The three most conceited Filipinos
SOURCE: INQUIRER-Neal Cruz
I RECEIVED a letter from the lawyers of Willie Revillame after the publication of my column “Free Willie or Jail Willie?”, which was an objective narration of how the legal tussle between Willie and ABS-CBN came about. In the interest of fair play, we are publishing that letter:
Download our free toolbar here
SOURCE: INQUIRER-Neal Cruz
I RECEIVED a letter from the lawyers of Willie Revillame after the publication of my column “Free Willie or Jail Willie?”, which was an objective narration of how the legal tussle between Willie and ABS-CBN came about. In the interest of fair play, we are publishing that letter:
“…The crux of the matter is whether or not Revillame’s contract with ABS-CBN is still subsisting and enforceable. The provision of Revillame’s contract states that the contract is immediately terminated upon ABS-CBN’s cancellation of the program ‘Wowowee.’ However, despite canceling ‘Wowowee’ unilaterally, ABS-CBN refuses to let Revillame go, which necessitated the filing of the civil suit before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City to confirm the rescission of his contract and uphold his claim that he is the injured party.
“ABS-CBN responded with a claim of P486 million as liquidated damages for every week that ‘Willing Willie’ was shown, which claim has now accumulated to more than P2 billion. It likewise sought the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop Revillame from performing similar work with another network. Judge Luisito Cortez of RTC Branch 84 (who has since inhibited himself from the case on the petition of ABS-CBN) denied the network’s application for a TRO. Absent a TRO, the program ‘Willing Willie’ was launched and aired on TV-5. For the second time, ABS-CBN applied for a TRO, this time with the Court of Appeals, but the higher court likewise denied its application.
“After suffering two legal blows by twice failing to get a TRO, ABS-CBN has taken another tack. This time, a copyright infringement case was filed before the Regional Trial Court of Makati where the network, for the third time, asked for the issuance of a TRO to stop Revillame and ‘Willing Willie.’
“The Makati court is an improper venue for this infringement suit since none of the parties reside in Makati including ABS-CBN. Further, the contract between Revillame and ABS-CBN stipulates that any action between the parties should be filed and resolved exclusively before the courts in Quezon City.
“The filing of the case before the Makati court is forum shopping, which is prohibited by law as forum shopping trifles with the administration of justice and manipulates court processes. When multiple suits involving practically the same issues are filed, this may result in different courts issuing contradictory rulings. This is not what justice should be.
“ABS-CBN is not unaware and innocent of copyright infringement, having been embroiled in infringement complaints twice before—one involving ‘Kuwarta o Kahon’ and ‘Pera o Bayong’ and another involving ‘Winner Take All’ and ‘Smart Ka Na Ba?’
“In the ‘Kuwarta o Kahon’ and ‘Pera o Bayong’ case, ABS-CBN was sued for damages because its ‘Pera o Bayong,’ the most popular segment of its show ‘Magandang Tanghali Bayan,’ allegedly copied the format and mechanics of Pepe Pimentel’s ‘Kuwarta o Kahon.’ ABS-CBN won that case by relying primarily on the case of Joaquin v. Drilon (GR No. 108946) where the Supreme Court held that the format or mechanics of a television show was not copyrightable. The Joaquin case was Revillame’s very same defense in this copyright infringement case before the Makati City court. Ironically, ABS-CBN conveniently disregarded the doctrines laid down in the said Joaquin case—it was now claiming that this was not applicable in the case of Revillame.
“In the ‘Winner Take All’ and ‘Smart Ka Na Ba?’ dispute, a certain Wilfredo G. Cuevas sued ABS-CBN and Smart Communications Inc. for infringement and claimed that ABS-CBN stole his copyright for a game called ‘Winner Take All’ when ABS-CBN broadcast the game show entitled ‘Smart Ka Na Ba?’ ABS-CBN likewise heavily relied on the Joaquin case to support its position that the format of television programs was not entitled to copyright protection.
“What is sauce for the goose should also be sauce for the gander.
“As enunciated in the Joaquin case, formats and mechanics of a television show are not copyrightable. The Intellectual Property Code also enumerates what works are protected by copyright, and ideas, concepts, formats of, in this case, a television game show, are not included within the protected works. Copyright and its infringement involve legal as well as technical issues. The article, for all its worth, did not capture and comprehend the real picture of the controversy involving Revillame and ABS-CBN.” The rest of the letter deals with propaganda and praise for Revillame which I think we should not punish the readers with.
* * *
A word of advice: It would help Revillame if he had less conceit. The program “Willing Willie” just oozes with conceit that repels many viewers.
A group of journalists held a poll on who is the most conceited Filipino, and Revillame easily ranked first. Kris Aquino was runner-up. Not far behind was Manny Pacquiao.
All three, you would note, are newly rich. Which shows you what sudden wealth does to people—they become swellheads. They need head shrinkers who would deflate their enormous egos and put them back to earth.
* * *
Sa totoo lang, the newscasts of the three major networks are imitating one another. That may not be copyright infringement but they exasperate many viewers. All three have segments on show-biz gossip which are only concoctions of the movie scribes.
Even the network identifications are imitative. Channel 7 calls itself “Kapuso,” Channel 2 calls itself “Kapamilya,” so the newcomer TV5 calls itself “Kapatid.” Can’t they be more original?
“ABS-CBN responded with a claim of P486 million as liquidated damages for every week that ‘Willing Willie’ was shown, which claim has now accumulated to more than P2 billion. It likewise sought the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop Revillame from performing similar work with another network. Judge Luisito Cortez of RTC Branch 84 (who has since inhibited himself from the case on the petition of ABS-CBN) denied the network’s application for a TRO. Absent a TRO, the program ‘Willing Willie’ was launched and aired on TV-5. For the second time, ABS-CBN applied for a TRO, this time with the Court of Appeals, but the higher court likewise denied its application.
“After suffering two legal blows by twice failing to get a TRO, ABS-CBN has taken another tack. This time, a copyright infringement case was filed before the Regional Trial Court of Makati where the network, for the third time, asked for the issuance of a TRO to stop Revillame and ‘Willing Willie.’
“The Makati court is an improper venue for this infringement suit since none of the parties reside in Makati including ABS-CBN. Further, the contract between Revillame and ABS-CBN stipulates that any action between the parties should be filed and resolved exclusively before the courts in Quezon City.
“The filing of the case before the Makati court is forum shopping, which is prohibited by law as forum shopping trifles with the administration of justice and manipulates court processes. When multiple suits involving practically the same issues are filed, this may result in different courts issuing contradictory rulings. This is not what justice should be.
“ABS-CBN is not unaware and innocent of copyright infringement, having been embroiled in infringement complaints twice before—one involving ‘Kuwarta o Kahon’ and ‘Pera o Bayong’ and another involving ‘Winner Take All’ and ‘Smart Ka Na Ba?’
“In the ‘Kuwarta o Kahon’ and ‘Pera o Bayong’ case, ABS-CBN was sued for damages because its ‘Pera o Bayong,’ the most popular segment of its show ‘Magandang Tanghali Bayan,’ allegedly copied the format and mechanics of Pepe Pimentel’s ‘Kuwarta o Kahon.’ ABS-CBN won that case by relying primarily on the case of Joaquin v. Drilon (GR No. 108946) where the Supreme Court held that the format or mechanics of a television show was not copyrightable. The Joaquin case was Revillame’s very same defense in this copyright infringement case before the Makati City court. Ironically, ABS-CBN conveniently disregarded the doctrines laid down in the said Joaquin case—it was now claiming that this was not applicable in the case of Revillame.
“In the ‘Winner Take All’ and ‘Smart Ka Na Ba?’ dispute, a certain Wilfredo G. Cuevas sued ABS-CBN and Smart Communications Inc. for infringement and claimed that ABS-CBN stole his copyright for a game called ‘Winner Take All’ when ABS-CBN broadcast the game show entitled ‘Smart Ka Na Ba?’ ABS-CBN likewise heavily relied on the Joaquin case to support its position that the format of television programs was not entitled to copyright protection.
“What is sauce for the goose should also be sauce for the gander.
“As enunciated in the Joaquin case, formats and mechanics of a television show are not copyrightable. The Intellectual Property Code also enumerates what works are protected by copyright, and ideas, concepts, formats of, in this case, a television game show, are not included within the protected works. Copyright and its infringement involve legal as well as technical issues. The article, for all its worth, did not capture and comprehend the real picture of the controversy involving Revillame and ABS-CBN.” The rest of the letter deals with propaganda and praise for Revillame which I think we should not punish the readers with.
* * *
A word of advice: It would help Revillame if he had less conceit. The program “Willing Willie” just oozes with conceit that repels many viewers.
A group of journalists held a poll on who is the most conceited Filipino, and Revillame easily ranked first. Kris Aquino was runner-up. Not far behind was Manny Pacquiao.
All three, you would note, are newly rich. Which shows you what sudden wealth does to people—they become swellheads. They need head shrinkers who would deflate their enormous egos and put them back to earth.
* * *
Sa totoo lang, the newscasts of the three major networks are imitating one another. That may not be copyright infringement but they exasperate many viewers. All three have segments on show-biz gossip which are only concoctions of the movie scribes.
Even the network identifications are imitative. Channel 7 calls itself “Kapuso,” Channel 2 calls itself “Kapamilya,” so the newcomer TV5 calls itself “Kapatid.” Can’t they be more original?
