The long-standing public feud between cryptocurrency entrepreneur Linus Williams Ifejirika (Blord) and social media critic Martins Vincent Otse (VeryDarkMan/VDM) has escalated into a landmark intellectual property dispute. In January 2026, the conflict moved beyond digital accusations into the legal realm as Blord officially trademarked the name “Ratel” and issued a “cease and desist” order against VDM.
1. The Trademark Chess Move
On January 19, 2026, Blord announced that his legal team, led by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), had successfully registered “Ratel” as his business brand.
-
The Directive: Blord has barred VDM from using the name to describe his supporters or movement, stating that any future use requires his formal, written approval.
-
The App Launch: Coinciding with the legal move, Blord launched the “Ratel” App, a fintech platform for cryptocurrency swaps, gift cards, and bill payments, effectively embedding the name into his commercial infrastructure.
2. The Conflict Origins: From China to the Police
The dispute is rooted in an October 2025 clash during VDM’s trip to China.
-
The “Iphone 17” Scandal: VDM accused Blord of selling refurbished “iPhone XR” units modified to look like “iPhone 17 Pro Max” models at inflated prices, labeling the practice as fraudulent.
-
The Petition: Following these accusations, VDM reportedly submitted a petition to the Nigerian Police to investigate Blord’s business practices, leading to a period of heightened tensions and public mudslinging.
3. VDM’s Counter-Defense: “Spirit Over Papers”
VeryDarkMan has responded to the legal threat with characteristic defiance, arguing that a brand is defined by its community rather than a certificate.
-
The Authenticity Argument: VDM insisted that “Ratel” is a “spirit” and an identity he fostered long before the trademark filing.
-
Legal Loopholes: Intellectual property lawyers have noted that trademarks are class-specific. If Blord registered “Ratel” under a “Fintech/Banking” class (Class 36), he may not be able to legally stop VDM from using it in an “Entertainment or Social Activism” capacity (Class 41), provided there is no consumer confusion.
4. Public and Legal Implications
The case has sparked a national conversation on “Trademark Squatting” and the rights of influencers over their fanbases.
-
Ethnic and Business Sensitivity: The dispute has occasionally veered into sensitive territory, with supporters of both figures debating the ethics of targeting established entrepreneurs versus the need for consumer accountability.
-
The Ceasefire Rumors: While reports on January 20 suggested Blord might withdraw the legal order following “high-level interventions,” the formal status remains a point of intense social media monitoring.
The Bottom Line
The “Ratel” saga is a cautionary tale for Nigerian influencers and entrepreneurs on the importance of early trademark registration. While Blord currently holds the “paper” advantage with his fintech app, VDM’s “brand of the people” approach sets the stage for a complex legal battle over who truly owns the identity of the Ratel movement in Nigeria.
