Daniel Ong vs SPH

So this Daniel Ong very satki, go around social media platforms telling people that SPH charge him for replicating articles that he was interviewed in. Then when he remove they charge him investigation fees.

Well Daniel, really? Before you go around social media platforms complaining about how much they charge you, did you actually read up on the copy right act? I like this particular sentence that DK wrote in his article.

Even if he doesn’t know about this rule, it is also no excuse. This is written in the Copyright Act. It is not SPH’s responsibility to inform the interviewees about the Copyright Act. An ex-principal was imprisoned for a few months recent because he paid for sex with an underage girl. The girl didn’t tell him that she is underage. Did the judge let him off?

He recently published a post about the case which pretty much sums up my sentiments. You can read it here...http://blog.dk.sg/2012/07/08/sph-vs-daniel-ong-who-has-the-rights-to-the-articles/

While the copyright act awaits updating with new internet and social media guidelines. Its only right that one reads it before bringing up the case to the public.

In any case while the fee is indeed exorbitant. Its only right that one pays for an article that writes about you. Not written by you.

Disclaimer: Permission was sought from DK to publish his blogpost here. I have also attached a screenshot of him granting me permission should he decide to charge me for it.