Examining Legal and Ethical Issues: Copyright, Defamation, Malaysia

This essay delves into the legal and ethical considerations surrounding press freedom, copyright, and defamation within the Malaysian context. It examines Article 10 of the Federal Constitution concerning freedom of speech, highlighting its limitations and the existing laws that regulate it. The analysis extends to the Copyright Act 1987, detailing the concept of originality, copyright protection, infringement, and direct infringement. Furthermore, the essay explores the Defamation Act 1957, its purpose in protecting individuals from reputational damage, and its impact on freedom of speech, referencing the MGG Pillai v Tan Sri Dato Vincent Tan Chee Yioun case to illustrate its application. Desklib provides access to this and similar assignments, offering students a valuable resource for their studies.

Running head: LEAGL AND ETHICAL ISSUES
Ethical and Legal Issues
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1LEAGL AND ETHICAL ISSUES
Federal Constitution 10/4
Opinion on press freedom – Article 10 of the Constitution of Malaysia states that the citizens
of Malaysia have the right to freedom of speech. In the Federal Constitution under the
mentioned article, the rules, restrictions and regulations of a Malaysian citizen have been
specified. Therefore, it can be stated that the Malaysians have these right to make use of the
freedom of speech as it has been mentioned in this particular article. Although the freedom is
kept restricted in a certain issues that include the status of the moral language. The federal
constitution also states that the citizens of Malaysia have special rights on the status of Islam
as a national religion. It can be said that this article provides freedom to the citizens of
Malaysia to some extent (Phua, Mahali & Kamlun, 2015). This is because they are imposed
with restrictions in the context of press freedom. Several existing laws help in regulating the
freedoms that have been granted as per this article. Thus, the opinion on press freedom states
that the citizens of Malaysia cannot utilize the press freedom fully since there are restrictions
on it.
Copyright – the Copyright Act 1987 that came into force on December 1, 1987 governs the
general law of copyright in Malaysia. Over the years, the law of copyright has undergone
plenty of essential amendments. Therefore, in Malaysia the protection of copyright is
accorded without any sort of procedure of deposit and registration. The concept of originality
in copyright refers to the work that should have been originated from the author and some
effort must have been provided into the creation of work. The license of copyright should be
in writing. Copyright must also consist of the architectural work when it exists in Malaysia
or any other kind of literary work incorporated in a building located near Malaysia. These
special rules are only applicable in Malaysia (Balganesh, 2016). As per the Copyright Act of
Malaysia, if the work of the author is published, it will considered to be protected in the other
Berne Union countries. All the existing musical, artistic and literary work that were published

2LEAGL AND ETHICAL ISSUES
that will be in Malaysia itself (Luo & Mortimer, 2016). The work of the artists are given
protection in Malaysia. Thereafter, copyright will vest itself in a work if the author is in a
joint authorship and is qualified when the work was being made. However, the term
copyright protection varies based on the factors where the nature of the material where the
copyright exists. This Act especially provides that copyright will not include any kind of
design that is registered under any kind of written law relating to the industrial design
(Denicola, 2015).
Infringement and direct infringement – As per the Copyright Act, infringement refers to a
situation where the production of any kind of work for copyright under this Act which
includes an infringement of the copyright in the work. Such a situation can also arise if any
article is imported into Malaysia without the permission of the owner of copyright, the
making of which was executed when the owner of the copyright did not grant the consent
(Miletzki & Broten, 2017). The purpose of copyright infringement is to use the works that are
protected by laws of copyright without permission, infringing the exclusive rights granted to
the holder of copyright. Therefore, any individual who causes another individual to execute
without the permission or license of the owner of copyright and an act of which is controlled
by copyright under this Act infringes copyright. If the article is disturbed for the purpose of
trading or any other individual for a purpose to extent that it will affect the owner of the
copyright. It can also be infringed by any way of trade where the article is exhibited in public
(Ainsworth & Dawson, 2015). Direct infringement in copyright refers to that situation when
an individual without any authorization remakes or reproduces or carries out the copyrighted
work. Therefore, direct infringement is one of the three kinds of copyright infringement. It
usually appears when an individual carries out of the exclusive rights that have been granted
by the Copyright Act without taking permission of the copyright owner. For instance, if a
copy of a book is created without seeking the copyright owner’s permission, then it is treated

3LEAGL AND ETHICAL ISSUES
to be a violation of the exclusive right to reproduces and hence an infringement of copyright
is committed. The unauthorized copying is the most common kind of direct infringement, a
violation of any of the exclusive rights includes the infringement of copyright. For example, a
direct infringement consists of the performance that is formed without the consent of the
author.
Defamation – The term defamation is a complex and detailed tort. The Defamation Act 1957
was established for governing an individual from expressing the words that cause damage to
the reputation in the eyes of the public (Jamali, 2017). It therefore refers to the malicious
damaging of the reputation that included printing, writing and speaking. There are generally
three elements of defamation that needs to be fulfilled for charging any individual under the
Defamation Act, 1957. The Defamation Act also helps in protecting the individuals. It was
observed in the case of MGG Pillai v Tan Sri Dato Vincent Tan Chee Yioun & other
Appeals (1995) 2 MLJ 493. The journalist of MGG Pillai, the publisher and the editor were
found to be guilty of the libel which was held against Vincent Tan. Vincent was a successful
businessman in Malaysia. He had brought an action against the appellants and other
individuals who had claimed for the damages for defamation. The other appellants were the
publisher and printer of the Malaysian Industry Magazine. They had therefore published an
apology by not sending the draft for the approval of the respondents. Thus, it can be stated
that the Defamation Act, 1957 exists for protecting an individual from being defame.
However, it does limit the freedom of speech.

4LEAGL AND ETHICAL ISSUES
References:
Ainsworth, L., & Dawson, R. (2015). Understanding copyright: basic principles.
Balganesh, S. (2016). The questionable origins of the copyright infringement analysis. Stan.
L. Rev., 68, 791.
Denicola, R. C. (2015). Volition and Copyright Infringement. Cardozo L. Rev., 37, 1259.
Jamali, H. R. (2017). Copyright compliance and infringement in ResearchGate full-text
journal articles. Scientometrics, 112(1), 241-254.
Joyce, C., Ochoa, T. T., Carroll, M. W., Leaffer, M. A., & Jaszi, P. (2016). Copyright law (p.
85). Carolina Academic Press.
Luo, H., & Mortimer, J. H. (2016). Copyright infringement in the market for digital
images. American Economic Review, 106(5), 140-45.
Miletzki, J., & Broten, N. (2017). Development as freedom. Macat Library.
Phua, M. H., Mahali, M., & Kamlun, K. U. (2015). Protected area and recreation
management. Penerbit Universiti Malaysia Sabah.