Finally there is some word from Mr. Ceniza (or someone who purports to be him - his email address does not work and I cannot reply to him as it bounces back with a fatal error). In my previous post, he posts three comments professing ignorance that using my photograph without my permission was wrong. Even at the tender age of 21, and regardless of educational or other background, I would have hoped that Mr. Ceniza could distinguish between basic right and wrong. Certainly he would have little difficulty knowing that stealing a handbag or cellphone is wrong. In one paragraph he insists that the recipe is their family’s and that he did not copy that, but in another paragraph he claims innocence with respect to taking my photos as being wrong… I don’t buy it, and the apology, though it may be sincere, is not enough at this point. It’s not that I want to extract blood from a stone, it is that I wish a particular principle, that of intellectual property rights, to be handled correctly. I also wonder why he is so repetitive in absolving the Inquirer of any wrongdoing. Considering that he claims he doesn’t understand what he did was wrong, how can he absolve others in what is clearly an interrelated and relatively straightforward case now that he has admitted to the world that he did, in fact, steal my (and Karen’s) photograph. This morning, before I headed off the to the Marketmanila Eyeball, I sent the following letter to Ms. Chelo Banal-Formoso, the Lifestyle editor at the Inquirer. It is lengthy, but for those that are interested, worth reading. I spell out my understanding of the situation and propose several possible options to resolve the key issues. I hope to hear from the Inquirer soon.
Read more…