Copy or Create?

 

🎨 “Copy or Create?” – Understanding Copyright in Malaysia’s Creative Scene

In a digital age where content is shared with a single click, the line between inspiration and imitation is getting thinner. Whether you're a TikTok creator remixing songs, a university student designing artwork, or a business reusing stock images, understanding copyright is no longer just for lawyers—it's for everyone.

🇲🇾 Copyright in Malaysia: What You Need to Know

In Malaysia, copyright is governed by the Copyright Act 1987. It protects original works like music, films, books, photos, software, and more. Unlike trademarks or patents, you don’t need to register a work for it to be protected. As long as it’s original and fixed in a tangible form, it’s covered.

​

What does that mean for you? If you wrote a poem and posted it on Instagram, congratulations—it’s automatically protected under Malaysian copyright law.

⚖️ The Malaysian Twist: Cases That Stirred the Public

You may remember the controversy surrounding local T-shirt brands copying designs from Western labels, or that viral YouTube video that used copyrighted background music and got flagged. These are more than just isolated incidents—they show the growing tension between content creators and copyright owners in Malaysia.

Even government bodies aren’t immune. In 2020, a Malaysian artist accused a local ministry of using her illustration without permission in a public campaign. It sparked a wave of discussions around digital rights and respect for intellectual property.​

💡 Common Misconceptions

Let’s clear up a few myths that many Malaysians still believe:

  • “I found it on Google, so it’s free to use.”
    ❌ Wrong. Google is a search engine, not a free content library.

  • “If I credit the creator, I can use it.”
    ❌ Not always. Giving credit doesn’t equal permission.

  • “I made changes to the original—so it’s mine now.”
    ❌ That’s still a derivative work and needs permission.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Case Study: Sony Music Malaysia vs. Pesona Cipta Sdn Bhd (2000)

Case Study Background: In this landmark case, Sony Music Entertainment Malaysia filed a lawsuit against Pesona Cipta Sdn Bhd, a local production company, for unauthorized reproduction and distribution of Sony’s copyrighted music content. What Happened? Pesona Cipta was found to have duplicated and sold several audio CDs containing songs that were originally produced and owned by Sony Music without obtaining proper licenses or permission. These CDs were distributed to the public, resulting in profit from copyrighted content. Legal Action & Outcome: Sony Music sued under the Copyright Act 1987. The court found that Pesona Cipta violated Sony’s copyright and ordered the company to pay damages and stop distributing the copied materials. This case highlighted the seriousness of copyright infringement and the strength of copyright laws in Malaysia. Why This Case Matters This case sends a clear message that intellectual property rights must be respected, and even companies can face heavy ...
Read more

Case Study: Sara Nadzirah binti Zulkifli v Khirulanuar bin Mohamadiah (2023)

This case seems to be recent, with the rise in popularity of quick platform such as Instagram, and netizens posting without knowledge of copyright infringement. What's it about? The plaintiff named Sara Nadzirah is a social media influencer. The initial action that sparked the case was of her recording a 51-second video of herself eating durian as a "mukbang" and uploaded it to her Instagram account. The clip/video gain significant attention, as she had a following alongside platform algorithm. ​ Infringement The defendant named Khirulanuar was the reason as to why attention went to the video and Sara Nadzirah. He posted her video on his own platform without her permission, Ezydurian Services , as an opportunity to promote his brand over the plaintiff's image of being a small content creator. Legal Action Sara Nadzirah had demanded Khirulanuar to remove the video off of his brand platform, but he rejected her request. She later filed a lawsuit for copyright i...
Read more

Warner Music Malaysia Sdn Bhd v. Metro Music Sdn Bhd (2005)

Case Study: Warner Music Malaysia vs. Metro Music Sdn Bhd (2005) Date: 8th March 2005 Type: Copyright Infringement – Illegal Distribution of Music Background Warner Music Malaysia filed a case against Metro Music Sdn Bhd, a retail and wholesale business, for distributing pirated VCDs and audio CDs of copyrighted songs owned by Warner Music and its affiliated labels. What Happened? Metro Music was caught selling and wholesaling large quantities of unlicensed music recordings in local markets and through unofficial channels. The recordings were traced back to Warner's catalog, including international and domestic artists. Legal Action & Outcome Warner Music brought the action under the Copyright Act 1987, claiming substantial commercial loss and damage to reputation. The High Court found Metro Music guilty of infringement of copyright and ordered the company to pay statutory damages and legal costs. An injunction was also issued to prevent all other infringing activities. Why Thi...
Read more