DJB:
Thanks for the correction Sassy. But what was the answer to my question? Does he claim to be the CREATOR of the works and that all the visible and identifiable components of it are actually his? Before we start emoting over PCIJ supposed turn to crass commercialism and unethical behaviour? What is your opinion about the observation that the basis of his komiks are probably screengrabs of ABSCBN broadcasts?
Eto naman yung sagot ni pikon.
Sassy Lawyer:
Dean, nice try in provoking me and trying to get me to write something with the thought of diverting attention to you.
Won’t work.
That’s your last comment in my blog.
di man lang sinagot ang tanong... LOL.
anyway, re the topic of SL's thread, PCIJ did wrong kung hindi nila i-attribute yung original works ni Happy. And it is good to see Sheila Coronel willing to do the right thing and own up to the mistake, apologize and offer compensation for Happy Vergara (although apparently it is still not enough).
ang sa akin naman, i'm all for bloggers protecting their stuff on the internet. but i do hope that the very same people that are so protective of their materials on the net are not the same ones who often steal photos (video caps) and articles from the Mainsteam media.
UPDATE: One thing Happy did that was smart was to make sumbong to the biggest pro-arroyo blogger out there. LOL.
Sassy and her cronies like cathcath have been looking for something like this to knock down PCIJ a peg or two (because most of PCIJ's reports lately are not exactly flattering to their president, GMA... and Veneracion is obviously not happy with it.)
UPDATE: UPDATE: Sabi ni Happy Vergara:
Dean, you may be right in my being ambiguous about what I own and do not own. No one’s suing (as some might like to think; and definitely not a “blog war” geez) and I certainly made it clear that I own none of the images.
I wonder kung humingi rin siya ng permission na gamitin yung images na hiniram o ninakaw niya sa Mainstream media.
In the end, I'm not really all that exercised about this "issue" unlike Connie because I don't have an axe to grind against the "anti-Arroyo" PCIJ. Nag-apologize na ang PCIJ and they're willing to compensate Happy, so good for them.
Posts
5 comments:
“Magnanimous in victory, gracious in defeat.” I wish some people would try to follow that rule.
It's obvious na Happy is the "victor" here, at nagkamali ang PCIJ.
But Happy seems to be not content with the apology and compensation being offered by PCIJ, and is looking for more blood...
Hi John,
Thanks for the link on Happy Vergara and the comics issue.
Based on my readings in her link which included some of the PCIJ replies in her blogsite, I believe Happy Vergara whom I don't know from Adam is not really ASKING for blood.
From what I've read, she is demanding a PUBLIC recognition by PCIJ of her right to the comic strip. I don't know how PCIJ can do this beyond officially recognizing Happy's right to copyright IN the book.
Paying her for that copyright is normal in my opinion.
What I cannot quite comprehend is WHY PCIJ proceeded to PRINT the comic strip in hardcopy without having obtained FIRST the formal approval of its owner.
Having said that, I'm sure Happy and the PCIJ will both come to a happy arrangement to resolve the issue.
Good luck to both of them.
From what I've read, she is demanding a PUBLIC recognition by PCIJ of her right to the comic strip. I don't know how PCIJ can do this beyond officially recognizing Happy's right to copyright IN the book.
Happy's a he, Anna.
there are 2 ways to do this i guess. one is to pull out all the PCIJ books and reprint them with apology and recognition of Happy's work. two, put a insert on every PCIJ book on sale with the apology/recognition.
Paying her for that copyright is normal in my opinion.
i agree.
What I cannot quite comprehend is WHY PCIJ proceeded to PRINT the comic strip in hardcopy without having obtained FIRST the formal approval of its owner.
a mistake on their part that i hope was rectified with compensation and apology and recognition. pcij did ask the permission of the other artists for their work. i don't know why they were unable to do that to Happy.
Based on my readings in her link which included some of the PCIJ replies in her blogsite, I believe Happy Vergara whom I don't know from Adam is not really ASKING for blood.
Well, he seems to be. May public apology/recognition at compensation na ino-offer na sa kanya, but he seems to still be dissatisfied with it at that time. He considered these amends being offered by PCIJ as a "slap on the wrist" lang raw. And he wants a "more public" public apology.
heck, even the NYT doesn't do corrections or apologies on the front page. it's all located in the page 3 corrections box.
Yeah John,
It's gonna be a bit costly but I guess PCIJ will have to bite the bullet:
"there are 2 ways to do this i guess. one is to pull out all the PCIJ books and reprint them with apology and recognition of Happy's work. two, put a insert on every PCIJ book on sale with the apology/recognition."
Or perhaps offer Happy a PCIJ post as an official political cartoonist after all, she's/he's good, don't you think?
Btw, is Happy getting royalties from the sale of the books on top of the proposed copyright fee?
Or perhaps offer Happy a PCIJ post as an official political cartoonist after all, she's/he's good, don't you think?
nah. happy said that he really doesn't want the money or a job from PCIJ. gusto lang raw niya ng public apology from PCIJ.
i hope PCIJ and happy have settled their differences.
Btw, is Happy getting royalties from the sale of the books on top of the proposed copyright fee?
it's very possible anna. i'm not sure exactly kung ano ang napagusapan nila. but PCIJ said that it was willing to compensate happy for using his work.
Post a Comment