I want to raise a few points.
Firstly, this isn't about money. This is about ethics. Journalists
have certain responsibilities to adhere to a high standard of
ethics, this is not a tabloid, this is The Straits Times.
You can do things legally but unethically. People can tell when
you're being unethical. look at the NKF case (not saying that this
is on the same scale), where what they did was mostly within legal
boundaries, but still absolutely unethical.
Secondly, if you are going to say that this or that is the LAW I
suggest you consult a lawyer if you are going to make statements
that you deem are facts. such as this one:
"ST knows , the bloggers will not suffer any lost. Therefore no
acknowlegment is needed prior to the publication. "
"If i am not wrong, ST did credit the bloggers website. I think...
"
These are absolutely false statements. These kinds of statements
confuse people. If you are unsure, verify your facts first and
perhaps phrase it more as a question?
With relation to Fair Dealing, I am researching that right now to
see how much leeway they have using that. I still do not feel that
it is ethical even if they get away with it using that
clause.
Acknowledgement was made to "Singapore blogs" and
"Friendster"
But the ownership of copyrights belong to the photographers.
And finally, according to my lawyer friend, having those photos
placed there and having the big headline "iwant2bfamous.com" with a
byline "Read me, I want to be famous" can be considered defamatory
if no such things were said by the owners of the copyrights of the
photos.
