report on the anti-counterfeiting and piracy initiatives...
TRANSCRIPT
___________________________________________________________________________
2008/SOM3/IPEG/010 Agenda item: 4b-i
Report on the Anti-counterfeiting and Piracy Initiatives of the Philippines
Purpose: Information
Submitted by: Philippines
27th Intellectual Property Rights Experts’ Group Meeting
Lima, Peru15-16 August 2008
1
27th APEC-Intellectual Property Rights Experts’ Group (IPEG) Meeting
15-16 August 2008
Lima, Peru
REPORT ON THE ANTI-COUNTERFEITING AND PIRACY
INITIATIVES OF THE PHILIPPINES
Information Paper
2
INTRODUCTION
THE REPORT
I. Public Information and Education: Changing Mindsets
II. Effective Enforcement: Accelerating the Pace
III. Copyright Protection: New Strategies for Access to Knowledge
IV. Judicial Reforms, Adjudication and Alternatives: A Shifting Tide
V. Policy and Legislation: A Fresh Approach
VI. Inter-Agency Work and Public-Private Partnerships: Firm Foundations
VII. International Cooperation: Regional and Bilateral Strategies
CONCLUSION
Annexes
3
INTRODUCTION
In November of 2006, upon the recommendations of the Intellectual Property Office of
the Philippines (IP Philippines), President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued a Presidential
Memorandum on “Sustaining Our Gains in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR),” addressed to the
Cabinet Secretaries and sub-cabinet officials of key agencies engaged in IPR protection. The
latest in a series of Presidential memoranda in 2006, “Sustaining Our Gains…” laid down
strategic goals to curb piracy in the country. Her earlier directives designated IP Philippines as
oversight agency and instructed the Department of Justice (DOJ) and law enforcement
agencies to aggressively prosecute IPR violators. The President’s memorandum became the
basis of the Action Plan for 2007-2008 of the National Committee on IPR (NCIPR) headed by
the IP Philippines.
This Report describes the work accomplished in 2007 in the seven components of the
Action Plan, namely: public information and education; effective enforcement; copyright
protection; judicial reforms, adjudication and alternatives; policy and legislation; inter-
governmental agency coordination; public-private partnerships; and international cooperation.
In addition to the reforms institutionalized in the IPR regime, the Report will highlight
some relatively new approaches and developments in the different components of the action
plan. Without glossing over the tough challenges the government still needs to hurdle, this
Report will show the substantial outcomes, and not only outputs, that have resulted from the
government’s efforts. These outcomes have changed the political and social landscape, making
the environment more favorable to IPR protection and appreciation compared to three years
ago when the NCIPR was formed.
4
THE REPORT
I. Public Information and Education: Changing Mindsets
Presidential directive: “Intensify public information and education campaign on the
importance of IPR in promoting creativity, innovation and competitiveness, and educate our
people, particularly the youth, on this matter, through our education system, in order to develop
an IP conscious culture.”
Mainstreaming IPR Education in Public Schools
Nothing less than changing mindsets about the importance of IPR is needed to
eradicate piracy and counterfeiting in society. To achieve such changes in cultural attitudes
requires information and education campaigns (short term as well as long term approaches,
negative as well as positive messages), complemented by conventional law enforcement.
In 2006, the Bureau of Secondary Education of the Department of Education (DepEd)
approved the proposal of the National Book Development Board (NBDB), to include IPR,
particularly copyright, in the standard learning competencies for Economics in Secondary
Education.
The final draft of the IPR Teacher’s Manual and Student’s Guide Project proposal and
draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was completed on 21 August 2007 by representatives
of IP Philippines, DepEd and NBDB. A MOA among NBDB, DepEd and IP Philippines is
expected to be signed in 2008 as soon as the resources are available to produce the Teacher’s
Manual and Student’s Guide in printed and digital formats. Forty-nine thousand copies of the
document entitled “IPR Teacher’s Guide and Student Manual for Economics” will be produced
and distributed to 5,000 public high schools by July 2009.
Supplementary materials for the other subject areas, namely: English, Economics,
Pilipino, Music and Arts, and Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE) will be developed and
published. However, due to the huge printing costs, the contents for the other four subject areas
will be posted online in the websites of the proponents for downloading by public and private
schools as well as local textbook publishers.
A five-day IPR Orientation and manuscript development workshop involving subject
specialists and curriculum writers, as well as the training of 189 Education Supervisors I
nationwide, with the support from the Instructional Materials Council Secretariat (IMCS) and the
IP Community, shall also be implemented in 2008.
Pilot testing in selected private and public schools in Luzon is proposed to commence in
school year 2009-2010, specifically for fourth year high school students. Expanding the scope
of the project to all levels in secondary education will depend on available resources. A similar
project modified to suit other levels of the educational system from elementary to higher
education is being conceptualized.
5
The Intellectual Property Research and Training Institute (IPRTI)
On 06 June 2007, IP Philippines inaugurated the Institute of Intellectual Property
Research and Training Institute (IPRTI), the first of its kind in the country. This institute will
educate and train scientists, inventors, teachers, entrepreneurs, artists, lawyers, judges and law
enforcers on how to protect and manage intellectual property assets. The IPRTI is envisioned to
be the center of IP education, training, and research in the Philippines and, eventually, in the
Southeast Asian region.
In its seven months of operation, the IPRTI has offered courses in patent drafting,
patent search and examination, and engineering and chemistry certificate courses for IP
lawyers. The IPRTI also started administering the Patent Agent Qualifying Examination (PAQE).
These courses, a component of the “Enhance IP Training Program” of the IPRTI, aims to
professionalize and upgrade IP practice in the areas of trademarks, patents, adjudication and
enforcement.
The IPRTI is preparing for other advanced courses for universities and research and
development institutions (RDIs), entrepreneurs, prosecutors and judges. The institute has
already explored bilateral cooperative relations with the IP Academy of Singapore, the WIPO
Worldwide Academy (WWA), the European Patent Office (EPO), and the United States Patent
and Trademark Office (USPTO).
For 2008 the Institute will launch its Specialized IP courses for judges, in partnership
with the Philippine Judicial Academy (PhilJA), and with commitments of support from WIPO, the
EPO and the USPTO.
Enhanced Public Information and Communications
Media always play a critical role in public information campaigns, and IP Philippines
values its relationship with its media partners. Press releases, enforcement data and coverage
of actual operations in the field continue to be popular among the print and broadcast media.
Through these press releases, media practitioners are also educated on IPR, and feedback
from this sector shows that the information is much appreciated. Good media relations also
allow IP Philippines to get more positive messages regarding creativity and innovation across to
the public.
Proactive engagement with the media resulted in three hundred fifty-five (355)1 news
reports on IPR enforcement, published almost daily in all nine (9) major dailies and their online
versions. More than P19 million worth of media values (exposure) were generated from print,
broadcast, television, radio and Internet media in 2007 - an increase of 790.34 % from 2006
media values generated.
On radio, IPR obtained considerable airtime, including weekly segments every Saturday
for two (2) seasons on “Konsyumer Atbp,” a popular radio program on DZMM, the highest rating
AM station in the country. IP Philippines is conceptualizing its own radio and television program
on IP to be launched in 2008 or 2009.
1 January (39), February (21), March (36), April (36), May (18), June (38), July (38), August (26),
September (28), October (25), November (21) and December (29).
6
High-impact events are important parts of the information and education campaigns,
and they usually take place on World IP Day in April, the 10th Anniversary of the Philippine IP
Code in June and National IPR Week in October. Among these events were art and technology
exhibits, art competitions, conferences, trainings, seminars and a popular anti-piracy concert.
These high-impact events will be institutionalized this year in partnership with the private sector.
The website of the IP Philippines is updated regularly with news and developments on
IPR in the country. It also hosts the IPR monitoring database of enforcement actions and
pending cases in the courts. The IP Philippines’ website received a total of 96,9452 hits in 2007.
For 2008, the IP Philippines website will have a complete overhaul and new look to make it
more attractive, comprehensive, and user friendly.
II. Effective Enforcement: Accelerating the Pace
Presidential directive: “Intensify regular and effective (A) raids and “spot” inspections
on factories that produce illegal optical discs, trademarked and copyrighted goods, (B) seizure
and destruction of pirated and counterfeited goods and equipment used to produce them, and
(C) arrests and prosecutions leading to deterrent level sentences served.”
In 2007, the combined operations of the IPR Enforcement Units of the PNP, NBI, OMB
and BOC resulted in the confiscation of 7,301,262 pieces and 17,707 boxes/sacks of fake
goods with an estimated total value of P2,998,353,617.60. This amount exceeded the
government’s combined 2005 and 2006 record by P497,039,260.64.3
Enforcement Data
January – December 2007
NO. OF OPERATIONS QUANTITY
AGENCY Inspection
Search
Warrant
Plant
Audit
Warrants
of
Seizure
&
Detention
Pieces Boxes/
Sacks Container
ESTIMATED
VALUE
(Php)
NBI - 244
-
- 329,283 17,707 - 260,928,950.00
PNP - 242 - - 315,352 - - 464,199,837.40
OMB 2,503 - 23 - 4,806,612 - - 1,120,489,200.00
BOC - - - 33 1,850,015 - - 1,152,735,630.20
TOTAL 2,503 486 23 33 7,301,262 17,707
- 2,998,353,617.60
2 January (16,847), February (5,209), March (no data), April (3,370), May (8,726), June (9,020), July
(10,587), August (8,464), September (9,140), October (9,373), November (9,050) and December (7,159). 3 2005: P1,148,088,760.00 and 2006: P1,353,225,596.96. TOTAL: P2,501,314,356.96.
7
There were a total of 3,045 reported enforcement operations conducted in 573 areas
around the country. Of these activities, 2,503 were inspections of retail outlets and production
areas, 486 were by search warrants, 23 plant audits and 33 were warrants of seizure and
detention (WSD). Of the 573 raids, 31 raids were conducted in Binondo, 9 raids in Quiapo, 3
raids in 168 Shopping Mall, 11 raids in Greenhills, 6 raids in Metrowalk and 11 raids in Makati
Cinema Square. 505 raids were conducted in other areas. The focused enforcement operations
have resulted in visible reduction of pirated and counterfeited goods in known “notorious” areas.
Summary of Enforcement Activities in Strategic Areas
January – December 2007
NO. OF AREAS RAIDED (Notorious Areas)
PERIOD AGENCY
QUIAPO BINONDO METRO
WALK
168
MALL
MAKATI
CINEMA
SQUARE
GREENHILLS
OTHERS
NBI 1 21 1 49
PNP 1 5 -
1 4 50
January –
December
2007
OMB 7
5
5
3
10 7 406
Sub-Total 9 31 6
3
11 11 505
Grand Total 573
The performance of the different law enforcement agencies in the year 2007 are
specified below:
The IPR Unit-Philippine National Police (IPU-PNP)
The IP unit of the PNP served 242 search warrants, arrested 59 persons, and seized a
total of 315,352 pieces of counterfeited/pirated goods worth P464,199,837.40. This figure is just
from the IP unit of the PNP and does not include the operations conducted by field units. In
2007, the PNP started working on an internal reporting system that would monitor IP-related
operations around the country and it is expected to be operational by 2008 (Annex “A”: Table 1)
The IPR Division-National Bureau of Investigation (IPRD-NBI)
In 2007, IPRD-NBI received 104 complaints and filed 423 cases directly with the
Department of Justice. It served 244 search warrants and seized a total of 329,283 pieces and
17,707 boxes of counterfeited/pirated goods with an estimated value of P260,928,950.00.
(Annex “B”: Table 2)
8
The Optical Media Board (OMB)
The OMB conducted 2,526 operations (2,503 by inspections and 23 plant audits) and
seized 4,806,612 pieces of optical discs valued at P1,120,489,200.00. Other articles/equipment
seized include: 174 DVD players, 294 televisions, 52 personal computers and 260 speakers,
equalizer/sub-woofers, and transformers/AVR’s. (Annex “C”: Table 3) The Legal Division of
OMB processed 2,468 administrative complaints, wherein 9 complaints were against registered
CD replicating facilities. OMB filed 22 criminal complaints with the public prosecutor.
From the data available, the OMB’s enforcement efforts have produced at least one (1)
conviction in January 2007.4 The OMB has intensified its provincial campaign against
counterfeit optical media products, which are being smuggled particularly through the southern
part of the country.5
Some significant activities took place in 2007.
On 09 February 2007, the OMB highlighted its 3rd Anniversary by shredding about two
hundred (200) sacks of pirated optical media discs worth about P16,650,000.00 at Camp
Aguinaldo. Representatives of the NCIPR, the diplomatic sector and the private sector were
present at the event.
Boosting the anti-piracy campaign, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo visited the
notorious Quiapo district on 06 March 2007, and in a “town hall” meeting warned Quiapo
traders about their illegal trade. “Piracy is a crime. It’s against the law. That’s why I’m offering
alternative means of livelihood for you and your families,” she told some 50 residents of
Barangay 647 on San Agustin Street led by Barangay Chairman Suharto Buleg.”6 The surprise
visit of the President generated national media coverage.
Moreover, on 06 August 2007, thousands of pirated optical discs and two (2) computer
burning towers seized in the Manila suburb of Quiapo were destroyed by recently elected Mayor
Alfredo Lim and OMB Chairman Edu Manzano. The optical discs included DVDs and VCDs
seized by the Philippine National Police on 05 August 2007. The raid, implemented following an
informant’s tip-off, resulted in the arrest of a 29 year old man who was lodging at the Polly Pinky
Lodging House in Quiapo, where he was reportedly manufacturing hundreds of pirated VCDs
and DVDs. The equipment destroyed was capable of producing more than 8,000 pirated optical
discs in 24 hours. Chairman Manzano said, “the torching of the optical discs and equipment
was aimed at sending a message to the public in Quiapo, a suburb notorious for the
manufacture and distribution of pirated optical discs, that the OMB and the City of Manila are
serious about clamping down on piracy.”7
4 People vs. Abdula Alonto et al. case (Criminal Case No. 228277-C) for violation of R.A. No. 9239
(Optical Media Act of 2003). See: Table on Convictions (2001-2007). 5 Newspaper: The Philippine Star Nation A-28, 17 August 2007 (Friday). 6 Newspaper: Philippine Star, published on 11 March 2007, Front Page/News – page 4. 7 Motion Picture Association publication (Asia-Pacific Anti-Piracy Update, Issue 04-2007, page 11).
9
To curb film piracy and help inject new life into a beleaguered local film industry,
Malacañang led efforts to establish a stronger collaboration between the OMB and the Motion
Picture Anti-Film Piracy Council, Inc. (MPAFPCI).8 On 25 October 2007, the OMB and the
MPAFPCI signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), particularly in the area of
information sharing. The Council is also pursuing its rewards program for moviegoers who
report pirates copying movies in theaters with digital or cell phone cameras. The Council has
awarded from P10,000.00 to P20,000.00 to at least 10 people since the program began in July
2007.9
The IP Unit- Bureau of Customs (IPU-BOC)
In 2007, the IPU-BOC issued 33 WSD’s and confiscated 1,850,011 pieces of fake
goods and 4 replicating machines with an estimated value of P1,152,735,630.20. (Annex “D”:
Table 4)
One significant development was the seizure of about $2 million worth of digital
versatile disc-replicating equipment, capable of making 400,000 pirated copies a day. These
were intercepted by the BOC on 25 January 2007 for misdeclaration and for violating provisions
of Republic Act No. 9239 (Optical Media Act of 2003). The smuggled goods, consisting of four
“top-of-the-line” machines, video packaging materials and gadgets used in producing pirated
copies, were in two (2) 40-footer and two (2) 20-footer container vans from Hong Kong, United
States and Taiwan.10
According to the Motion Picture Association (MPA), the seized replicating machines
were capable of producing 14 million pirated DVDs per year, generating potential revenue of
US$ 17.5 million. Mr. Mike Ellis, Senior Vice President and Regional Director, Asia-Pacific of the
MPA said, “The MPA and our member companies congratulate the Bureau of Customs and the
Optical Media Board on the seizure of machines that would have turned out millions of pirated
DVDs.”11
On 08 March 2007, WSD’s were issued by the District Collector of the Port of Manila
against the shipments in question for violation of Section 2503 (Undervaluation,
Misclassification and Misdeclaration in Entry) of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines,
as amended by R.A. No. 765112 in relation to R.A. No. 9239. The Seizure and Forfeiture
Proceedings were docketed as S.I. 2007-015, 2007-016 and 2007-017. The seizure cases are
now submitted for resolution.13
8 http://www.op.gov.ph/news.asp?newsid=19151 9 Newspaper: Philippine Daily Inquirer H1, 10 December 2007 (Monday). 10 Manila Standard Today (http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=police1_jan26_2007.
11Motion Picture Association News Release, 30 January 2007
(http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/philippinescustomsseizurejan07.pdf). 12 An Act to Revitalize and Strengthen the Bureau of Customs Amending for the Purpose Certain Sections
of the Tariff and Customs Code of the Philippines as Amended. 13 Report of the Bureau of Customs, Internal Inquiry and Prosecution Division, Intellectual Property Unit of
01 October 2007.
10
Another significant development in the BOC is the participation of Airport Customs in
the campaign against counterfeiting. On 11 January 2007, Airport Customs police intercepted
22 boxes of pirated DVDs valued at half a million pesos, about to be shipped from the Manila
Domestic Airport for the Visayas and Mindanao. Ninoy Aquino International Airport Customs
Enforcement and Security Service Chief Major Elpidio Manuel said the discs were made in
Malaysia and would have been distributed in Cebu, Cagayan de Oro, Iloilo and Davao.14 Airport
Customs officers are now part of the training program for IP customs enforcers.
Moreover, the BOC Commissioner has made training on IPR a requirement for all
Customs employees seeking promotions in the organization. (Customs Memorandum Order No.
32-2007, 29 September 2007)
Special Sectoral Campaigns
Software Piracy - Since it started its crackdown against businesses using or selling
illegal software, the “Pilipinas Anti-Piracy Team” (PAPT)15 has confiscated P189,404,494.00
million worth of illegal software. The PAPT has also made available the free service of the PAPT
Technical Inspection Panel (P-TIP), which aims to assist companies in determining if the
software programs that they are using are licensed or not. The P-TIP has been trained by the
Business Software Alliance to conduct software systems checks. The PAPT also has an
available newly revised website (www.papt.org.ph), which contains the latest news of the
Team’s enforcement actions. It has also an open link where anyone can report of businesses
engaging in software piracy.16
The Business Software Alliance (BSA) has found the results produced by PAPT for the
past two years as encouraging. In a statement during the 2nd Anniversary of the PAPT, BSA
Director for Anti-Piracy in Asia Mr. Tarun Sawney said, “while piracy rates in this country were
still high, government agencies were now consistently enforcing intellectual property laws
regarding copying of computer programs.17
In 2007, PAPT conducted 55 raids confiscating P121,278,500.00 worth of illegal
software. In 200618 and 200519, 34 raids were conducted by PAPT and confiscated illegal
software with an estimated value of P68,125,994.00.
14 Newspaper: Malaya, News Page A2, published on 12 January 2007.
15 The NBI, OMB and PNP, together with the IP Coalition, have banded together to launch the “Pilipinas
Anti-Piracy Team” (PAPT), a campaign that aims to curb software piracy in the Philippines. BSA, the
foremost organization promoting the use of original and licensed software, is supporting the campaign. At
the launch, the five organizations signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) that spelled out the
objectives and action plans of the campaign. 16 http://www.papt.org.ph/news.aspx?id=2&news_id=66&paging=1.
17 Newspaper: Manila Standard Today B8, 17 September 2007 (Monday).
18 2006: P55,722,294.00 (22 raids).
19 2005: P12,403,700.00 (12 raids).
11
PAPT strengthened its grip against software piracy in the South. In 2007, PAPT
conducted series of raids against business establishments in the South allegedly distributing
and using unlicensed software. The IPRD-NBI raided Cannon Creek Asia Inc. and Design
Editions, both located in Mandaue City, Cebu. The raid resulted to the seizure of unlicensed
software installers and 82 computers loaded with unlicensed software belonging to Adobe
Corporation and Microsoft, Inc. amounting to P9 million. The OMB raided optical media stalls in
Cebu City including Goldisc Digital Multimedia, Marksman Superbit Shop and YFG
Merchandising. The raid resulted to the seizure of 200 sacks of pirated software programs. On
the other hand, the PNP-Criminal Investigation and Detection Group’s Anti-Economic Crimes
Task Force raided Clickers Café and Lafia Internet café in Davao City and Top One Internet
Café, Soft Touch Internet Café and Golden Circle Internet Café in Cebu City. The police were
able to seize 86 computers in Davao and 80 computers in Cebu loaded with pirated software,20
and arrested eight (8) people.21
In addition to the focus on Southern Philippines, an important change in the PAPT work
is the participation of members of the Aviation Security Group (ASG). On 10 August 2007, ASG
seized some P10 million worth of DVD’s aboard two cars belonging to a group of Muslim
traders. The DVDs, estimated to be 20,000 pieces, were found in 29 boxes intercepted at the
Ninoy Aquino International Airport checkpoint. Most were pornographic, and some were the
latest Hollywood blockbusters still to be shown locally. ASG Chief Director Atilano Morada also
alerted the OMB, which sent one of its officers to take custody of the seized DVDs that were
supposed to be brought through the Philippine Airlines cargo terminal for shipment and
distribution in the Visayas and Mindanao.22
The OMB has also strengthened further its partnerships with the private sector. On 01
August 2007, ten (10)23 industry groups have committed to police their ranks against the use of
unlicensed software and intellectual property rights infringement that could taint the image of
the country in the eyes of investors. This was embodied in a manifesto that these industry
associations signed at the Makati Shangri-La Hotel advocating proper “Software Asset
Management” (SAM) through the adoption of model SAM practices. The signing of the
manifesto is part of the public education and awareness campaign of the Business Software
Alliance (BSA), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), the Bureau of Internal Revenue
(BIR) and the IP Philippines against the use of unlicensed software.24
Moreover, BSA forged a partnership with the Cebu Software Development Industry
Association (Cebusoft) in October 2007, aimed to strengthen the drive against unlicensed
software in Cebu through the Follow SAM program. “The partnership with Cebusoft is very
significant in our campaign to promote respect for intellectual property rights and use of
licensed software throughout the country,” stated Mr. Roland Chan, BSA Director for Marketing
in Asia.25
20 http://www.papt.org.ph/news.aspx?id=2&news_id=66&paging=1.
21 http://www.papt.org.ph/news.aspx?id=2&news_id=69&paging=1.
22 Newspaper: Malaya by Jay Chua, 11 August 2007 (Saturday).
23 The groups that signed the manifesto are Business Processing Association of the Philippines (BPAP),
Contact Center Association of the Philippines (CCAP), Financial Executives Institute of the Philippines
(FINEX), Philippine Software Industry Association (PSIA), Animation Council of the Philippines Inc.,
Cebu Software Development Industry Association Inc. (CebuSoft), Medical Transcription Industry
Association of the Philippines Inc. (MITIAPI), Philippine Internet Services Association, Association of
Consulting Civil Engineers of the Philippines (ACCEP) and the Association of Government Internal
Auditors (AGIA). 24 Newspaper: Business Mirror A2, 02 August 2007 (Thursday).
25 Newspaper: Manila Bulletin, 11 October 2007 (Thursday).
12
Cable Piracy - On 16 June 2006, the NTC and IP Philippines signed a MOA seeking to
resolve their respective jurisdictions in hearing and trying cases related to cable piracy. A public
hearing on the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) for the MOA was held on 21
February 2007.
On 02 April 2007, the NTC and IP Philippines approved and formalized the IRR of the
MOA. The Cable and Satellite Broadcasting Association of Asia (CASBAA) and its members
“warmly welcome the prospect of effective action by the Philippine government to protect
intellectual property rights in the broadcasting industry.”26 The IRR provides for a means to
resolve complaints involving intellectual property issues in the cable industry. This is a result of
successful public-private partnerships the IP Philippines formed in the cable industry.
On 13 July 2007, The Federation of International Cable TV Association of the
Philippines (FICAP) filed a Petition (Prohibition with Prayer for Preliminary Injunction and
Temporary Restraining Order)27 with RTC Branch 95, Quezon City (Judge Henri Jean Paul B.
Inting). On 03 September 2007, the Court issued an Order denying the TRO for lack of merit
and setting the case on 25 October 2007 for the hearing of the preliminary injunction.
03 January 2006, Complainants (Discovery Communications-Europe, National
Geographic Channel, AXN Holdings, Turner Entertainment Networks, Asia, ESPN Sp. et. al.)
filed 12 separate complaints for violation of R. A. No. 8293 against Estrellita T. Juliano-Tamano,
et. al. On 21 November 2006, a Resolution was issued by the investigating prosecutor finding
probable cause against respondents Estrellita T. Juliano-Tamano et. al. for violation of R.A. No.
8293 (Section 177 in relation to Section 217), and filed the corresponding 94 Informations with
the RTC, Cotabato City. 08 May 2007, Respondents filed a Petition for Review with the
Secretary of Justice.
On 05 July 2007, the Secretary of Justice issued a Resolution (Resolution No. 498,
series of 2007), which reversed and set-aside the Joint Resolution issued by the investigating
prosecutor on 21 November 2006. The resolution directed the investigating prosecutor (with
leave of court) to immediately cause the dismissal of the Informations for violation of R.A. No.
8293 filed against the respondents.
On 24 July 2007, Complainants filed a Motion for Reconsideration. On 11 September
2007, RTC Branch 14 Cotabato City issued an Order dismissing the 94 Informations filed
against Estrellita Juliano-Tamano et al. On 10 October 2007, Acting DOJ Secretary Agnes VST
Devanadera issued a Resolution granting the Motion for Reconsideration (reversing and setting
aside Resolution No. 498, series of 2007). The resolution also directed the Chief State
Prosecutor to re-file the Informations and to report the action taken hereon within 10 days from
receipt.
On 08 November 2007, Estrellita Juliano-Tamano filed a Motion for Reconsideration.
The Complainants filed their Reply on 14 November 2007. The DOJ will file a motion to transfer
the venue from Cotabato City to Manila.
26 Newspaper: Manila Bulletin B5, 20 April 2007 (Friday).
27 Civil Case No. Q-07-60764 FICAP vs. NTC & IPO)
13
Meanwhile, in Congress, lawmakers filed a bill to penalize illegal cable connection. On
26 July 2007, Representative Joseph A. Santiago (Lone District, Catanduanes) filed House Bill
No. 1409 (The Anti Cable Television and Cable Internet Pilferage Act of 2007). The bill was
referred to the Congressional Committee on Information and Communications Technology on
07 August 2007.
In addition, on 15 November 2007, House Bill No. 3075 authored by Representative
Narciso D. Santiago III and Representative Marcelino R. Teodoro was also filed. The bill aims to
protect the Cable Television Industry from unauthorized connections to existing cable television
facilities that allow illegal recording, reproduction, distribution, importation or sale of intercepted
or received cable television system signals. Dubbed as the “Anti-Cable Tapping Act of 2007”, it
provides for imprisonment of not less than six months but not more than one year or a fine of
not less than P5,000.00 but not more than P10,000.00 or both.28
III. Copyright Protection: New Strategies for Access to Knowledge
Presidential directive: Vigorously enforce copyright protection of printed materials.
However, formulate and implement effective strategies that would provide affordable access to
copyrighted works, especially textbooks, such as copyright licensing and establishment of
copyright collection societies or organizations;
Collection Societies and Reproduction Rights Organizations
Without letting up on enforcement of copyright, the thrust of government’s policy is to
complement conventional enforcement with other strategies of protecting and promoting
copyright in the country. Creating collection societies or collection management organizations
for the copyright sector, particularly in the publishing industry, is a strategic goal of the
government.
In 2007, IP Philippines and the NBDB facilitated the creation of a collection society for
book authors and publishers called the Filipinas Copyright Licensing Society (FILCOLS). On 20
April 2007, the Book Development Association of the Philippines (BDAP), an association of
local book publishers and book distributors, approved a soft-loan amounting to Five Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00) for FILCOLS.
It is envisioned that, by 2008, there will be only one collective management society for
authors and publishers, led by duly-elected representatives from various associations and
stakeholders of the book publishing industry, which will be endorsed by the NBDB and IP
Philippines to the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations (IFRRO).
Institutions of Higher Education have already expressed their interest in entering into
copyright licensing agreements with FILCOLS.
In a separate, but related development, the NBDB has spearheaded the crafting of
copyright guidelines that can be used by higher educational institutions and by FILCOLS at the
proper time. These guidelines include the application of the “fair use” principle in schools, such
as policies on classroom use of copyrighted materials in course packs, and the use of
copyrighted material in multi-media formats, among others. The largest umbrella organization of
private schools, the Coordinating Council for Private Educational Associations (COCOPEA),
has expressed keen interest in implementing these guidelines and entering into copyright
licenses with FILCOLS.
28 By: Michelle Sapnu, PRID (http://www.congress.gov.ph/press/index.php?pg=details&pressid=2043).
14
IP Philippines has completed the initial assessment of these draft guidelines, and
remains in constant dialogue with the NBDB. As soon as a local collective management
organization (CMO) becomes operational in 2008, these guidelines will be pilot-tested in
selected colleges and universities before these are replicated in other higher education
institutions nationwide.
In relation to book piracy, in March 2007,29 the IP Philippines and its partner
organizations discussed programs to address book piracy in the country. The World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) organized the international conference under the theme, “WIPO
Sub-Regional Roundtable on Copyright-Based Business: Authorship, Publishing and Access to
Knowledge”. Around fifty (50) local authors, publishers and organizations in the publishing
industry, which include delegates from six (6) IP offices in Southeast Asia, participated in the
event.
Aside from enforcement, IP Philippines has been addressing the issue of book piracy at
the policy level. The Office is institutionalizing its Copyright Support Services Unit, which
includes facilitating the establishment of collection societies for writers and other artists similar
to what Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers (FILSCAP) has done for
musicians. To do this, IP Philippines established strong ties with the NBDB and the Unyon ng
mga Manunulat ng Pilipinas (UMPIL) (Writers Union of the Philippines) and other writers’
groups. IP Philippines sponsored basic orientation seminars on copyright for UMPIL members
and other writers’ groups. The Alab Art Space in the IP Philippines building was opened last
year, which expresses full support of the Office for writers and artists.30
Meanwhile, the issue of photocopying or reproduction of copyrighted works has been
getting attention in the Philippine Congress. On 08 August 2007, Representative Rufus B.
Rodriguez (Cagayan de Oro, 2nd District) filed House Bill No. 1949 (An Act Declaring It
Unlawful To Illegally Reproduce Copyrighted Books And Printed Materials Through
Photocopying, Duplicating, Printing Or Similar Means Without The Written Consent Of The
Copyright Owner Whether The Publisher Or The Author Or Both Amending For the Purpose
R.A. 8293).
IV. Judicial Reforms, Adjudication and Alternatives: A Shifting Tide
Presidential directive: Maintain appropriate coordination with the Judiciary in ensuring
that courts are adequately skilled in intellectual property cases, and in consultation with the
Judiciary and Congress, explore the designation or creation of Special Intellectual Property and
International Trade Courts;
Special IP and International Trade Courts
In 2007, the tide has shifted in the Supreme Court and the judiciary in favor of
specialization among commercial court judges in IP litigation. In November 2006, IP Philippines
partnered with the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) and the Supreme Court in organizing a
5-day workshop on IP law for commercial court judges.
29 28-29 March 2007, EDSA Shangri-La, Mandaluyong City.
30 AGIP News: 4301, 20 April 2007.
15
Newly appointed Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno delivered a major
policy speech on law and economics in 2007. He said, “This partnership between and among
the Supreme Court, PHILJA and the IP Philippines seeks not only continuing judicial education,
but appropriate training for court personnel, whether stenographers or sheriffs, with the end in
view of producing bench books for judges and manuals for court personnel when dealing with
intellectual property cases. This partnership likewise seeks to achieve an efficient case
monitoring system for intellectual property disputes, from the IP Philippines/trial court level, the
appellate courts, and the Supreme Court.”
In 2007, two (2) commercial court judges, six (6) DOJ prosecutors and one (1) lawyer of
the PhilJA were sent to foreign training.31
In ongoing bilateral cooperation dialogue with the USPTO, there is a proposal to
conduct two (2) special training seminars for commercial court judges focusing on IP cases.
The first will be in April and the second in September 2008. These programs will be
institutionalized in 2008.
Recognizing the growing importance of IP, the Chief Justice appointed on 27 July 2007
the Director General of IP Philippines as member of the Sub-Committee on Commercial Courts
under the Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court.32
As of 03 January 2008, the database of the Office of the Court Administrator, Supreme
Court shows that there are 509 IPR violations cases pending nationwide, with 391 cases in the
courts of the NCR. The following courts have the largest volume of cases: Manila-Branch 46
(92), Quezon City-Branch 90 (89) and Manila-Branch 24 (76).
The advocacy for specialized IP training for judges and for special IP courts is gaining
ground. The leadership in the Supreme Court projects an “activist” Court that appreciates the
relationships between and among different disciplines, including IP and economics. Although in
2005, the volume of IP cases pending in the courts of law did not justify the designation or
creation of special IP courts, the recognized value of such courts, at least in Metro Manila, will
most likely change the situation in 2008. With the tremendously improved relations among IP
Philippines, the Supreme Court and the PhilJA, the prospects for some form of IP Court
(whether IP alone or with international trade cases) are very positive.
Promoting Mediation in the Courts
The NCIPR has recommended the inclusion of the IP violations under the Court
Annexed Mediation (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) programs.
One of the priority objectives of the Supreme Court is to decongest court dockets, and
for this purpose, issued Administrative Circular No. 20-02 dated 24 April 2002 to establish a
court-referred mediation system, which provides for Mediation as one expeditious mode of
alternative dispute resolution.
31 (1) Global Intellectual Property Academy Enforcement of IPR’s Program in Virginia, USA on 27-30
March 2007; (2) Seminar on IPR Enforcement for the Judiciary and Public Prosecutor in Bangkok,
Thailand on 06-08 June 2007; and (3) Workshop on Digital Copyright and Copyright Collective
Management in Bangkok, Thailand on 16-19 July 2007. 32 Supreme Court Memorandum Order No. 29-2007, 27 July 2007.
16
Considering that amicable settlement or of submission to arbitration is often reached by
the parties in trademark, unfair competition and copyright cases, it is highly recommended that
the civil aspect of violation of Republic Act No. 8293 be also included, in CAM and JDR
programs, together with B.P. 22, quasi-offenses, estafa, libel and theft. (Annex “E”: The cases
covered by CAM and JDR)
Department of Justice’s Task Force on Anti-Intellectual Property Piracy (DOJ-TFAIPP)
In 2007, the DOJ-TFAIPP had an inventory of 1,172 pending complaints. By year end,
the Task Force had disposed close to one half (574) and had 598 cases carried over to 2008.
Of the complaints disposed, 96 were dismissed, 470 complaints were filed in court, and 8
motions for reconsideration were denied. (Annex “F”).
Significantly, the Department issued Order No. 937 on 12 November 2007 assigning
twenty (20) prosecutors to the TFAIPP in addition to the prosecutors designated under
Department Order No. 595 dated 11 August 2006 and Department Order No. 823 dated 12
October 2006. Currently, the TFAIPP has now thirty-two (32) prosecutors with the sole objective
of eliminating the backlog from 2007 within 2008 and keep the dockets current.
As reported to the IP Philippines, prosecutions of IPR cases have resulted in sixty-four
(64) convictions from 2001 to 2008, thirty-nine (39) of which were handed down in 2005-2006.
Last year, only one conviction has been recorded. (Annex “G”: Table 5) However, this cannot be
taken as an accurate reflection of the state of prosecution efforts in the country. Gathering
accurate data on cases has been difficult in 2007 due to the lack of cooperation from lawyers
and agents of IP owners. IP Philippines will be taking institutional measures that will, hopefully,
allow access to information about cases filed in court by law firms and other agents.
Administrative Adjudication in IP Philippines: A Viable Alternative
IP Philippines has been improving systems and processes at its Bureau of Legal Affairs
(BLA) to better serve IP owners as a viable alternative venue to secure redress for IP violations.
The BLA has original jurisdiction, concurrent with the courts of law, over IP violations.
For Intellectual Property Violation cases (IPV), the BLA resolved 26 IPV cases in 2007,
17 of which are cases from its backlog. The current turn around time for resolving IPV cases is
at 24 months compared to the average of 36 to 48 months 3 years ago. For cases filed starting
June 2007, the BLA has committed to dispose of IPV cases within twelve (12) months from the
filing of a complaint. To meet this target, the rules of procedure for litigating IPR violations will
be amended by the second quarter of 2008.
Capacity Building/Training – Intellectual Property Rights Protection (IPROTECT) Training
Program
In 2007, IP Philippines organized four (4) trainings under its IPROTECT program:
• 09 October 2007: Levi Strauss & Co. Brand Protection in the Philippines at the IP
Philippines Multi-Purpose Hall, Makati City
• 23 August 2007: Pfizer Product Identification Seminar, Palm Grove, Rockwell Club,
Makati City
17
• 03 April 2007: AstraZeneca Anti-Counterfeiting Seminar, Palm Grove, Rockwell
Club, Makati City
• 20-21 March 2007: National Workshop on Counterfeiting and Border Measures,
EDSA Shangri-La Hotel, Mandaluyong City
The IPROTECT trainings mentioned above benefited 183 government personnel and
38 participants from the private sector.
Moreover, 36 members of the NCIPR were sent to foreign seminars and trainings last
year: 2 commercial court judges; 6 prosecutors from the DOJ-TFAIPP; 6 policemen from PNP;
8 personnel from the IPU-BOC; 4 employees from IP Philippines; 2 personnel from the
Department of Health, NBI, OMB; and 1 participant each from the PhilJA, The National Library,
and the local government’s of Makati and Quezon.
These training opportunities were a result of stronger ties between Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and other IP offices and WIPO, and bilateral agreements
between the IP Philippines and the USPTO and EPO.33
Other Legal Strategies for Law Enforcement
To strengthen the drive against IPR infringement the NCIPR is seriously studying the
legal basis and the proper procedure for filing criminal, civil and administrative charges against
establishment owner’s (such as malls) whose lessees sell counterfeit products.
Consultations were conducted with some representatives of mall owners and private
sector partners. In one of the Public-Private Partnership Council for IPR (P3CIPR) meeting, a
checklist of requirements for filing of cases and inquest procedures were distributed to the
attendees for their comments.
On its part, OMB continued surveillance of several malls and business establishments
where pirated and counterfeited goods are being sold. Evidence is being gathered through
these activities. Some mall-building managers were informed in writing that pirated and
counterfeited goods are being sold in their establishment and were informed to take the
appropriate action.
33 (1) 3
rd Global Congress on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy in Geneva, Switzerland on 30-31
January 2007.
(2) Global Intellectual Property Academy Enforcement of IPR Program in Virginia, USA on 27-30 March
2007.
(3) Seminar on Capacity Building to Implement Anti-Counterfeiting and Piracy Initiative in Ha Noi,
Vietnam on 31 May – 01 June 2007.
(4) Seminar on IPR Enforcement for the Judiciary and Public Prosecutor in Bangkok, Thailand on 06-08
June 2007.
(5) Workshop on the Enforcement of IPR in the Digital Era in Nha Trang, Vietnam on 04-06 July 2007.
(6) Workshop on IP Enforcement and Combating Trade in Counterfeit Product in Bangkok, Thailand on 10-
12 July 2007.
(7) Workshop on Digital Copyright and Copyright Collective Management in Bangkok, Thailand on 16-19
July 2007.
(8) Training on IP for APEC Countries in Tokyo, Japan on 09-29 September 2007.
(9) Special Course: The Enforcement of Copyrights and Related Rights in Tokyo, Japan on 22 October – 02
November 2007.
(10) Workshop on Effective Practices in the Border Enforcement of IPR in Bangkok, Thailand on 12-16
November 2007.
(11) Workshop on Effective Enforcement of IPR in Beijing, China on 13-14 December 2007.
18
On software piracy, the CIDG-AFCCD of the PNP has sent out letters to some business
establishments in Cebu City, Davao City and Metro Manila that have been reported to the PAPT
website for alleged use of software without proper licenses.34 The letters also advised
businesses to conduct necessary system checks in order to determine the legitimacy of their
software licenses. Advisory letters have also been sent to several mall-owners encouraging
them to police their establishments from tenants that sell pirated products.
IP Philippines supports House Bill No. 1033 (An Act Penalizing Mall and Store Owners
Engaging in the Sale of Contraband Products) filed by Representative Jose G. Solis (2nd
District, Sorsogon) on 11 July 2007. The bill was referred to the Committee on Trade and
Industry on 01 August 2007. Smuggled and pirated goods not only distort normal pricing
mechanisms but also affect other market forces that contribute to the decline of the local
economy. This bill seeks to clamp down on these illegal activities by penalizing store/stall
owners who engage in the selling of contraband products. It also provides penalties for mall-
owners who tolerate the selling of contraband products by their tenants.35
Local Governments
Local governments play an important role in IPR enforcement, and in general, fostering
a local environment attractive for businesses and investments.
Moreover, IP Philippines, in partnership with the IP Coalition of IP owners, has been
implementing the LGU Ordinance project since 2005. As of today, there are eleven (11) local
government units that have IP ordinances (Makati City, Quezon City, Muntinlupa City, Navotas
City, Cebu City, Iloilo City, Davao City, Baguio City, Naga City, Balanga Bataan and Tuba
Benguet).
V. Policy and Legislation: A Fresh Approach
Presidential directive: Continue to provide the Executive and the Legislative Branches
of government with policy and legislative proposals in order to update the country’s intellectual
property laws, ensuring that these are in compliance with the country’s existing international
obligations embodied in treaties and other agreements
The Philippine IP Policy Strategy (PIPPS)
The Philippine Congress has shown signs of high interest in IP related legislation.
There are more members now, perhaps due to their professional backgrounds and relative
youth, have been publicly mentioning IP issues and filing bills in relation to IP. This is timely for
the Philippine IP Policy Strategy crafted by IP Philippines with its stakeholders.
In November 2007, IP Philippines launched the PIPPS to ensure that the Philippine IP
system promotes innovation. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo endorsed the PIPPS in the
National Innovation Summit. Inventors, entrepreneurs, artists, policymakers and experts in the
fields of science and technology, and the academe cooperated in crafting the PIPPS.
34 http://www.papt.org.ph/news.aspx?id=2&news_id=49&paging=2
35 http://www.congress.gov.ph/bis/print_history.php?save=1&journal=&switch=0&bill_no=HB01033
19
The PIPPS strategy is a living document that will undergo further improvements. It
covers eight sectors representing the country’s IP assets and approaches to realize the
identified objectives. These are public health; patent reform; universities and research and
development institutions (RDI); biodiversity and genetic resources; indigenous knowledge
systems and practices (IKSP); folklore and geographical indications; small-and medium-sized
enterprises; copyright and other creative industries and; institutional capacity-building and IP
enforcement.
The objectives of the PIPPS are as follows:
• To identify key concerns and issues for each policy area
• To recommend strategies required to address the key concerns
• To align the PIPPS with the economic and development goals of the country as
embodied in the Medium-Term Philippine Development Plan 2004-2010
• To align the PIPPS with global developments in IP
• To realize the vision of IP Philippines of fostering a creative and competitive
Philippines that values, nurtures and uses IP for national development.
The PIPPS, which began as the National IP Policy and Strategy (NIPPS) project in
January 2006, was initiated and funded by the IP Philippines. It was created to “take stock” of
the country’s IP assets, as well as craft and implement strategy to harness and use IP assets in
realizing national development goals.
The PIPPS is a fresh approach in advocating a legislative agenda. The document itself
and the broad, participative process behind it will serve as a unifying theme for the many
sectors affected by IP. Moreover, the growing interest among legislators can be organized into
an influential caucus of IP champions.
The Internet Treaties (WIPO Copyright Treaty [WCT] & WIPO Performances & Phonograms
Treaty [WPPT])
On 03 July 2007, Senator Edgardo J. Angara filed Senate Bill No. 880 (An Act
Amending Certain Provisions of Republic Act No. 8293 or the Intellectual Property Code of the
Philippines and for Other Purposes). The bill was read on First Reading and referred to the
Committee on Trade and Commerce on 04 September 2007.
IP Philippines will support the bill, which seeks to amend the Copyright provisions of
Republic Act No. 8293 to incorporate the provisions of the WIPO Internet Treaties.
In October 2002, the GRP acceded to the WCT and WPPT. The accession made the
provisions of the treaties part of the laws of our land. However, IP Philippines is of the view that
the amendments will make our organic laws one of the most modern in the world.
The Cybercrime Bill
The following bills are pending before the House of Representatives:
House Bill No. 00190 (An Act Defining Cybercrime, Providing for Prevention,
Suppression and Imposition of Penalties Therefor and for Other Purpose), which is authored by
Representative Juan Edgardo M. Angara, was filed on 02 July 2007. The bill was referred to the
Committee on Justice on 24 July 2007.
20
House Bill No. 01323 (An Act Preventing and Penalizing Computer Fraud, Abuses and
Other Cyber-Related Fraudulent Activities, and Creating for the Purpose the Cyber-Crime
Investigation and Coordinating Center, Prescribing Its Powers and Functions, and Appropriating
Funds Therefor), which is authored by Representative Eric D. Singson, was filed on 25 July
2007. The bill was referred to the Committee on Justice on 07 August 2007.
The Affordable Medicines Bill
The bill seeks to amend Republic Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual
Property Code of the Philippines (IP Code), to protect public health by creating an environment
that will lower the prices of medicines through increased competition among drug companies
and by providing the government with better policy tools to significantly influence the supply and
demand of medicines.
IP Philippines’ role was to ensure TRIPS compliant amendments and consistent with
DOHA. As to be expected, there may be honest differences in opinion or positions regarding
this subject; but it is of the considered position of the Philippine government that these
amendments are TRIPS compliant.
Accession to the Madrid Protocol
The IP Philippines is studying the benefits and the legal, technical and administrative
implications of accession to the Madrid Protocol and other international agreements concerning
trademarks like the Nice Agreement on the international classification of goods and services
and the Vienna Agreement on the classification of figurative marks.
Moreover, as part of its process in coming up with a legislative agenda, IP Philippines
will also participate in the international meetings on the Patent Law Treaty (PLT), and the
Substantive Patent Law Treaty (SPLT). IP Philippines is also studying the ways by which
Geographical Indications (GIs) can be protected in the country, including the benefits and
appropriateness of protecting it under a separate GI system or registering it as a collective
mark.
VI. Inter-Agency Work and Public-Private Partnerships: Firm Foundations
Presidential directive: The DTI, through IPO, shall (A) continue to coordinate inter-
agency efforts against piracy and counterfeiting; (B) maintain a database and enforcement
monitoring system; (C) consolidate information and reports from other agencies; and (D) submit
quarterly progress reports to the President, and provide copies to the Executive Secretary and
the Cabinet Secretary
The Secretariat for Intellectual Property Inter-Agency Coordination (SIPIAC), which was
formed by IP Philippines under the direct supervision of the Director General, organized 21
meetings for the NCIPR and 7 meetings for the P3CIPR, since it was created in 2005.
Moreover, the Secretariat organized the NCIPR Strategic Planning Workshop in
Whiterock Resort Hotel, Subic, Zambales on 06-08 December 2007.
21
The database was launched on 22 February 2007 during the 1st P3CIPR Forum for
2007 at the Intellectual Property Philippines Multi-Purpose Hall. Officials from the government
sector (DOJ, DTI, DILG, BOC, PNP, NBI, NBDB) and representatives from the private sector
(law firms, Microsoft Philippines, cable association, IP coalition, software industry, Book
Development Association of the Philippines, Philippine Chamber of Pharmaceutical Industry)
attended the activity. Representatives from the American Embassy in Manila, participated in the
event as observers.
On 19 December 2006, the IP Philippines turned over the system to the end-users
(DOJ, BOC, OMB, NBI and PNP). Under the instrument of acceptance, IP Philippines will
provide the said government agencies with the system after the sign-off of the instrument of
acceptance, and the end-user agency ensures that the system is always used and the database
that supports it is continually populated. IP Philippines shall also regularly monitor the proper
use of the system and shall be responsible for its maintenance. For the meantime, the database
will be used by the DOJ, BOC, OMB, NBI, PNP and IP Philippines. However, the plan is to
include in the network courts handling IP cases.
The NCIPR Secretariat has cultivated constructive relationships with the private sector.
Quarterly meetings of the Public-Private Partnership Council for IPR are held at IP Philippines.
These regular dialogues provide a venue for information sharing, following up operational
matters, policy debate, and joint projects for public information and education. This Council has
been institutionalized just like the NCIPR, and together they form stable mechanisms for
dialogue and coordination, laying a firm foundation for cooperation.
VII. International Cooperation: Regional and Bilateral Strategies
As part of the national program to improve the level of IPR protection in the Philippines,
and the appreciation of the benefits of IPR protection, in January 2007, IP Philippines had
bilateral meetings with the officials of IP Australia, USPTO, IP Department of Hong Kong
(HKIPD), EPO, and met with officials/representatives of private associations (Motion Picture
Association, International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers, International
Federation of Reproduction Rights Organization).
The government continued to strengthen its bilateral relations with strategic partners. In
his visit to the Philippines on 04 September 2007, Mr. David A. Katz of the USTR (then Director
for Southeast Asia and Pacific Affairs, Office of the United States Trade Representative,
Executive Office of the President, United States of America) attended the NCIPR meeting.
On 17 October 2007, the Director General of the IP Philippines presided over the US-
ASEAN Business Council Meeting. The meeting facilitated a dialogue between US businesses
and Government of the Republic of the Philippines officials to boost investment and trade in the
country. Council members also met with top officials of the IP Philippines and Mr. Eduardo B.
Manzano, Chairman of the OMB.
Significantly, the IP Philippines hosted the 4th Heads of Intellectual Property Offices
Conference (HIPOC) 2007 in partnership with the European Patent Office (EPO) at the
Peninsula Manila with close to 100 local and foreign delegates and the highest number of IP
Office heads in attendance last 13-14 November. The international conference, themed
“Addressing IP Needs of the Future”, builds on the HIPOC meeting in Singapore on addressing
growing workload and office modernization. The common objective is to restore that delicate
balance in the IP system to ensure it promotes innovation, making it relevant to our people and
spur socio-economic development.
22
Considering that IP is of major importance in the international arena and has been a
primary concern of developed, developing, and least developed countries, the Philippines will
maintain its presence in the international community, strengthen relations with its fellow ASEAN
Member Countries, contribute to the development of ASEAN as a formidable bloc in the
community of nations, and explore partnerships, cooperation programs, and provision of
technical assistance to non-ASEAN developing and least developed countries.
Thus, the IP Philippines will continue to participate in international fora such as the Asia
Pacific Economic Cooperation-IPR Experts Group (APEC-IPEG) and the ASEAN Working
Group on IP Cooperation (AWGIPC) as a vehicle to advance the nation’s interests and promote
the development of ASEAN as a strong force in the international community; take the lead in
the establishment of an ASEAN Design Filing System for the benefit of nationals of ASEAN
Member Countries and promote harmonization; and coordinate with the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) and high-achieving IP offices for the development of cooperation
with and technical assistance programs to non-ASEAN developing and least developed
countries.
RP-US Trade Investment Council (TIC) meetings on IPR
On 09 May 2007, the IP Philippines Director General attended the U.S. - R.P. Trade
Investment Council (TIC) Meeting conducted at the Executive Conference Room of the
Department of Trade and Industry, Makati City. IPR was one of the items in the agenda, wherein
the following matters were discussed: U.S. Special 301 Announcement, IPR Action Plan,
PGMA’s November 2006 Decree on IPR, Update on the Philippines enforcement action and
prosecutions and capacity building.
Bilateral Cooperation Agreements
On 27 January 2007, IP Philippines and USPTO signed a MOU on cooperation
activities on matters related to the acquisition, utilization and protection of IPR in both countries.
The MOU is aimed at improving the administration of IP protection systems, the effectiveness of
legal protection for, and use of, IP, and developing professional skills through information
sharing and exchange and capacity building.
Significantly, two (2) patent examiners from the IP Philippines Bureau of Patents
attended the USPTO Foreign Examiner-in-Residence (FEIR) pilot program. The pilot program
focused on biotechnology and is modeled after the USPTO’s Patent Training Academy
curriculum for new examiners. It started in September 2007 and will be completed in January
2008.
In September 2006, IP Philippines and EPO signed a MOU to strengthen technical
cooperation on IPR. With these cooperative agreements, our strategic partnership with EPO
and USPTO have gone beyond enforcement strategies, it now includes capacity-building for
patent examiners in biotechnology, strategies for commercialization of patented technologies,
and raising public awareness and education on the importance of IP in today’s knowledge
economy. These technical cooperation agreements are clear recognition of the importance of IP
to economic development and growth.
23
CONCLUSION: SUSTAINING THE GAINS
Much has changed in the Philippines’ IPR regime since 2005 when IP Philippines took
the lead as coordinator and oversight agency for the country’s IP system. Closer inter-
government agency coordination, high media visibility, controversial debates over legislative
proposals, partnerships with the private sector, sustained law enforcement operations,
expanded information and education efforts, including training, have all contributed to creating a
more favorable environment for IPR protection in the country.
The country’s trading partners recognized this positive development. To some extent,
the Philippines and IP Philippines have become useful models in the cooperation programs of
the EPO and USPTO with the ASEAN and with developing countries.
It is no exaggeration to state that in all the components of the Action Plan, except
perhaps for judicial adjudication, the improvements are tremendous. We say “perhaps” for
judicial adjudication because of the difficulty of gathering information and data about the cases
pending in the courts. If lawyers and agents of IP owners were more cooperative, we believe we
will have a clearer picture of the situation and act accordingly. To address this situation, IP
Philippines will amend its criteria for registering patent and trademark agents by including
updated case inventories from lawyers and agents. More than enough time was given to IP
practitioners to cooperate with the government. Now, it’s time for regulatory measures to
encourage them to cooperate.
The judiciary and the prosecution arm of the government, after two years of laying the
foundations through good relations and confidence building, training programs and advocacy,
are going to make significant strides this 2008. The partnership for IP with the Supreme Court
and the PHILJA will have a breakthrough this 2008, with institutionalized and systematic
capacity building and, if plans proceed well, some form of a specialized IP court – if it really will
improve the adjudication of IP cases. For this, IP Philippines is commissioning a study with
PHILJA that will include an analysis of the Thai Central IP and International Trade Court and its
viability in the Philippines.
Among all the seven components of the Action Plan, the fact is judicial adjudication is
the most complex and difficult area for reform and change. Enforcement, public information and
education, policy reform and the other components are progressing steadily, even dramatically.
To be sure, the legislative mill grinds slowly; not however out of complexity, but due to the very
nature of the legislative process in a Presidential system of government. Of course, the realities
in the political landscape at a given time shape Congress’ legislative priorities. Yet, the number
and quality of bills being filed in Congress that pertain to IP is impressive and shows a growing
consciousness of the importance of IP among legislators, particularly the new members of the
House of Representatives. A strategic move of IP Philippines this year is to organize an “IP
caucus” of legislators in Congress and to provide them technical support when it comes to
pushing bills about IP. The Philippine IP Policy Strategy will serve as the unifying theme for
legislators and stakeholders.
Concerning enforcement, it is safe to say that the enforcement agencies have
established and even accelerated their momentum. Enforcement operations yielded close to 3
Billion Pesos worth of fake goods in 2007, that’s double the haul of 2006 and higher than the
total of goods seized in 2005 and 2006.
24
Like enforcement, public information and education has its own momentum now that
will carry on in 2008. With mainstreaming of IP education in the educational system, solid
foundation will be built this year for a real change in mindsets among the youth and within
campuses of schools. The same can be said about public- private partnerships institutionalized
through the Public-Private Partnership Council and other annual projects of IP Philippines.
International cooperation has also taken a significant turn the past year, with IP
Philippines playing an active role in ASEAN and APEC, strengthening bilateral cooperation
agreements with the EPO, USPTO and WIPO. The increase in credibility of the Philippines in
different international and regional fora is a result of its enhanced IP regime and the recognition
given to that fact by trading partners like the United States, Japan and Europe. Recognition has
allowed the IP Philippines to put forth the case for harmonization and best practices in ASEAN
and APEC. Admittedly, this credibility is at a delicate stage of evolution that can be washed
away easily by a loss of prestige.
The Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP) has made impressive
progress on all fronts against IPR violations for the past three years. Although there are real
problems and challenges that still have to be tackled, the GRP has shown and continues to
show the kind of political commitment that will, in due time, curb piracy and counterfeiting.
25
Annexes:
Annex “A”
Table 1.
PNP-IPU Enforcement Performance
QUANTITY
MONTH
NO. OF
SEARCH
WARRANT
S SERVED Pieces
Boxes/
Sacks
ESTIMATED
VALUE
(Php)
January 33 269 - 141,210.00
February 33 13,437 - 169,822,500.00
March 34 4,038 - 88,028,500.00
April 2 51,248 - 9,949,500.00
May 66 18,807 - 68,805,701.00
June 7 205,670 - 12,003,650.00
July 9 13,833 - 8,838,000.00
August 16 4,700 - 14,700,000.00
September 17 1,108 - 6,500,000.00
October 14 1,542 - 320,000.00
November 7 700 - 21,600,303.00
December 4 - - 36,490,473.40
TOTAL 242 315,352 - 464,199,873.40
26
Annex “B”
Table 2.
IPRD-NBI Enforcement Performance
QUANTITY
MONTH
NO. OF
SEARCH
WARRANTS
SERVED Pieces
Boxes/
Sacks
ESTIMATED
VALUE
(Php)
January 26 25,734 - 12,220,000.00
February 45 48,267 - 85,249,000.00
March 36 61,952 - 19,048,000.00
April 13 3,890 - 14,163,000.00
May 20 11,961 - 21,900,000.00
June
20 29,012 - 27,818,000.00
July 15 4,784 - 7,000,000.00
August 10 2,934 - 2,400,000.00
September 18 14,618 - 33,500,000.00
October 22 1,597 17,707 14,720,000.00
November 19 8,517 - 10,350,000.00
December 66 116,019 - 12,560,000.00
TOTAL
244
329,283 17,707 260,928,950.00
27
Annex “C”
Table 3.
OMB Enforcement Performance
NO. OF OPERATIONS
ESTIMATED SEIZED
OPTICAL DISCS MONTH
Inspection Search
Warrant
Plant
Audit Inspection
Search
Warrant Total
ESTIMATED
VALUE
(Php)
January 78 - 3 172,276 - 172,276 31,137,800.00
February 188 - 1 914,905 - 914,905 82,951,000.00
March 283 - 4 398,127 - 398,127 79,960,360.00
April 112 - 2 653,600 - 653,600 82,110,250.00
May 193 - 2 345,350 - 345,350 82,749,500.00
June 224 - 1 374,000 - 374,000 97,273,250.00
July 308 - 1 490,200 - 490,200 178,633,500.00
August 369 - - 403,637 - 403,637 141,839,950.00
September 204 - - 414,000 - 414,000 118,482,000.00
October 265 - 1 303,717 - 303,717 107,361,700.00
November 152 - 5 123,200 - 123,000 43,704,000.00
December 127 - - 213,600 - 213,600 74,553,000.00
TOTAL 2,503 - 23 4,806,612 - 4,806,612 1,120,489,200.00
28
Annex “D”
Table 4.
IPU-BOC Enforcement Performance
NO. OF OPERATIONS QUANTITY
MONTH Warrant of Seizure and
Detention Pieces Sacks/Boxes
ESTIMATED
VALUE
(Php)
January 4 22,226 - 27,630,903.20
February 3 61,781 - 388,536,800.00
March 3 589,368 - 36,073,040.00
April 1 1,202 - 929,556.00
May - - - -
June 2 16,694 - 5,710,000.00
July 8 148,105 - 71,940,941.00
August 4 655,252 - 290,295,200.00
September 1 128,432 - 8,787,180.00
October 3 4,192 - 12,754,200.00
November 3 214,885 - 235,283,900.00
December 1 7,878 - 68,870,700.00
TOTAL 33
1,850,011
& 4
replicating
machines
- 1,152,735,630.20
29
Annex “E”
The cases covered by CAM and JDR are:
a) All civil cases (which include Copyright/Trademark disputes, among others), except
those which by law may not be compromised, settlement of estates, and cases
covered by the role on Summary Procedure;
b) Cases cognizable under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law;
c) Civil aspect of B.P. 22;
d) Civil aspect of quasi-offenses under Title 14 of the Revised Penal Code;
e) Civil aspect of Estafa, Libel where damages are sought; and
f) Civil aspect of Theft (Article 308, Revised Penal Code)
CAM is an enhanced pre-trial procedure that involves settling mediatable cases filed in
court with the assistance of a trained mediator who has been accredited by the Philippine
Supreme Court. The mediator assists party litigants to identify the issues and develop
proposals to resolve their disputes.
JDR is another innovation in the Philippine court system. When court annexed mediation
fails, the case is brought to the judge who then acts as a conciliator, a neutral evaluator
and a mediator. The judge will try to mediate the case. If the judge’s intervention as a
mediator succeeds, the case is concluded with a judgment based on a compromise.
CAM and JDR provide alternative venues in settling disputes and are being encouraged
by the Supreme Court. By enabling parties to resolve their disputes amicably, they
provide solutions that are less time-consuming, less tedious, less confrontational, faster
and less expensive options, which provide for a fair resolution of cases. By jointly
resolving the dispute, both parties come up as winners.
30
Annex “F”
TASK FORCE ON ANTI-INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PIRACY
(TFAIPP)
January – December 2007
No. of Pending Cases as of December 31, 2006 823
No. of Cases Received (2007)
January 39
February 16
March 34
April 24
May 19
June 20
July 23
August 25
September 68
October 45
November 20
December 16
Total No. of Cases for Disposition 349
1,172
Dismissed under Preliminary Investigation 96
Filed in Court 470
Motion for Reconsideration Denied 8
Disposed 574
Pending Cases as of December 31, 2007 598
31
Annex “G”
Table 5.
Data on Convictions (2001 – 2008)
PRESIDING
JUDGE/JUSTICE
CASE NO.
TITLE
2008 DECISION
Hon. Marlene
Gonzales-Sison,
Court of Appeals,
13th Division
CA-G.R. CR
No. 29400
pp vs. Eugene
Li36
30 January 2008 (Copyright and
Trademark infringement
and Unfair competition)
36 Reported by BNU
37 Reported by the Optical Media Board (OMB)
PRESIDING
JUDGE
CASE NO.
TITLE
2007 DECISION
Hon. Judge Antonio
Jayobo, MTCC
Silay, Negros
Occidental
28277-C
pp vs. Abdul
Alonto et al.37
09 January 2007
(RA 9239: Optical Media
Act of 2003)
32
38 Reported by RTC - Branch 59, Angeles City
39 Reported by RTC - Branch 59, Angeles City
PRESIDING
JUDGE
CASE NO.
TITLE
2006 DECISION
Hon. Ma. Angelica
T. Paras-Quiambao,
RTC, Branch 59,
Angeles City
02-531,
02-532,
02-533 and
02-534
pp vs. Nick Q.
Navarro, Janeth B.
Navarro & Jayson
C. Canlas38
Accused Nick Q.
Navarro & Janeth B.
Navarro – Convicted on
24 January 2006;
accused Jayson C.
Canlas – Dismissed on
24 January 2006
(RA 8203: Counterfeit
drugs)
Hon. Ma. Angelica
T. Paras-Quiambao,
RTC, Branch 59,
Angeles City
00-046 pp vs. Edmundo
Mangaya and
Perla Mangaya39
25 January 2006
(Unfair competition)
Hon. Alfredo C.
Flores,
RTC, Branch 167,
Pasig City
123511,
123512,
123513,
123514,
123515 and
123516
pp vs. Sally King,
Loreto Lee, Susan
Chua , Johnny
Nubla & Emilia
Nubla40
10 April 2006
(Trademark
infringement and
Unfair competition)
Hon. Antonio M.
Eugenio, Jr.
RTC, Branch 24,
Manila
00-187015 pp vs. Manny
Marasigan
05 June 2006
(Copyright
infringement)
Hon. Antonio M.
Eugenio, Jr.
RTC, Branch 24,
Manila
98-169591
99-171135
pp. vs Nestor C.
Yao
pp. vs. Nestor C.
Yao alias “Jao Jee
Hung”41
13 July 2006
(Copyright
infringement)
Hon. Antonio M.
Eugenio, Jr.
RTC, Branch 24,
Manila
03-210765
03-210971
pp vs. Nestor M.
Batilo42
24 August 2006
(Trademark
infringement)
Hon. Rufino S.
Ferraris, Jr.
MTCC, Branch 7,
Davao City
119, 756-G-
04
119, 757-G-
04
pp vs. Macacuna
Gandarosa Y
Basheron &
Alinor Pangcatan
Y Abobakar43
13 November 2006
(RA 9239: Optical
Media Act of 2003)
Hon. Judge Antonio
Jayobo, MTCC
Silay, Negros
Occidental
28267-C
pp vs. Asmawe
Tantowa, Abdulah
Mama, Maraque
Orot, Pandaw
Orot, Oding
Baro44
20 December 2006
(RA 9239: Optical
Media Act of 2003)
33
40 Reported by Bengzon Negre Untalan Intellectual Property Attorneys (BNU)
41 Source: RTC – Branch 24, Manila
42 Reported by BNU
43 Reported by the Optical Media Board (OMB)
44 Reported by the OMB
45 Reported by RTC - Branch 59, Angeles City
46 Reported by BNU
47 Reported by RTC-Branch 10, Davao City
48 Reported by RTC-Branch 10, Davao City
49 Reported by AFCCD/C IDG-PNP
PRESIDING
JUDGE
CASE NO.
TITLE
2005 DECISION
Hon. Ma. Angelica
T. Paras-Quiambao,
RTC, Branch 59,
Angeles City
00-1159,
00-1160,
01-595,
01-093 and
01-094
pp vs. Benjamin
de Castro @
Tisoy45
23 June 2005
(Trademark
infringement and
Unfair competition)
Hon. Sixto C.
Marella, Jr.,
RTC, Branch 138,
Makati City
03-2400 &
03-2401
pp vs. Fu Lin
Gutierrez and
Simon Chan46
08 August 2005
(Trademark
infringement)
Hon. Jaime V.
Quitain,
RTC, Branch 10,
Davao City
54,469-04
and
54,680-04
pp vs. Manuel
Lim Yap and
Crestita Tan Yap47
29 November 2005
(Unfair competition)
Hon. Jaime V.
Quitain,
RTC, Branch 10,
Davao City
55,922-05 to
55,926-05
and 56,477-
05 to 56,481-
05
pp vs. Manuel
Lim Yap and
Crestita Tan Yap48
29 November 2005
(Unfair competition)
PRESIDING
JUDGE CASE NO. TITLE 2004 DECISION
Hon. Edwin D.
Sorongon,
RTC, Branch 214,
Mandaluyong City
MC-00-3006
to MC-00-
3015
pp vs. Catherine
Marquez49
22 June 2004
(Copyright
infringement)
Hon. Novelita
Villegas-Llaguno,
RTC, Branch 22,
Naga City
99-7554 pp vs. Romulo
Salvador
27 November 2004
(Trademark
infringement)
34
PRESIDING
JUDGE CASE NO. TITLE 2003 DECISION
Hon. Augusto V.
Breva,
RTC, Branch 10,
Davao City
45,725-2000
45,723-2000
and 45,724-
2000,
pp vs. Marietta
Jeanne R. Fanlo
and Ed R. Fanlo
30 January 2003
(Trademark
infringement)
10 February 2003
(Trademark
infringement)
Hon. Augusto V.
Breva,
RTC, Branch 10,
Davao City
44,666-2000 pp vs. Mae Joy
Barameda
21 April 2003
(Trademark
infringement)
PRESIDING
JUDGE CASE NO. TITLE 2002 DECISION
Hon. Augusto V.
Breva,
RTC, Branch 10,
Davao City
45,726-2000,
45,723-2000,
45-724-2000
pp vs. Marietta
Jeanne R. Fanlo
and Ed R. Fanlo
17 September 2002
(Trademark
infringement)
Hon. Antonio M.
Eugenio, RTC,
Branch 24, Manila
99-172794 pp. vs. Harold
Chua50
03 October 2002
(Copyright
Infringement)
PRESIDING
JUDGE CASE NO. TITLE 2001 DECISION
Hon. Alfredo C.
Flores,
RTC, Branch 167,
Pasig City
117584 and
117585
pp vs. Elmer
Mosqueda
10 December 2001
(Trademark
infringement)
2008: (3) 2007: (1) 2006: (19) 2005: (20) 2004: (11) 2003: (4) 2002: (4) 2001: (2)
Total: 64 convictions
50 Reported by Quisumbing Torres Law Office