Red Sports ( vs. SPH (Singapore Press Holdings): the case of a David-wannabe against an established Goliath?

In the online article published on 10/08 in Red Sports website, "Oh, my! Singapore Press Holdings website steals from Red Sports (and you can add Lianhe Wanbao to the list too)", the writer lamented about the alleged use of the Red Sports' copyrighted photo by one of Singapore Press Holding websites, as well as by SPH's printed newspaper Lianhe Wanbao.

The understandably-furious writer penned a compelling article complete with the screenshots of the alleged infringement. It's irresistible. And unthinkable indeed if such things could have happened.

I mean, hey, it's SPH we are talking about!

While I agree SPH as an organisation may need to bear the responsibility, I'd prefer thinking that the bulk of if should have been thrust on their journalists' shoulders.

The journalists are the guilty party. Not even their editors.

It won't be fair to assume that the SPH's editors are responsible to ensure all the photos or articles are rightly owned by the journalists who submit them. Please la, how do you expect the editors could have checked each & every single of photos or articles? I don't think we can do that using 'google', right?

The best course of action is therefore for SPH to admit (without much delay) that an infringement of intellectual property had happened, that it's very much regrettable, that they're sorry & that disciplinary action has been taken against the journalists (it will do good to be more specific on what kind of punishment it is).

A Roman Stoic philosopher namely Lucius Annaeus Seneca aka Seneca the Younger once quoted "errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum" which in plain English: "to err is human, but to persist is diabolical". SPH would do well to enforce a very harsh penalty against the guilty journalists & by doing so, the company would have discouraged future recurrence of the incident.


Post a Comment

Blog Archive