Home » Archives » 28. November 2007

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…)

Posted by disini at 3:20 pm | permalink | comments[1]