PEP.PH – Folk artist Gary Granada is asking for the support of fellow artists to join him in his crusade against the GMA Kapuso Foundation for allegedly “stealing” an original idea and disregarding the law concerning intellectual property rights.
“Gaya ng nakasanayan sa advertising industry, binigyan nila ako ng lyrics which I’m supposed to set to music na dapat ang haba ay 60 seconds,” said the singer-songwriter, whose popular mainstream compositions include “‘Pag Nanalo ang Ginebra” and “Mabuti Pa Sila,” among others. As a songwriter commissioned to lend his expertise to a project, Gary pointed out his right to tweak and change a few, or if necessary, a number of lines he felt necessary to fit the melody he had in mind.
The final study submitted by Gary, unfortunately, was turned down thus allowing the client to scout for other composers who might meet their vision for the project. A seasoned songwriter well versed on the business side of the entire trade, Gary reiterated he has no problem dealing with his client’s final judgment whether to accept or reject his proposal.
The problem started when Gary heard the approved jingle played on the airwaves purportedly done by a different composer. Gary claimed that the version used by his former clients resembles the “rejected” study he initially submitted.
“Obviously, ginamit nila ‘yong edited lyrics batay sa pagkasukat ko,” he took note. “Pero hindi lang po ‘yon ‘yong issue. Bukod sa lyrics, ginamit din nilang tungtungan ang musical structure na ginawa ko.”
Gary continued, “Nagsumbong ako sa FILSCAP, ‘yon po yong Filipino Society of Composers Authors and Publishers. Nagpadala ito ng sulat sa GMA. Tinanong namin kung bakit di nila ginawa ‘yong friendly reminder namin na kung ipagawa nila sa iba, ang ibigay nila sa gagawa ay ang original nilang lyrics at huwag gamitin ang ginawa kong study.”
The letter containing the points raised by Gary and FILSCAP reportedly fell on deaf ears, which the songsmith labeled as an “arrogant” gesture on GMA-7 part.
Gary likewise lashed out at the network’s legal team for its statement challenging his argument by saying that the material was a collective effort, meaning that Gary has no right to claim sole ownership of the idea, more importantly the lyrics used for the jingle.
“Kung ganun, e, di ang ibig sabihin pala, kung paano sinukat ‘yong lyrics at music para magkasya sa isang minuto ay collective namin ginawa ‘yon. ‘Yong paano pagtugmain ‘yong mga letra sa mga nota ay collective namin ginawa ‘yon. ‘Yong kung saan dalhin ang daloy ng harmony ay collective namin ginawa ‘yon. At kung ganun na nga, marami naman pala sa GMA Network that can collectively compose, bakit pa nila ako kinuha?
“Sa tinagal-tagal ko sa trabahong ito, noon ko lang naranasan ang mag-compose collectively. Naalala ko ‘yong short meeting namin na ‘yon, mahaba kasi ‘yong lyrics kaya kailangan pang paiksiin. Halimbawa, ‘yong ‘aking kinabukasan’ ok ba sa inyo kung gawin kong ‘bukas aking kinabukasan,’ pitong syllables. ‘Bukas’ dalawa lang, tatango-tango naman ‘yong iba. Ganun pala ‘yong mag-compose collectively,” Gary said sarcastically.
“Kaya nga ang tawag sa inyo ay copywriter at ang tawag sa akin ay composer kasi babaling-balintongin mo man ‘yang utak mo ng isang milyon beses, hindi mo ma-compose ‘yong lyrics na ‘yon ng ganun. And you have the audacity to tell me that my composition is our collective effort?”
GMA NETWORK RELEASES OFFICIAL STATEMENT
In an official statement sent by the GMA Kapuso Foundation over the weekend, the charity institution distanced itself from the material in question by saying that it “had nothing at all to do with the composition of the music of the writing of the lyrics.”
The rest of the statement reads:
“Mr. Granada claims that the lyrics used for the plug is his version. We dispute that. GMA Marketing provided Mr. Granada the complete lyrics for the music he was supposed to compose. He changed a word in these lyrics. With due respect to Mr. Granda, that does not make the lyrics, under copyright law, his version or his work.
“Certainly, Mr. Granada cannot claim sole authorship of the lyrics because he himself admits that GMA provided the lyrics and that he ‘rewrote’ portions of it, which means that he admits as well the authorship of the lyrics by GMA Marketing.
“Neither can he claim joint authorship of the lyrics. There is joint authorship when two requisites concur: (1) there must be an intention between the parties to be joint authors at the time the work was created, and (2) the contributions to the work of the party claiming to be a joint author must be independently copyrightable (see Erickson v. Trinity Theatre Inc, 13 F. 3d 1106[1994]).
“It is clear that the first requisite is lacking. For a work to be considered a “joint work,” two or more persons must collaborate with the intent to create a unitary work. In this case, Mr. Granada was engaged by GMA Marketing to write the music to the lyrics that had already been completed by GMA. Neither GMA Marketing nor Mr. Granada intended to be joint authors of the lyrics.
“The second requisite is also clearly absent. The changes to the GMA lyrics, whether all or some of them originated from Mr. Granada, are mere ideas, or refinements to it. In the case cited, it was held that ideas, refinements, and suggestions, standing alone, are not independently copyrightable.”
