When you have to do a public presentation or write a speech, do you look to the words of famous orators for inspiration?
Melania Trump, the wife of Donald Trump, who is running for President in America, was recently accused of copying parts of Michelle Obama’s speech.
Attorney Tyrone Walker explained that plagiarism and the law surrounding this issue is very interesting.
In Obama’s speech, she said, “Barack and I were raised with so many of the same values – that you work hard for what you want in life, that your word is your bond and you do what you say you’re going to do; that you treat people with dignity and respect…”
Trump came under huge media scrutiny after she said, “From a young age, my parents impressed on me the values that you work hard for what you want in life, that your word is your bond and you do what you say and keep your promise. That you treat people with respect…”
With regards to this controversial issue, Walker said, “Plagiarism is quite common and throughout history, many have copied the words of others. Copyright is part of a group of intellectual property rights, which provide legal protection to creators of works of the mind.”
Walker further explained that copyright in South Africa is governed by the Copyright Act. “Protection of speeches is covered in this act. A copyright owner or holder can take legal action where there is an infringement of his or her rights.”
He highlighted that there are various recourses available to anyone whose intellectual property has been ‘stolen’. “Remedies provided include delivery of the infringing material and damages, and an interdict preventing further infringement of his or her rights. The courts have the power to award additional damages where there has been a flagrant infringement of copyright,” Walker said.
There are several recent examples of copyright infringement in South Africa such as the Moneyweb vs Media24 case. “The issue was whether Media24, owner of Fin24, infringed Moneyweb’s copyright in seven articles. Each of these articles had been written by journalists for Moneyweb, and in each case, Fin24 had used a part of the article in its publication.”
With regards to this matter, Walker explained that the judge held that, of the seven articles, only three enjoyed copyright protection because the creation of the three articles involved ‘its own skill or labour’.
Walker explained that copyright had been infringed in only one article as there was obvious ‘word-for-word copying’.
