Image credit: Rio2016.com
Image credit: Telluridefoundation.org
On New Year's Eve, the organizers of the 2016 Rio Olympics unveiled their logo. The spectacle was shown amid the festive booze craze in the Copacabana beach where the logo was flashed on a big screen. But some were bothered. It looked something familiar, too familiar perhaps: there was a telling resemblance with the logo of Telluride Foundation, a philantrophic organization based in Colorado.
The logo, as above, depicts three people in a flowing embrace. Tatil Agency, the group which won the competition for the logo's design, meant to portray through the logo the values that Brazil as a great sporting nation cherish: "contagious energy, harmonious diversity, exuberant nature, and the Olympic spirit". But now, cynics and some Brazilian media sectors were saying the logo was plagiarized, a ripoff of Telluride's. Comparing both of them, do you think it was?
Fred Gelli, the director of Tatil, defended their design: the concept of people embracing is too broad and not novel. They have made thorough research to ensure that intellectual property rights are respected. "For some reason," he says, "we missed that one." But we must remember that, for plagiarism, malicious intent is NOT an essential element. Mere negligence would suffice as plagiarism, so long as a prior work's source was not properly attributed, or no prior permission as required was asked and granted. Saying that it was missed out among many is just too easy to give as an excuse. Actually, it would negate the entire responsibility that sets the benchmark of conduct for intellectual property law.
The plagiarism issue is real, especially these days, as we have seen here and abroad. People now more jealously guard their intellectual creations. In this age of fast-paced ICT, the duties to live up to the standards of ethics, honesty, and integrity are made more stringent than ever. Is this a welcome development that will enhance creativity, or does it function as a Damocles' sword hanging over and impinging mental output? This balance is most delicate; we should tread this path carefully. Lest we commit a form of regulation too oppressive.
Richmund Sta. Lucia, Post # 7
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment