By The Malketeer
In the high-stakes world of branding, national representation, and creative capital, one would expect transparency, integrity, and due recognition to be non-negotiable principles, especially when it involves Malaysia’s global image.
Yet, a simmering dispute between Current Media Group (CMG) and the Ministry of Investment, Trade, and Industry (MITI) over alleged plagiarism of expo designs has cast a disquieting shadow over these very ideals.
The Claim That Sparked a Storm
The issue first erupted publicly in April 2024 when Fey Ilyas, founder of Current Media Group, took to social media to accuse MITI of using his company’s intellectual property—specifically design concepts for the Malaysian pavilion at the upcoming Osaka World Expo 2025—without payment or formal credit.
According to Fey, CMG was engaged by MITI in 2022 to develop the pavilion’s concept, theme, and architectural vision.
Presentations were made to key stakeholders, including Minister Tengku Zafrul Aziz, and repeated verbal assurances were allegedly given that the firm would be appointed for the project.
But in an unexpected turn, MITI reportedly informed CMG in January 2023 that it would instead open the project to a formal tender process.
Despite the reversal, CMG’s designs appear—allegedly—in the current plans for the national pavilion.
The Letter of Demand and a Deafening Silence
After months of seeking resolution behind closed doors, CMG issued a formal Letter of Demand (LoD) to MITI on 17 July 2025.
The company is seeking not just financial compensation, but also acknowledgement of its creative contributions—a move that underscores a broader call for the recognition of intellectual property in Malaysia’s creative and marketing ecosystem.
In a statement, CMG said it had exhausted all informal avenues for dialogue and had been left with no option but to pursue legal recourse:
“Should MITI fail to respond satisfactorily within the statutory period, CMG will pursue every legal remedy available under Malaysian law.”
This escalation reflects more than a mere commercial disagreement—it has become a symbolic flashpoint over how creative contributions are valued (or ignored) in government-linked projects.
The Ministry’s Initial Response and Subsequent Inaction
Following the online uproar, MITI issued a public statement asserting it had launched an internal investigation and that it took the allegations seriously.
It also warned it would “take legal action if and when necessary.”
But as of mid-July, CMG says it has received no requests for documents, interviews, or clarifications.
The promised investigation, it appears, has stalled or vanished into a bureaucratic black hole.
This prolonged silence has prompted renewed calls for transparency not just from CMG, but from a growing segment of the creative industry that sees this case as emblematic of how ideas are routinely undervalued and mishandled.
More Than Just a Legal Dispute
What makes this saga especially troubling for marketers and creatives is its implication for the broader ecosystem.
When intellectual contributions go uncredited, and creative labour is treated as disposable, it erodes the very trust that enables agencies, consultants, and freelancers to confidently engage with government bodies or corporate giants.
CMG’s statement reinforces this concern: “We remain open to constructive mediation at any time, so long as the process is undertaken in good faith, recognises the value of creative labour, and upholds equitable terms.”
Their stance—measured but firm—echoes an increasingly urgent industry-wide conversation about fair remuneration, acknowledgment, and ethical engagement.
The Moral of the Story: Pitch at Your Own Risk?
This episode serves as a cautionary tale to agencies and consultants across the marketing and creative spectrum.
The unwritten rule of “pitch now, hope later” has long been a contentious issue, with many practitioners asked to invest time, creativity, and resources into speculative work with no guarantees of formal appointment—or payment.
And yet, what’s at stake here goes beyond procurement norms.
It touches on professional dignity and creative respect.
If a homegrown agency’s contribution to a global showcase like World Expo 2025 can allegedly be sidelined so easily, what message does it send to the world about how Malaysia treats its own talent?
A Call for Reform
This isn’t the first time such concerns have surfaced and it won’t be the last.
But the CMG-MITI episode presents a timely opportunity for public sector bodies to reflect, recalibrate, and rewrite the rules of engagement with creative professionals.
Stakeholders in the marketing and communications community are calling for:
As legal proceedings potentially unfold, all eyes will remain on MITI and CMG.
Will the ministry respond meaningfully and transparently?
Or will this become another case of creative exploitation swept under the proverbial rug?
Whatever the outcome, one thing is clear: Malaysia’s creative economy deserves better.
If we are to compete on the global stage—whether at the World Expo or beyond—we must start by honouring our own.
After all, if branding is about trust, then surely the best place to begin is with the people who build the brand.
Share Post:
Haven’t subscribed to our Telegram channel yet? Don’t miss out on the hottest updates in marketing & advertising!
