Court orders Darryl Yap to take down Pepsi Paloma teaser video | ABS-CBN
ADVERTISEMENT

Welcome, Kapamilya! We use cookies to improve your browsing experience. Continuing to use this site means you agree to our use of cookies. Tell me more!
Court orders Darryl Yap to take down Pepsi Paloma teaser video
Court orders Darryl Yap to take down Pepsi Paloma teaser video
MANILA – The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 205 has partially granted the petition for writ of habeas data filed by veteran television host and actor Vic Sotto against filmmaker Darryl Yap over the teaser of the movie "The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma."
MANILA – The Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 205 has partially granted the petition for writ of habeas data filed by veteran television host and actor Vic Sotto against filmmaker Darryl Yap over the teaser of the movie "The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma."
In a 20-page decision dated January 24, Muntinlupa RTC Branch 205 presiding judge Liezel Aquiatan partially granted Sotto's petition and ordered Yap to take down the teaser video of the movie on all online platforms.
In a 20-page decision dated January 24, Muntinlupa RTC Branch 205 presiding judge Liezel Aquiatan partially granted Sotto's petition and ordered Yap to take down the teaser video of the movie on all online platforms.
"Respondent DARRYL RAY SPYKE B. YAP and any person or entity acting on his behalf, including the production team of Vin Centiments are ORDERED to delete, take down and remove the 26-second teaser video from online platforms, social media, or any other medium for having misused the collected data/information by presenting a conversation between two deceased individuals, which cannot be verified as having actually occurred," the decision read.
"Respondent DARRYL RAY SPYKE B. YAP and any person or entity acting on his behalf, including the production team of Vin Centiments are ORDERED to delete, take down and remove the 26-second teaser video from online platforms, social media, or any other medium for having misused the collected data/information by presenting a conversation between two deceased individuals, which cannot be verified as having actually occurred," the decision read.
The court however said respondent Yap is "allowed to proceed with the production and eventual release of the film."
The court however said respondent Yap is "allowed to proceed with the production and eventual release of the film."
ADVERTISEMENT
Sotto earlier said he was not consulted about the film and only found out about it through his wife and friends, but Yap's camp claims otherwise.
Sotto earlier said he was not consulted about the film and only found out about it through his wife and friends, but Yap's camp claims otherwise.
The filmmaker's counsel said "there was an attempt to consult" when they sent Sotto's camp a copy of the script before production began.
The filmmaker's counsel said "there was an attempt to consult" when they sent Sotto's camp a copy of the script before production began.
"In this case, the petitioner argues that the film and teaser disseminate personal information (i.e., allegations of rape involving him) that are false, unverified, or damaging. The teaser unfairly constitutes misuse of personal information as the name of the actor was used in a dialogue between two already dead individuals," the decision read.
"In this case, the petitioner argues that the film and teaser disseminate personal information (i.e., allegations of rape involving him) that are false, unverified, or damaging. The teaser unfairly constitutes misuse of personal information as the name of the actor was used in a dialogue between two already dead individuals," the decision read.
"It cannot be said that the information portrayed in the film is derived from publicly accessible sources (e.g., newspaper articles, court records, etc.) as it was a conversation between two persons who have long been dead, hence, unverifiable if this confrontation indeed took place. The widely circulated teaser video could lead a reasonable person to conclude that the petitioner is indeed a rapist , thereby violating his privacy rights and potentially threatening the life and security of his family," it added.
"It cannot be said that the information portrayed in the film is derived from publicly accessible sources (e.g., newspaper articles, court records, etc.) as it was a conversation between two persons who have long been dead, hence, unverifiable if this confrontation indeed took place. The widely circulated teaser video could lead a reasonable person to conclude that the petitioner is indeed a rapist , thereby violating his privacy rights and potentially threatening the life and security of his family," it added.
The court however emphasized that the decision is limited to the 26-second teaser video showing the said confrontation between Paloma and Charito Solis.
The court however emphasized that the decision is limited to the 26-second teaser video showing the said confrontation between Paloma and Charito Solis.
ADVERTISEMENT
"That being said, the Court cannot disclose the full reasoning, aside from the misuse of data of unverifiable origin, for requiring the teaser's removal, as doing so might diminish the excitement of moviegoers and risk revealing key aspects of the film's content," it said.
"That being said, the Court cannot disclose the full reasoning, aside from the misuse of data of unverifiable origin, for requiring the teaser's removal, as doing so might diminish the excitement of moviegoers and risk revealing key aspects of the film's content," it said.
"The Court cannot suppress the entire film, as it is based on the life story of Pepsi Paloma where the respondent secured the consent of the mother and brother, derived from public records like newspaper clippings, footages and is protected by artistic freedom and public interest," the decision further stated.
"The Court cannot suppress the entire film, as it is based on the life story of Pepsi Paloma where the respondent secured the consent of the mother and brother, derived from public records like newspaper clippings, footages and is protected by artistic freedom and public interest," the decision further stated.
Earlier this month, Sotto filed the petition seeking to take down promotional materials, teaser video/s and other material related to the film since it mentions the host-actor's personal information and sensitive personal information.
Earlier this month, Sotto filed the petition seeking to take down promotional materials, teaser video/s and other material related to the film since it mentions the host-actor's personal information and sensitive personal information.
Sotto also filed a criminal complaint for 19 counts of cyber libel against Yap.
Sotto also filed a criminal complaint for 19 counts of cyber libel against Yap.
"Furthermore, this Court cannot address the issues of malice and bad motive, as these are valid matters for determination in the criminal complaint for cyberlibel, which remains under investigation by the Office of the City Prosecutor," the ourt said.
"Furthermore, this Court cannot address the issues of malice and bad motive, as these are valid matters for determination in the criminal complaint for cyberlibel, which remains under investigation by the Office of the City Prosecutor," the ourt said.
ADVERTISEMENT
In a statement, Atty. Enrique Dela Cruz Jr., the lawyer of Sotto said they are "thankful" for the court's decision.
In a statement, Atty. Enrique Dela Cruz Jr., the lawyer of Sotto said they are "thankful" for the court's decision.
"Nagpapasalamat kami sa kagalanggalang na hukuman dahil naging patas ang pagdinig at nabigyang hustisya ang idinulog na reklamo ni Mr. Vic Sotto," Dela Cruz Jr. said.
"Nagpapasalamat kami sa kagalanggalang na hukuman dahil naging patas ang pagdinig at nabigyang hustisya ang idinulog na reklamo ni Mr. Vic Sotto," Dela Cruz Jr. said.
"Sana ay alisin na agad ang teaser video na ginamit ang pangalan ni Mr. Vic Sotto at tanggalin na din ang anumang promo materials na may pangalan at iba pang sensitive personal information ni Mr. Vic Sotto," he added.
"Sana ay alisin na agad ang teaser video na ginamit ang pangalan ni Mr. Vic Sotto at tanggalin na din ang anumang promo materials na may pangalan at iba pang sensitive personal information ni Mr. Vic Sotto," he added.
The lawyer said they will now focus on the cyber libel complaint against Yap.
The lawyer said they will now focus on the cyber libel complaint against Yap.
"May cyberlibel case pa kami against Mr. Yap. Doon na kami mag focus ngayon. Thanks," it said.
"May cyberlibel case pa kami against Mr. Yap. Doon na kami mag focus ngayon. Thanks," it said.
ADVERTISEMENT
Atty. Raymond Fortun, the lawyer of Yap, meanwhile said they will not appeal the decision.
Atty. Raymond Fortun, the lawyer of Yap, meanwhile said they will not appeal the decision.
"We are not appealing the Decision. It allows the production and eventual release of the movie, with the content of the teaser being part of the movie. We have nothing further to add," he said in a text message.
"We are not appealing the Decision. It allows the production and eventual release of the movie, with the content of the teaser being part of the movie. We have nothing further to add," he said in a text message.
Last week, Yap released the trailer of the movie on his Facebook page, which showed clips of interviews with Paloma's mother and brother.
Last week, Yap released the trailer of the movie on his Facebook page, which showed clips of interviews with Paloma's mother and brother.
The film will be released in cinemas on February 5.
The film will be released in cinemas on February 5.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT