IP Code

“If a man is keeping an idea to himself, and that idea is taken by stealth or trickery-I say it is stealing.
But once a man has revealed his idea to others, it is no longer his alone. 
It belongs to the world.”

Linda Sue Park, A Single Shard

Nowadays, information is the most sought after commodity. With the help of technology, information can be gathered and analyzed in a matter of seconds. Also with the help of technology, ideas which were once needed to written down can now be posted and shared online. Because of the permanence of the information shared through the world wide web do you think people has the right to claim what has been revealed to them? Does the statement or quote above applies here in the Philippines?

Let’s take a good look.

According to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines also known as Republic Act. No. 8293 as amended by Republic Act No. 9150, Republic Act No. 9502 and Republic Act. No. 10372, intellectual property is the collective term used for all "creations and innovations of the human mind". Anything that is originally conceptualized or created by an individual is considered to be an intellectual property. Because of the ingenuity, creativity and uniqueness of these items, these are subject to being stolen or being used without any proper permission from the creator. Intellectual Property rights covers several areas, Copyright and Related Rights, Trademarks and Service Mark, Geographic Indications, Industrial Designs, Patents, Layout-Designs (Topographies) of Integrated Circuits and Protection of Undisclosed Information (n, TRIPS).

Here in the Philippines we can cite two cases regarding Intellectual Property Rights.

Back in 2014, Starbucks, a global coffee giant won a case against Cafe de Manila Corp, a local company that tried to register the word "Frap" as their marketing phrase. The word "Frappucino" is a term created and used by Starbucks for their line of frozen coffee drinks. It is basically their trademark.

from https://userscontent2.emaze.com/images/4bd7f0c4-19f3-4114-b503-e984eed8b238/e5b243c41540d3b675ea32a67fc47580.png

from http://globalassets.starbucks.com/assets/670738A3F65745FD9478721D181A5C11.png

from https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-IdY6BKTkupE/U6DheHCqznI/AAAAAAAAAEk/3y_JJuF4Ufk/w720-h960/10336801_1400209193600284_2581377460178112469_n.jpg

According to the Intellectual Property Office's Bureau of Legal Affairs, Cafe de Manila may not use the word FRAP for their marketing slogan because according to the IP Code of the Philippines Section 123 (d) of Republic Act No. 8293, "a mark cannot be registered if it is identical with a registered mark belonging to a different proprietor or a mark with a n earlier filing or priority date with respect of the same goods or services, closely related goods or services, or if it nearly resembles such a mark as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion." Because of this, the IPBLA ruled in favor of Starbucks. Cafe de Manila needed to look for other words or phrases they could use to avoid any issues in terms of copyright. This case did not just happen here in the Philippines, there are also similar cases like this in other countries, 

Another case about intellectual property rights that can be cited as an example happened back in 2014. Mr. Raymund Sta. Maria Catabijan an author and a publisher filed a complaint against La Concepcion College, a private school in San Jose del Monte City in Bulacan. Mr. Catabijan claimed that the school used his creation without proper credit and he submitted pieces of evidence to the Intellectual Property Rights Office of the Philippines as proof. 

Here are the samples of the content:

Complainant's - Mr. Raymund Catabijan

Respondent's - La Concepcion College

from http://newsbytes.ph/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/infringement.jpg

The IPOPHL Bureau of Legal Affairs found La Concepcion College guilty of copyright infringement. They ordered the school to stop from doing any activities that include Mr. Catabijan's works such as publishing, selling and distributing materials and they required the school to pay Mr. Catabijan P 608,450.00 for the damages they have caused. The school was willing to do what was ordered by the IPOPHL and they were acknowledge by the IPOPHL director-general for accepting the repercussions and impact of what they've done. 

With the examples we cited, we should now be more vigilant in terms of using any kind of items posted online. We should always be reminded that anything that is shared online is not always available for our use without any corresponding charges. for free. A lot of them are subject to copyright law. We should make it a habit to check if the item we are planning on using is under copyright law. 

REFERENCES

N.A. (2014) Starbucks Wins Philippines Case Over FRAP Trademark. Retrieved November 22, 2017 from http://news.abs-cbn.com/business/09/26/14/starbucks-wins-philippine-case-over-frap-trademark-report

N.A. (2014) Bulacan School Ordered to Pay PHP 608,450 for Copyright Infringement. Retrieved November 22, 2017 from http://newsbytes.ph/2014/11/08/bulacan-school-ordered-to-pay-p608450-for-copyright-infringement/

Bungubung, Pia, (2015) Scope and Limitations of Copyright Under Philippine Law and Jurisprudence in Relation to Works on the Internet. Retrieved November 22, 2017 from https://piabungubung.wordpress.com/2015/07/20/scope-and-limitations-of-copyright-under-philippine-law-and-jurisprudence-in-relation-to-works-on-the-internet/

N.A. (2015) The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines Republic Act 8293 as amended.

Retrieved from November 23, 2017 from http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/text.jsp?file_id=129343

N.A. (2014) Starbucks Corporation Vs. Caffee De Manila Corp. Retrieved November 23, 2017 from http://www.federislaw.com.ph/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/STARBUCKS-CORPORATION-vs.-CAFFEE-DE-MANILA-CORP.-IPC14-2012-00057-September-16-2014.pdf