Watch the GMA 7 news report: Mark Solis for alleged plagiarism

GMA News Channel 7 asked for a legal  opinion on the Mark Solis entry to the photography contest of the Chilean Embassy, which entry (photograph) was found to have been right-clicked from the site of a Brazilian photographer’s Flickr account for which  Mark Solis had apologized.

     Watch for the interview on GMA 7 news!

       The GMA 7 cameraman took a video of the text of the moral rights provision of the Intellectual Property Code .

     Watch for the discussion!

      The cameraman also took a video of Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code. Just in case the lighting wasn’t that great in the conference room (kasi the text was  in small font of the crime book), here’s the provision in bigger font :

Art. 172. Falsification by private individual and use of falsified documents. — The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods and a fine of not more than P5,000 pesos shall be imposed upon:

     xxx

2. Any person who, to the damage of a third party, or with the intent to cause such damage, shall in any private document commit any of the acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding article. (underscoring supplied)

xxxx                   xxxx

According to  Justice Aquno :   A private document has been defined by the Supreme Court as “every deed or instrument executed by a private person, without the intervention of a notary public or other person, legally authorized, by which document some disposition or agreement is proven, evidenced, or set forth. “

    On the other hand, “acts of falsification enumerated in the next preceding article” refer to the following:

1.Counterfeiting or imitating any handwriting, signature, etc.;

2.Making it appear that a person took part in any act when in fact they did not;

3.Attributing certain statements to a person who in fact did not make them;

4.MAKING UNTRUTHFUL STATEMENTS IN A NARRATION OF FACTS (caps and underscoring supplied: this is a pertinent provision to the action being contemplated by those who have been duped by the person in question).

5.Altering true dates;

6.MAKING ALTERATIONS IN A GENUINE DOCUMENT WHICH CHANGES ITS MEANING;

7. Issuing as an authenticated copy of an original when no such original exists;

8.Intercalating any instrument in relation to a protocol, registry, or official book.

 xxxxxxxxxxxx

       Watch for the news report!

.

Staff of Sen. Vicente Sotto III admits lifting paragraphs (text, some legal provisions).

      News peg: “The chief of staff of Sen. Vicente “Tito” Sotto III finally admitted that parts of his speech against the RH bill on Wednesday, August 15, were copied from a blog by a foreign author who calls herself the “Healthy Home Economist”.

      “Lawyer Hector A. Villacorta, Sotto’s chief of staff, wrote Sarah Pope a response in the comments section of her blog in which he said: ” `I understand you felt slighted that your blog was not attributed to you which became part of the speech of the senator.’ ” (rappler.com)

      The following provisions of the Intellectual Property Code may be relevant to the right of the author to require that his/her work be attributed to him/her: 

      “Chapter X. Moral Rights. Section 193. Scope of Moral Rights. – The author of a work shall, independently of the economic rights in Section 177 or the grant of an assignment or license with respect to such right, have the right:

     “193.1.     To require that the authorship of the works be attributed to him, in particular, the right that his name, as far as practicable, be indicated in a prominent way on the copies, and in connection with the public use of his work;

       “193.2.   To make any alterations of his work prior to, or to withhold it from publication;

        “193.3.  To object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, his work which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation; and

         “193.4. To restrain the use of his name with respect to any work not of his own creation or in a distorted version of his work. (Sec. 34, P.D. No. 49)”