Shatta Wale at the time admitted he had not paid MOG in cash but claimed he had supported him in other ways. The matter generated heated exchanges online but was never formally resolved.

This latest clash has reignited debates about copyright ownership, producer points and fair compensation in the Ghanaian music industry.

Legal observers say the outcome could have wider implications, particularly as more artists seek to monetise their catalogues through licensing and publishing deals.