Mural Mural on the Wall

November 28, 2007

It's hard to take sides on this burning issue between the National Press Club and the Neo Angono Artists Collective.  It seems to me that everyone is on the side of the artists who painted the mural.  Legally, they're correct — as artists and creators, the Intellectual Property Code grants them moral rights over their works such that they can prevent the unauthorized alteration of their work "which would be prejudicial to (their) honor or reputation."  Moral rights are retained even though the artist has given up his copyright (although he can waive his moral rights, too).  Note that in the case of commissioned works like the NPC Mural, the copyright is retained by the artist (in the absence of a contrary agreement).  So, theoretically, the Neo Angono Collective can sue for copyright infringement, too, on the theory that the work is an unauthorized transformation of the work.

Well and good.  

But it occurred to me that the National Press Club might have a defense and so I thought one up.  It's based on information passed on to me by an NPC officer.  Apparently, the press didn't carry the NPC's side of the story (irony of ironies, isn't it?).  Anyway, my legal defense for them is based on the narration of facts that was relayed to me.  It seems that the NPC required the Artists to submit thumbnails of the mural and the NPC Board approved every aspect of the work.  However, what was delivered deviated from the approved thumbnails.  These were the items that were subsequently changed.  In short, the Artists made insertions into the work that their client (the NPC) did not approve.  You could say that the NPC was duped and later, outsmarted in the media storm that followed, because the victim was turned into a bad guy.

So, on the assumption that the Artists surreptitiously inserted unacceptable items into the mural, the NPC can defend itself on the ground that the NPC is merely exercising its Constitutionally protected right to free speech when it altered the mural.  Free speech?   Well, I've never been to the NPC nor have I viewed the mural but I imagine that if I see the mural, I would assume that the work represents the views of the NPC.  This is why the NPC board approved every aspect of the work — to ensure that their speech was accurately depicted in the work.  However, the Artists inserted their own speech into the work and now insist that their speech be retained in the work citing as their legal basis, copyright law. 
(more…)

An Open Letter to Teddy Te

November 27, 2007

What follows is a letter addressed to Prof. Teddy Te in response to his post entitled "Ingratitude. In Gratitude."  I would have left this matter alone but he did name me personally and I feel the need to respond. I think this is not the best way to debate this issue but Teddy chose the venue and made the initial volley.  There is a need to clear the air.

Although I do not adopt all of the statements below (I didn't sign the letter), I believe that Teddy has been misrepresenting (or maybe he misunderstands) the facts.  For context, read his post first, then the letter below.

There's another document and some background to this (not to mention an earlier post by Teddy, too).  Maybe I'll get into that later.  But for now, read on. 

 

 — ◊ ◊ ◊ —

 

                                               27 November 2007

Dear Teddy,

OUR STATEMENT STOOD ON THE PRINCIPLE that the Search Process must not be
subverted. Instead of answering us on the level of principle, you attacked us as
persons, labeled us as ingrates, and viewed it all as the politics of patronage.
You have committed two basic mistakes.

FIRST, YOU GOT THE FACTS WRONG. You say that we “demand[ed] that Dean
Carlota not be allowed any extension of his term beyond his birthday.”
(more…)

Guess Who’s Back? . . . Again . . .

Ok. So, here's another feeble attempt at blogging.

Last Saturday,  we had the pleasure of hosting a mini iBlog about Blogging and the 2010 Elections.  It was hosted by the UP Law Internet and Society Program but put together by Janette Toral.   It was an informative session and I'm proud to say that all of the participants were there because they were seriously interested in blogging.  After all, why spend a Saturday morning at the UP College of Law in Diliman? 

Anyways, as with many of Janette's events, we usually open up with passing the mike around and introducing yourself (and your blog).  When it came to me, I had to admit that although I have a blog, I haven't posted in some time (more like a year).  The usual excuse is — I don't have the time.  The truth is, I do.  Except that I've been doing other things with my time — maybe I'll blog about it sometime. 

But for now, I've resolved to blog (once in a while or when I have something to say — and I always do).  As usual, I don't vouch for the truth or accuracy of the facts only the sincerity of my opinions (sometimes, facts get in the way or as Stephen Colbert would likely say, "Relying on facts to form an opinion or to promote a course of action is a cop-out."  

On that note,  here I go . . . again.