New update as of 19 February 2009:
GARY GRANADA THANKS GMA NETWORK
In its latest statement, finally admits letting the second composer listen to Gary Granada's study but "only after she had submitted her own study of the jingle and, therefore, she could not have used Granada’s study.”
This is a very crucial piece of evidence because it makes you wonder, what is the point in letting the second composer listen to the study made by the first composer after approving the study submitted by the second composer? And if you look very closely, it says “study”, not “final version”. So I have a very simple question. Which came first:
A. Second composer submits final version; or
B. GMA Network lets second composer listen to Granada's study.
Thank you GMA Network for publicly and officially confirming my claim, despite saying my claim is a lie. And since you threaten to sue me, I will be more than happy to see you in court.
P.S. GMA Network is now employing their supposedly balanced GMA News machinery without airing my side, so kindly please circulate. Thanks~
From my inbox mail, the saga continues...
9 February 2009
GARY GRANADA: OTHER COMPOSER NOT THE ISSUE
Concerning ’s simple-minded iwas-pusoy position that the issue is rather between me and a fellow composer, let me reiterate my argument for the nth time:
GMA Network is the producer and broadcaster of the jingle. They should be “man enough” as a respectable corporate entity to take professional corporate responsiblity. Even minuscule organizations have the most basic of self-respect to say, for instance,
“Our attention has been called regarding such and such.. and we shall look into the matter seriously and immediately, exhaust all avenues to give all parties a fair hearing and determine our course of action accordingly.”
For such a huge media organization, surely they could find one scriptwriter who knows how to write a respectable corporate statement. Again, I find this tack of Atty. Dick Perez wily and most insulting to our elementary intelligence.
I have no issues whatsoever with the other composer. For all we know, she was merely following instructions. Much as I don’t like this particular work of hers, I neither suspect nor presume guilt on her part. Hell, everybody has a bad hair day, and I also make lousy songs at times. But that is not the issue here.
Again and again, my claim is: GMA Network took advantage of the study I made in producing the jingle they aired. If that is not clear enough, let me itemize it:
ONE: GMA Network allowed the composer of Procter & Gamble’s 3pid Handog Edukasyon jingle access to the lyrics as set to music by Gary Granada.
TWO: And quite possibly, GMA Network allowed the composer of Procter & Gamble’s 3pid Handog Edukasyon jingle access to the recording of the study made by Gary Granada.
And so, in the spirit of honesty and social accountability, and to facilitate an intelligent discourse, I challenge GMA Network to a "walang kinikilingan, walang pinoprotektahan" public forum concerning my claim, and request the Philippine Daily Inquirer to organize one to be moderated by the University of the Philippines.
Kindly circulate, thanks~
Salamat kay Gary G sa pagpadala ng email na nasa ibaba, at bilang suporta sa usapin at malaman ng sambayanan ito po ang article at sulat ni Gary.
GMA NETWORK: GRANADA NOT CO-AUTHOR.
GRANADA: I NEVER CLAIMED CO-AUTHORSHIP, I CLAIM CHEATING.
GMA 7: GRANADA NOT A CO-AUTHOR
By Marinel Cruz
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 23:58:00 02/01/2009
Broadcast network GMA 7 said it has “called the attention” of the composer of a Kapuso ad jingle, which singer-songwriter Gary Granada claims to have used the basic structure of his own work.
“We are still waiting for the response,” GMA 7 senior vice president for legal affairs Dick B. Perez told Inquirer on Friday.
In a 14-minute audio file sent via e-mail to friends, colleagues and the media, Granada said GMA Kapuso Foundation commissioned his services for the jingle’s music. He said the study tape he submitted was disapproved, but that the final product, aired in December, resembled his work.
In a statement sent to the Inquirer on Saturday, Perez said the foundation “had nothing to do with the composition of the music.” Perez also said the lyrics given to Granada to work on came from GMA 7’s Marketing department.
Granada said he had to change one word to suit the music. Under copyright laws, Perez countered, this “does not make [it]... his version.” Perez added that Granada can’t claim joint authorship, either. “[Joint authorship means] 1) there was an intent between two parties to be joint authors at the time the work was created, and 2) the contributions to the work of the party claiming to be a joint author must be independently copyrightable.”
Granada’s case lacked these requisites, Perez insisted. He said Granada was engaged to write the music to lyrics “completed by GMA Marketing. Neither GMA Marketing nor Granada intended to be joint authors of [said] lyrics.”
GMA NETWORK STATEMENT DECEIVING. I NEVER CLAIMED CO-AUTHORSHIP. I CLAIM CHEATING.
I made it very very clear in my audio narrative. “Unang-una po, liwanagin ko lang, hinding-hindi ko inaangkin yung nilabas nila sa TV.. Ang claim ko, hindi sila makakagawa nun kung hindi nila sinamantala ang study na gawa ko.”
Apparently, GMA Network never even bothered to listen to the narrative in its entirety. That is GMA Network’s slogan: Katotohanan. So you expect better research from their people. By making it appear that I am claiming co-authorship, GMA Network skirts the issues I have raised, and in effect deceives the public.
I am a lyricist in my own right, and I have absolutely no interest in “co-authoring” with advertisement copywriters. I set their lyrics to music by composing pieces which also entails editing their “copies” as is the practice in the industry. If they are indeed capable of “co-authoring” compositions, there would have been no need for composers to do that for them.
Secondly, I never said I “had to change one word to suit the music” as the article stated. On the contrary, I said in the same audio narrative, “Kaya nga naging madali na lang gawan ng ibang tono ng iba, kasi finormat ko na yung original lyrics mo na magiging singable at musical.”
And lastly, saying that “GMA Kapuso Foundation had nothing to do with the composition of the music” is splitting the hairs of Pontius Pilate. Of course they could not have, they are not composers! It is patently lawyer doublespeak. Atty. Dick Perez is not a GMA production assistant, he is a GMA Network Vice President. His letter was printed on an official stationery complete with the GMA Network letterhead with the famous heart-shaped logo. His words therefore express the official position of the entire network. Surely they're not saying GMA Kapuso Foundation in not part of GMA Network. Do you see a disclaimer in Imbestigador that says it is a project of News and Public Affairs together with the Post Production and Marketing Departments and that the Legal Department has nothing to do with it?