[bajoyjoy]

^i agree. it doesnt discount the fact na nangopya ng bonggang-bongga yung mama. pano ka pa maniniwala sa susunod nyang sasabihin e alam mo ng (1) hindi sya ang sumusulat ng speech nya -- which is a normal practice naman, (2) hindi nagreresearch ang mga tao nya ng mabuti (3) hindi nagveverify ng info si sotto bago magmagaling sa senado...

@bauer-- yikes, ano ba yan, yung personal experience na nga lang na part ng speech nya ang aasahan mong kanya talaga at di nakaw, ngayon di na naman pala totoo. tama na naman ung blogger sa sinabi nyang "you are a lying thief!".

well said, @makasabat_po.. sobrang katamaran at kabobohan nga yung ginawa nya at ng buong opisina nya. at pangangatawanan pa nila na tama sila, lalong umaangat ang kabobohan ng mga ganyang di kayang umamin ng pagkakamali. kung nagsabi na lang sila na nagkaron nga ng oversight, sori nakaligtaan banggitin ung source, e di tapos na usapan. kaso ayaw nilang aminin na nag-copy-paste (at pati maling punctuation kopyang-kopya) na nga sila ng idea ng ibang tao AT lalabas pa na ang ginawa nilang basehan sa kanilang arguments against RH bill e isang blog about healthy recipes,  hindi man lang expert na matatawag. kahiya-hiya nga naman at "unelegant"<word used by his lawyer. and ung sinasabi nilang pareho sila ng pinagkunan na source nung blogger, e bakit hindi nila ipakita ung copy ng book or research nung dr. natasha mcbride kung totoong nagkataon lang na pareho sila ng na-quote.

tapos humirit pa ang chief of staff nya (atty villacorta) na ang blogs daw ay public domain at hindi copyrighted at exempted ang government from copyright law? 1972 pa yata nakapasa ng bar yan kaya di na nabasa ang Intellectual Property Code in its present form. he's putting the legal profession under a bad light sa mga pinagsasabi nya. mahina na nga si sotto, ganyan pa ang adviser nya? take note, Senate Majority Leader ang posisyon ni tito. hayzzz, patawarin!

magpprivilege speech daw si tito sen next week about plagiarism, sana hindi lifted from another blog or original work na naman ang babasahin nya LOL... kung mapaiyak ulit sya, baka dahil sa kahihiyan na ng mga sunod-sunod na kapalpakan nila.

ang sabi nga sa blog ni professionalheckler:

"Sen. Sotto, you are nothing, but a second-rate, trying hard, COPY-PASTE!"

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/08/17/12/sotto-would-be-championing-piracy
MANILA, Philippines - Senator Tito Sotto would be promoting piracy if he follows the advice of his chief of staff that Internet content is free to be used and claimed as his own without laws being violated, a journalist and blogger said Friday.

South China Morning Post correspondent Raissa Robles, who also has a blog on ABS-CBNNews.com, told ANC that Atty. Hector Villacorta's claim that Sotto can use any online content without fear of copyright infringement has implications.

"Atty. Villacorta said that the Internet is free. This would mean that Senator Sotto would be championing digital piracy," Robles said.

"He will never allow such piracy to be punished because you see there are pending bills right now punishing digital piracy online so that's what it means," she added.

"Sotto is a champion of the entertainment industry. What Atty. Villacorta said has very vast implications. He said everything in the Internet is free. That means music and movies can be downloaded or ought to be downloaded for free all time," she said.

Villacorta, in a text message to ABS-CBNNews.com, claimed that they are not violating copyright laws, despite the standards set by Republic Act No. 8293, or the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines.

"Blogs are public domain, information to the world, for the world. No copyright infringement," he said.

Robles said Sotto should follow the footsteps of journalist Fareed Zakaria, who was suspended by Time and CNN after admitting he plagiarized a paragraph from the New Yorker for his Time column.

Zakaria has apologized for committing plagiarism.

"Take the action that Fareed Zakaria did. Apologize for the whole thing and put it behind him," Robles said.

"There are very serious implications about this. He is not just a senator. He is a Senate majority floor leader and his speech was a major speech," she added.

Robles said whoever who wrote his speech for him was getting information from the Internet word-for-word.

"That, by classic definition, is plagiarism," she warned.

"I don't know what is going on in their office. But the point is, that is his speech," she said. "Senators, they have a lot of money for staff."

She expressed disappointment that Sotto's speech is supposed to champion the side of groups opposing the reproductive health bill.

"This is sidelined now by the accusation of plagiarism, which is also a very serious thing," Robles said.

She said if Sotto will have another privilege speech, his staff should go over it very carefully.

"I always thought that if a senator delivered a speech in the Senate, he would have thought about it for a long time and that would be his ideas," she said. "It should come from his heart." - reports from Karen Flores, ABS-CBNNews.com; ANC

[totscalilari]

didn't hear the speech, just know the story so baka hilaw comment ko...

i think people are making to big a deal with this and are losing the whole point, which is the RH bill...

it is not a contest and i think medical yung "plagiarized" part of the speech so obvious na di galing sa utak ni Sotto or staff niya  ung nakasulat dun, so IMHO, ok lang yung ginawa niya..

pero di ok yung comment niya afterward na sabi niya "just a blogger" yung kinopyahan niya so why should he quote her. Para niyang sinabi walang kwenta speech niya because he based it from "just a blogger". He should have just acknowledged the blogger and apologize

And I also didn't like his acting after the speech...

[sicalsem]

just want to share a blog post from http://evenstarwen.com/2012/08/17/an-open-letter-to-atty-hector-villacorta-from-a-humble-blogger/

An open letter to Atty. Hector Villacorta, from a humble blogger
Aug
17
Sir, if I might have a word with you.

Before Sen. Tito Sotto’s plagiarism extravaganza this week, I had no idea who you are. You moved in powerful circles in the nation’s capital while I quietly scribbled my thoughts in my little corner of the Internet. Alas, those happy days are gone. Now you’re everywhere I turn in the Philippine blogosphere, littering our space with your arrogant delusions. I’m tired of this. There’s an important debate going on regarding a bill that will drastically affect our country’s future, and you and your big mouth are sidetracking us.

I never thought that an unpaid blogger might have something to teach a senator’s chief of staff, but someone needs to stop you from making a bigger fool of yourself and your boss. Nobody in your office seems willing to do it, so I will. Listen up.

This all started when parts of an anti-Reproductive Health Bill speech made by Sen. Sotto were revealed to be lifted from an article by Sarah Pope, an American health blogger. He denied it, implying that bloggers are too insignificant to steal from, but everyone with a working bullsh*t detector just laughed in his face. When Sarah heard that a senator from halfway around the world not only stole her intellectual property but also, in her own words, “twisted the message of my blog to suit his own purposes against the women of the Philippines,” she felt the need to respond. (As an aside, see what I did there, when I attributed the words to the source? That’s a quote, Attorney. We’ll get back to that later.)

Now here’s where you come in. You stormed into Sarah’s comment section, dripping false humility and weary condescension, and proceeded to offer an ill-advised pseudo-apology that triggered a chorus of facepalms across the nation. Since then, you’ve spouted off more of your special brand of idiocy, and frankly, it’s embarrassing. It’s time for you to learn what you’ve been chattering about.

Let’s see. There’s a wealth of misinformation from you in this article from ABS-CBNnews.com. Let’s try to deal with that, shall we?

YOUR WORDS:

“Blog site is public domain.”
“Blogs are public domain. Anybody can use it [sic].”
“Bloggers, beware what you put out on the web. You should not cry if used by the web.”
THE FACTS:

No, Attorney,  a blog isn’t automatically in the public domain.  If an intellectual property doesn’t qualify for a copyright, or if its copyright has already expired, only then is it part of the public domain. Since blogs qualify for automatic copyright protection, and since that protection takes a long time to expire, the information that you and your staff copied for the senator was not, in fact, in the public domain.

You can’t evade  this. The Philippines signed several international copyright agreements, including one specifically designed to protect intellectual property online. We also have our own Intellectual Property Code. You asked where the laws are that would prove the crime of plagiarism was committed. Here they are, Attorney. And yes, just because these laws exist doesn’t guarantee implementation, but it’s kind of disturbing when a lawyer and a senator are either ignorant about them or actively defying them.

YOUR WORDS:

 ”Nagtatampo pala sila pag naqu-quote sila.” (Trans: Their sensitivities get hurt when they are quoted.)
 THE FACTS:

That was not quoting, Attorney, that was stealing. To quote means to properly acknowledge the source. You know, like I did with Sarah’s words up there and your own ridiculous sound bites. In blogging we do it by linking to whatever website we used as source.  In speech, you have to actually mention the origin out loud. In academic research and scientific literature, there’s a formal system that gives every first-time college thesis writer nightmares. I assume you are familiar with the last one, because you must be using scientific research for Sen. Sotto’s anti-RH Bill arguments, right? Right?

The point is, attribution is important. Without it, you are letting people believe that the words are your own, essentially claiming credit for them. In short, plagiarizing.

YOUR WORDS:

“Government is exempted from the copyright rule. As a general principle,  you cannot withhold information from government.”
 THE FACTS

I hesitate to venture into this territory because you’re a lawyer and I’m not. But the Philippine Constitution can be read by anyone, and maybe you just need a friendly reminder.

As far as I know, we are not yet a Big Brother society, though we do have a Big Brother television show. Here in the Philippines, we still believe that privacy is a right. Sections 2 and 3 of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights assure me that even the President himself can’t force me to let him read my high school diary and use it for his own purposes without a court order. Of course, if it were a matter of national security, I’ll let him read even the unsent love letter to my old crush, but only if he promises not to post it on Facebook.

As for the claim that working for the government exempts you from obeying the law, we only have to look at the cases of those Supreme Court justices charged with plagiarism to know that that’s just another one of your little daydreams.

I’m sure I missed a few other things, but I’m tired. Obviously one of your staff knows how to use google, so next time, please just ask him to do some research before you use any big words in your interviews.

Or there’s also the possibility of Sen. Sotto just saying he’s sorry. Then this will all eventually blow over and we could go back to concentrating on the RH Bill. Just two words, Attorney. How hard can it be?

Sincerely,

A blogger

[PeopleSupport]

Bakit sa ba plagiarism na napunta ang usapan? Di ba RH Bill ang issue dito? Nasilip lang yan na butas ng mga Pro-RH.. Wala na bang ibang pwedeng ibato?

Ok lang maging plagiarist wag lang MURDER PROMOTER.
As we all know from likhaan.org's Agaw Buhay Video.. Tsk! Tsk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL42DABB71810AF4C9&v=qUgZSBc_asc&feature=player_embedded

[totscalilari]

^murder promoter? never understood why people connect murder to the RH bill...

pero ibang topic yan! hehe

[PeopleSupport]

^murder promoter? never understood why people connect murder to the RH bill...

pero ibang topic yan! hehe

Yes ibang topic ito.
I just wanted to respond to plagiarism allegation of many to Sen. Sotto,  
that in my opinion is "Ok lang maging plagiarist wag lang MURDER PROMOTER."

"Abortion" or as you have said "Murder" as being connected to RH Bill is because some people who are supporting RH Bill like people from Likhaan.Org are openly pushing for legalized abortion in the Philippines.

Please watch their video:  
http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL42DABB71810AF4C9&v=qUgZSBc_asc&feature=player_embedded

[nanashi]

Bakit sa ba plagiarism na napunta ang usapan? Di ba RH Bill ang issue dito? Nasilip lang yan na butas ng mga Pro-RH.. Wala na bang ibang pwedeng ibato?

Ok lang maging plagiarist wag lang MURDER PROMOTER.
As we all know from likhaan.org's Agaw Buhay Video.. Tsk! Tsk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PL42DABB71810AF4C9&v=qUgZSBc_asc&feature=player_embedded

See the topic name. It's the plagiarism being primary discuss here the RH bill is secondary.


One more hting to add to this waging flame. Minamaliit ni Sen Sotto mga blogger...

 “Ba't ko naman iko-quote 'yung blogger? Blogger lang 'yun,"

Naalala ko pa may commercial tayo na huwag maliitin ang ating sarili sa pagdugtong ng ating trabahao ng salitang "lang"

Magsasaka lang po ako. Mali Isa ka magsasaka.

Ito naman Senator na ito ang lakas mang "lang" ng isang indibidwal.

[akoni]

I think that's part of PeopleSupport views regarding Tito Sotto issues of plagiarism, same with mine, Bakit yan ang tinutukan nila bakit hindi yong tanong ni Sotto na hindi nila masagot. well, ika nga nila..."The best defense is offense". Bad offense nga lang coz its personal. 

[smile]

I think Sotto's staff, especially his speech writer, must learn article spinning... para di halatang nangopya lang sa blog.:-(

[bajoyjoy]

Ok lang maging plagiarist wag lang MURDER PROMOTER

I hope you are not serious with that statement.

Mas maiging matuto tayo sa mga pagkakamali ng mga personalidad na binanggit (kahit ayaw umamin na nagkamali sila)-- at yan ay hwag magbitaw ng mga sweeping statements. kaya napaparatangang isip-wanbol si tito sotto dahil sa IRRESPONSIBLE COMMENTS/STATEMENTS na pinagsasabi sa tv ng hindi muna ginagamit ang isip. Mag-isip muna bago magsalita lalo sa mga public figures na tinitingala supposedly ng madla.

i think people are making to big a deal with this and are losing the whole point, which is the RH bill...

it is not a contest and i think medical yung "plagiarized" part of the speech so obvious na di galing sa utak ni Sotto or staff niya  ung nakasulat dun, so IMHO, ok lang yung ginawa niya..

Ang PLAGIARISM ay hindi tinitignan ang SUBSTANCE or validity or correctness (in this case medical studies) nung statement na allegedly kinopya- but the FORM or MERE FACT OF COPYING WITHOUT ATTRIBUTION TO THE PERSON WHOM YOU GOT THE EXACT WORDS FROM.

Ang punto ko, ang credibility ni Sotto ang na-"abort" sa mga ginawa at sinabi ng kampo nya, e sha pa naman ang pangunahing boses ng senado laban sa RH bill.

Maniniwala pa ba kayo sa kanya bilang majority leader gayong alam nyo na DI NAMAN TALAGA NYA PINAG-ARALAN NG PERSONAL ANG MGA MEDICAL CLAIMS NA DINISCUSS NYA (otherwise dapat hiningi nya ung source ng staff nya or dinouble check man lang to know exactly what the study said). And in HIS OWN WORDS-- BLOGGER LANG yung pinagkopyahan nya (kaya no need to cite)? Sya nga walang tiwala, tapos tayo maniniwala?

Napakabigat na usapin ang RH bill tapos di man lang bigyan ng tamang pagpapahalaga at magsagawa ng matinong pag-aaral ang mga taong sumulat ng speech nya? Kahit maging maluwag pa tayo dun sa fact na di na nagresearch, pero yung nanjan na yung research materials, sasabihin na lang in your own words, hindi pa nagawa? Yun naman ang napaka-hirap intindihin, dahil gaya nga ng sabi ni Smile, ang mga bloggers nga nag-sspin ng articles (and i believe ung articles na iniispin ay tinatawag na PLR or private label rights, meaning pwede mong kopyahin as is kasi walang reserved copyright; pero iniispin/nirerewrite/rephrase kasi pag hindi, macclassify na duplicate content which search engines frown upon).

Maniniwala ka pa ba sa kanya pagtapos natin malaman na ung Diane pills na sinabi nyang dahilan ng pagkamatay ng anak nya e, 3 yrs after namatay un anak nya saka pa lang naintroduce sa market yung Diane?

maniniwala ka pa ba sa kanya sa usapin ng RH BILL knowing na ang chief of staff/ legal adviser e sinabi on national tv na:

1. "Blogs belong to the public domain, meant to be shared and not copyrighted"

NOT TRUE. All original literary/artistic works (including articles among others) ARE COPYRIGHT PROTECTED FROM MOMENT OF CREATION. - Intellectual Prop Code of the Phils

2. The government is exempt from copyright law/rule

NOT TRUE. Generally, Walang exemption sa copyright laws, pero may LIMITATION ON COPYRIGHTS. For one, Pwedeng GAMITIN NG GOBYERNO ang copyrighted materials for educational or public info purposes BUT ALWAYS WITH THE CONDITION OF PROPER ATTRIBUTION/CITATION. And even if walang ganyang condition, bilang senador, Sotto should not hide under his public office's mantle of protection (immunity from suits), out of decency and delicadesa man lang. Paano kung ang state-owned broadcasting network sa China gumawa ng Eat Bulaga China ng walang pahintulot o pasabi sa kanila, at ibalik sa kanya yung justification na the govt (of China) is exempt from copyright laws? hindi malayo mangyari, haywan ko na lang kay tito sen ano isasagot nya pag nakita nya ang "bayan ni juan" naging "bayan ni Huang".

Sa totoo lang, nung nagsimula ang mga gulo na yan, di ko pinag aaksayahan ng panahon, pero habang tumatagal kasi sobrang ridiculous na ng mga pinagsasabi nung lawyer, sila na lang ni tito sen ang naniniwala sa isat isa at nagmumukang clowns. Kaya pinapatulan ko na rin ang topic kasi pinapalaganap nila ang kanilang virus of misinformation, with so much arrogance pa.

Bakit yan ang tinutukan nila bakit hindi yong tanong ni Sotto na hindi nila masagot.

no offense but imho NEVER naman nalihis ang isyu. Sa isip ko naman malinaw na ang pangunahing isyu pa rin ang RH BILL, naniniwala din ako na di ganun kadaling iligaw ang mga may mapanuring isip na sumusubaybay dito. Yung mga isip wanbol yun ang mga naligaw na talaga ang isip. Confident naman ako na walang taga-PMT ang ka-alumni nya sa Wanbol right?

Kaya wag sana natin ipagkaila na mabigat na isyu din ang pangongopya ng akda ng iba. Kung ang inyo bang anak bigyan ng assignment na essay, gusto nyo bang magsubmit sya ng napakagandang talumpati na direktang kinuha sa internet? Sabihin nating ang titser nya ay naimpress at binigyan sya ng 98%, matutuwa ba kayo gayong alam nyong walang natutunan ang anak nyo at ang markang nakuha nya e nangangahulugan na 98% sya kagaling pagdating sa pangongopya? Tapos icoconfront nyo sya sa ginawa at idedenay na parang ikaw pa ang pagmumukhaing tanga? paano kung sagutin kayo ng anak nyo, "papa/mama, ok lang naman yun bakit si sen sotto sabi ok lang magcopy-paste ng galing sa internet diba? Mas marunong pa kayo sa senador? saka ok lang yun, kesa naman gumamit ako ng condom/pills sa prom night at maging MURDER PROMOTER diba? Speaking of, magkaka-apo na kayo early next year, sakto before ako mag 16yrs old". 

Hindi pa ako magulang, pero tingin ko naman mali na kukunsintihin natin yang ganyang kabaluktot na pagiisip na maaring masagap ng mga mag-aaral. At lalo naman kung senador o abugado ang panggagalingan ng ganyang katwiran.

And just to clarify also, tama si nanashi na ang usapan dito sa thread ay ung speech ni sotto na plagiarized and the numerous subsequent faus pax, dahil mukang hahaba pa ang usaan na yan dahil nga ayaw tanggapin ang kanilang naging pagkakamali at gusto lang pagtakpan ang unang pagsisinungaling ng mas madami pang kasinungalingan. Anywy, i think may ibang thread ng ginawa para sa usaping rh bill, we can discuss the pro's and con's in depth there.

Post Merge: Aug 20, 2012, 09:35 PM
Anyway, another editorial about the subject:

'Iskul Bukol in the Senate'
Inquirer.net

The circumstances surrounding the acts of plagiarism committed by Sen. Vicente Sotto III, in the first two installments of his controversial “turno en contra” speech at the Senate last week, are so comical, so ridiculous, they invite disbelief. Did Sotto, the majority leader, really tell ANC’s Karen Davila that he was not obliged to attribute the passage he and his staff lifted almost word for word, comma for misplaced comma, from American blogger Sarah Pope because “blogger lang ’yon [she’s only a blogger]”?

Did his chief of staff, lawyer Hector Villacorta, really leave an extended comment in Pope’s blog that became an instant classic of offensive stupidity phrased in legal gobbledygook? “We are both indebted to the book’s author [Natasha Campbell-McBride] but if you wish that you also be credited with the contents of the book, let this be your affirmation. I can do it and by this message, I am doing it.”

Did Villacorta really tell GMA News, after news broke that the second part of Sotto’s speech also had at least three instances of outright plagiarism, as pointed out by the likes of prizewinning novelist Miguel Syjuco, that one can appropriate anything from the Internet? “Yes, the Internet is a free range of ideas for the world to see. It’s in the free atmosphere.”

And did Sotto really say to the Star (as quoted in the helpful timeline prepared by Filipino Freethinkers, whose blogger Alfredo Melgar was the first to find the passages lifted from Pope) that “Plagiarism, whether you give attribution or not, applies only if you contend that the contents are yours”?

It is tempting to respond to this series of intellectually dishonest rationalizations, this dumbfounding serial comedy, by simply laughing at the ridiculousness of it all. At a fraught moment in a once-in-a-generation legislative debate, one of the key players in the Senate turns out to follow the academic standards of the infamous Wanbol University—you know, that fictional school in “Iskul Bukol” where one of the most popular characters Sotto created, back when he was still doing full-time comedy, held court as king of school hijinks.

This makes us realize that there may be no better way to put Sotto’s acts of plagiarism and his and his staff’s tortured defense in perspective than to quote that satirical blogger, The Professional Heckler. Out of many laugh-out-loud passages, we choose this: “Yet latest online reports reveal Tito Sotto plagiarized the work of not just one BUT four bloggers to be exact… prompting actress Cherie Gil to quip, ‘You’re nothing but a second-rate trying hard copy-paste!’”

To be sure, Sotto is not the only high-profile personality wrestling with issues of intellectual fraud, which is the bottom line of any act of plagiarism. The influential Time writer and CNN host Fareed Zakaria was recently suspended for a month by both news organizations for lifting one passage from the work of Harvard professor and New Yorker writer Jill Lepore. Unlike Sotto, however, Zakaria readily admitted to the mistake. And according to both Time and CNN, they found no other instance of plagiarism in Zakaria’s work.

Sotto, however, remains a piece of work. He is reported to be preparing a privilege speech this week to defend himself against the charges of plagiarism by claiming that what political operatives call a demolition job has been ordered against him. If only he didn’t provide his detractors with the sticks of dynamite himself. As The Professional Heckler’s own tagline reminds us: “The problem with political jokes is they get elected.”

But, important as the issue of plagiarism is, the deeper issue in the Philippines is the fate of the long-awaited Reproductive Health bill. It is here where the real import of Sotto’s cut-and-paste approach to his speeches can be seen. He is ready to use everything—the work of bloggers he does not deign to acknowledge, dubious or at least ambiguous research, the sloppy legal justifications of his staff, even emotional blackmail—to stop the bill from becoming law. That is the real joke, but nobody’s laughing.
 

[totscalilari]

^ok, it is not okay to plagiarize. 

[PeopleSupport]

"Ok lang maging plagiarist wag lang MURDER PROMOTER." - Yes! I'm serious with this statement.

I'll keep fighting for life.. it's what we have and it's what the unborn must have. 

Kahit anong deny nyo.. Legalized Abortion ang ultimate goal ng mga proponents ng bill na ito..
 

[nanashi]

Base on my history reading a plagiarist started a war. Many died.

[akoni]

John 8:7
And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”

[nanashi]

John 3:20

Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.

If he would acknowledge his short-comings on plagiarism an be humble about it this won't be an issue.