Plagiarism punishable under Cybercrime Law — De Lima

Plagiarists, or those who steal and pass off the ideas or words of another as one's own, could also be held liable under the controversial Cybercrime Law, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima said Tuesday.   In an advisory opinion, De Lima said plagiarists can be held liable under Republic Act 10175—or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012—if they are found to be infringing on copyright or the exclusive rights of a creator over his or her original work. The new law gives the justice secretary enormous powers to take down content or block access to sites for suspected violations, even without a court order.    "If an act of plagiarism amounts to a copyright infringement under the Intellectual Property Code, a special law, then the violator may likewise be held liable under the Cybercrime Prevention Act if he/she used information and communications technology (ICT) for its commission," she said in her 10-page opinion.   Oddly enough, the lawmaker widely pilloried for plagiarizing from blogs for his speeches has found himself again at the receiving end of tirades and ridicule for his role in the Cybercrime Law. Sen. Tito Sotto is being accused of inserting the controversial provision on online libel in the law.  However, Sotto has denied inserting the libel provision on the Cybercrime Law and said it was the handiwork of one of the law's primary authors, Sen. Edgardo Angara, but only after he (Sotto) had proposed it during the period of amendments. Sotto's chief of staff Hector Villanueva admitted in August that one of the senator's speeches had lifted from an American blogger but claimed that it was not against the law. De Lima's opinion on the new cybercrime law would seem to negate that defense from now on.    Various groups have separately asked the Supreme Court to stop the implementation of the Cybercrime Law and declare it as unconstitutional for allegedly violating the people's guaranteed freedom of expression under the Constitution.   De Lima reminded the public that while plagiarism per se is not considered a crime, a person can still be punished and fined if the act amounts to copyright infringement.   Under the IPC, copyright infringement stemming from plagiarism is punishable by one to three years imprisonment and a fine of P50,000 to P150,000 for the first offense; three years and one day to six years imprisonment and a fine of P150,000 to 500,000 for the second offense; and six years and one day to nine years of imprisonment and a fine of P500,000 to P1.5 million for the third offense.   When committed online, however, the punishment can be worse, since Section 6 of the Cybercrime Act specifically sets a punishment one degree higher than provided under the Revised Penal Code to "cybercrimes" done on ICT networks.   "If copyright infringement was committed, the violator can be held liable under the IPC; in addition, he/she can also be held liable under the Cybercrime Prevention Act, if the plagiarism was committed through an ICT network or facility like the Internet," De Lima said.   While plagiarism has a limitless term of protection, a copyright on the other hand has a limited term, which spans through the life of the author of the work and extends to 50 years after his or her death. After this term, the original work is deemed to have entered the "public domain" and can already be freely used by anyone.   De Lima reminded the public to avoid plagiarism, regardless of the presence or absence of sanctions against it. She advised people to cultivate the habit of attribution. "When in doubt, cite," she said.   She also encouraged institutions to adopt anti-plagiarism measures. — KBK/DVM, GMA News