Flaming Ellipse: Plagiarism in Palma

Palma council has been placed in a highly embarrassing situation. The poster that is being used to promote its Sant Sebastià festivities includes a design that the council now accepts has been plagiarised. The design, which comprises a series of ellipse-shaped rings intertwined and superimposed onto others and coloured in shades of red and yellow to denote flames, bears a very strong resemblance to one created by a designer called David Yerga and which was used to promote the "Falles" fiestas in Valencia last year.

The council set up a competition for the poster design. The winner receives a prize of 3,000 euros, which will now not be forthcoming. Yerga is demanding the same amount as compensation. He has also insisted that the poster be withdrawn and that unless the council complies he will seek legal redress. The council, for its part, has said that it cannot now withdraw the poster and has also said that it was in no position to be able to judge if designs were original works or had potentially violated intellectual property.

Without knowing the ins and outs of the terms of its competition, it might be argued that, as the "client", the council did have a responsibility to ensure that it was at least protected from any claim. There has been some chatter on the internet about this case to the effect that the council should have been aware of the Valencia design - they're all "Catalans" after all. This seems a bit harsh, but the council may now wish that there had been greater diligence.

Moving from the specifics of this case, it is not exactly unknown for designs to look similar. Often they are knowingly similar, but not always. As with music, there are always influences. Indeed with music, it might be argued that there is no such thing as originality any longer, just degrees of copying, conscious or not.

In creative endeavour, however, plagiarism, or allegations of it, can be highly destructive. It can kill careers stone dead, and the student who did the Palma design may come to regret what she put forward for the competition. It is also inherently lazy and runs counter to the very notion of creativity in the sense that this means originality (or as near as this can be achieved nowadays).

While borrowing ideas is commonplace, to look to effectively pass off something as one's own when it isn't is an abrogation of the creative impulse. It's why plagiarism is so frowned upon. Call yourself an artist when you nick another's painting; call yourself a writer when you lift another's words. It makes no sense. If you are involved in creative endeavour, you want to paint your own pictures, write your own words. What's the point of doing it if you don't?

There have been examples of plagiarism in its written format, ones with a Mallorcan context. Take that of the well-known journalist with a leading UK tabloid who used more or less verbatim a description of Puerto Pollensa that came from the home page of puertopollensa.com. What on earth was she thinking of? The conclusion I drew was that she hadn't actually been to Puerto Pollensa but needed some copy. It would be instructive to know what she was paid.

Resort to the internet, be it for design works, photography or texts may be about working smart, but to take whole tracts of text or take photos and make them appear as your own verges on betrayal. Betrayal of the creative endeavour, of whatever profession may be involved and of the audience. I don't get it, and no more do I not get it than with grabbing from Wikipedia and other sites and reproducing word for word. If you write, you write. In your own words, not with those of someone else.

In Mallorca, as in Spain and as in the rest of the European Union, there is a clear enough law on copyright. It means that everything you do which is creative, be it written, designed, photographed, whatever, is your property. It may sometimes be difficult to prove, but the law exists nonetheless. But in Mallorca there can at times be a rather lax attitude. It's one I know only too well, having found my photos or designs reproduced somewhere without permission. It's an attitude which, when confronted, can receive a shrug of the shoulders or a look of bewilderment that anyone might suggest that something wrong had been done.

David Yerga needs to be congratulated. If a high-profile case of plagiarism can help to convince firstly councils that they need to be rather more thorough with their compliance and secondly a wider public that there is such a thing as copyright, then he will have performed a great service.

Go here to see the two designs:
http://ultimahora.es/mallorca/noticia/noticias/local/cort-admite-el-plagio.html


Any comments to andrew@thealcudiaguide.com please.

It's Grim Up North

"This is Radio Frio. AlcudiaPollensa.Blogspot.com, also known as It's Grim Up North.com, further known as the Unjustified Invasions of Kopyright.
"This is what APB is about, those photos and designs that are, how does one put it, borrowed."

I don't mind the fact that my time is spent, going out of my way, hanging about, taking photos, for which I am rarely expressly paid, as they (the photos) form part "of the service", and then maybe having to return because the weather is not right, the terrace has too few people, the sun is not shining. Actually, I do fucking mind. When, that is, I have to keep going back or someone has forgotten that I was coming. But normally I say nothing, because they're clients or friends or whatever, but the deal here is that people do not appreciate that elsewhere, in the UK for example, all that time and travel should be paid for. Typical for here. Let's try and avoid paying anything. Cheapskates. Should be a local place name. Like Blubberhouses or Loggerheads. That's Cheapskates, sorry Blubberhouses, near Harrogate and Loggerheads in Shropshire. It's grim up north.

It costs, this going to take photos and perhaps not being able to take them, and so does the design side. But you go along with it, until you find that someone has taken the piss. Either the photos or the whole design can appear somewhere - without my damn permission. How many discs of photos have I ever given out? Loads. I give them out, so they (clients) have a record not so they can be used, without permission, by those who have not had to go to the time and expense as I have. Intellectual property. Some don't even need discs originals; they just take what I have done, scan it or take their own photo and then reproduce it, in the process making it look really shit. Why don't they just ask? Does it never occur to them? Who gives a damn here? And I put these "courtesy of" notes onto designs, only to find they are not there when the final print version appears. What happens there, do you suppose? I know. It's taking the piss. We don't care that you have gone to time and trouble and actually done work that we either could not do ourselves or would not do, but from which we are quite prepared to extract a financial advantage.

You know something. I have a whole list of where these photos or designs have appeared, and whether permissions had been granted or not. And one of these days ... Just thought I'd let you know.


Meanwhile. Don't forget that Alcúdia now has by-laws which allow for the fining not only of street (and bar sellers) but also of those who buy from them. These laws have been designed mainly to stamp out the lucky-lucky men and their trade. We'll see, but it is noticeable that some bars have put up notices which say that selling is not permitted and that if it is done, it can result in a fine. 400 euros says the notice in The Smugglers. I think I might actually be 500, and that's just for the one who does the buying. So, think of this as the second warning of today's entry.


And returning to a theme of a few days ago - that of newspapers, internet and all that. This morning there were precisely no British newspapers at the nearest place selling papers, bar one paper, while at another there were no broadsheets. So I shall happily forego parting with five euros and look at the "Sunday Times" online. Maybe it's the grim rain, maybe the boys didn't get up because of the clocks changing, or maybe it's just because it's crap. A lot here actually is down to the fact that it is crap, whatever crap it is and whatever some might say. Anyway, sorry, Rupert, you ain't got my fiver today. And that one British newspaper that was available? Good old "Daily Bulletin", the J.R. Hartley of the newspaper world.


QUIZ
Yesterday's title - Vivian Stanshall. And here is something very fine indeed - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSRJvq4Wd48. Today's title - of course.

(PLEASE REPLY TO andrew@thealcudiaguide.com AND NOT VIA THE COMMENTS THINGY HERE.)