How to Make a Living from Music in the Philippines

Last week, I participated in a WIPO-IPOPHL seminar on 'How to Make a Living from Music'.

The key lecturer was Mr. David Stopps, author of the book with the same name. Stopps has had a long experience in music management in the UK, having worked with some of very best acts in the world like U2, the Police and David Bowie among many others.

What Stopps discussed were both familiar and new. Conceptually, I had been trained to understand copyright and collective management to the closest detail. But Stopps was able to drive the nail home by talking about his real-life experiences and how he witnessed independent artists earn income in so many different ways, as long as intellectual property was respected and complied with. 

Stopps discussed how music is placed in advertisements, films, TV shows, video games, apps and others, earning royalty income for the artist and the producer. He also talked about making derivate income from selling merchandise and product placement during shows. 

This was very interesting stuff that reminded me of how much time and sacrifice we need to put in to elevate the Philippine music business up to that level. 

Mark Thursday Alciso of the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Inc. (FILSCAP) talked about collective management of copyright and the challenges faced, including the unwillingness of businesses to pay license fees and the confusion caused by having several different organizations collect license fees for different rights over the same music.

Royalty collection also gets harder when one has to deal with large networks or organizations that have a ton of leverage. Artists in the Philippines seldom get paid for the use of their music in films, TV shows or advertisement, a common practice in more developed economies. What ought to be a significant source of income is reduced to zero and a shallow promise of 'artist exposure'... something they would get anyway whether or not they're paid.

Many other concerns were raised like the massive competition we get from foreign acts, the lack of radio airplay and the proliferation of substandard music in the mass market. 

In the end, we find ourselves back where we started. If we want this country to be a source of and a hub for great music, we need to make real changes in our understanding and respect for intellectual property and business. No more pushovers. No more compromise. As artists, we mean business.

_____

For those who missed the seminar, you may still benefit from David Stopp's experience by reading his book, published by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO):

Download the PDF version of David's book from the WIPO Website

Pinoy Blogfest 3.0

Geographical Indications (GI): Tayabas Lambanog

Marketed as "Philippine Vodka", the VuQo brand lambanog has made it to Hollywood: http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/lifestyle/02/24/12/filipino-vodka-makes-it-oscar-gift-bags

Priced at $24 (about P1,032) a bottle in California, very few Filipinos will get to enjoy this beautifully assembled product in its final form. But in essence, we Filipinos of legal age all know this to be the Tagalog lambanog or more specifically, the Tayabas Lambanog.

Lambanog is a powerful liquor created from the fermented nectar of the coconut flower. This nectar is then distilled and collected as Lambanog. The final product is a clear white liquid containing around 20% to 40% alcohol (40 to 80 proof) and is drank on its own or mixed with tropical fruit juices like mango, calamansi, lime, orange or pineapple.

So how did this P200 per gallon power liquor turn into a luxury? Simple. Proper intellectual property management and marketing. 

First, the VuQo brand was developed and registered as a trademark. This allows the producer to have exclusive intellectual property rights over the brand and market it freely without the fear of counterfeits.

Second, the producer packaged the liquor with elegantly-designed, world-class frosted bottles. This adds class and mystique to an otherwise unromantic ordinary drink. The bottles themselves are protected by industrial design intellectual property rights. 

Third, the producer highlighted the Philippine origin of the liquor, making it exotic, unusual and exciting to the American market. The indication of origin itself may be used as a brand and helps improve the marketability of a product as authentic.

Finally, the story of how lambanog is made and the cultural rituals associated with the drink is spread to promote the authenticity and tradition attached to the drink. These traditional stories become part of the product and part of the experience. Traditional knowledge over the creation of the product, its history and rituals may be protected as intellectual property.

These strategies used helped transform this simple barrio drink into a young celebrity among the drinks of the world.

Back home, the Philippine government and private industries are working hard to set standardized practices for the production of lambanog. This way, we will be able to have the Tayabas Lambanog recognized as a Geographical Indication.

A Geographical Indication or GI is a collective brand like Champagne Wine (France), Praewa Silk (Thailand) or Idaho Potatoes (USA) that is commonly used by producers to certify the authenticity of their product. An internationally accepted GI will help products fetch a higher price in the global market because the producers are subjected to strict product standards that guarantee quality. 

We hope to establish the Lambanog GI, among other Philippine GIs, in the world market and have our brand stand proudly alongside the Scotch Whisky and the Stolichnaya Vodka.

So we work hard to make this dream happen... but since it's a Friday night, allow me to down my first glass of triple-distilled Tayabas Lambanog with a little calamansi juice. Tagay na!

Healing Hilot: Protecting Indigenous Massage Techniques

The Dagdagay Hilot is an ancient massage technique that was developed by the indigenous cultural communities (ICCs) of Mountain Province in the Philippines. Here, the masseuse uses uniquely shaped sticks to massage the soles of the feet in order to stimulate blood circulation. This technique is often paired with the use of virgin coconut oil and other herbs. It is believed to be effective therapy for hypertension, hormonal imbalance, depression and stress.

Today, many health spas and massage establishments employ this technique as part of their services. Cropping up alongside them are schools or training facilities that offer to teach these techniques and issue certificates for successful students. Much money changes hands in this industry, yet there has been no reported benefit to the communities of Mountain Province from which these techniques were copied. This is also true for all other indigenous hilot techniques and the communities from which they originate.

Under the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA), ICCs have the right to exercise ownership over their health practices, among other things.[1]

The law reads: “they shall have the right to special measures to control, develop and protect their sciences, technologies and cultural manifestations…”

Unfortunately, this provision presently treated as a mere declaratory statement and it will continue to be one up until the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) shall have properly defined and operationalized these 'special measures'.

A different provision of the law offers more clarity by saying that Community Intellectual Rights (CIRs) may not be taken without ‘Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)’ or ‘in violation of their laws, traditions and customs’.[2]

These rights may be used as a basis for community ownership over a health practice like massage techniques. This community property may then be the subject of a contract for the use of the technique and its name. Franchising this knowledge and brand could be a good and steady source of revenue for a community for as long as there is a properly executed contract, compliant with the dual requirements of FPIC and conformity with the community’s laws, traditions and customs.

Schools and training facilities must also be subject to the quality standards set by the community’s master practitioners. Certificates issued will no longer simply be a result of x number of hours spent in class but an authentic stamp of approval by the communities themselves of the proper application of the technique.

Trademark law can be used to support this business model by registering certification marks that may be used authenticate spas, health establishments or schools that wish to use the community’s brand. 

A “DAGDAGAY” certified establishment assures the public of the quality and authenticity of the service being offered while everybody else is prohibited from using the brand or mark. Any violator will then be liable for both trademark infringement and violation of the provisions of IPRA.

This combination of protective measures under IPRA and the Intellectual Property Code can help create a system that would give life to the ideals set by IPRA to protect the cultural integrity of our ICCs and to help them maintain control over and benefit from their knowledge, systems and practices.

Perhaps someday we can enjoy our massages with real peace of mind, knowing that our patronage is helping our indigenous peoples in a very real way.

---

[1] Sec. 34. Right to Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices and to Develop own Sciences and Technologies. - ICCs/IPs are entitled to the recognition of the full ownership and control and protection of their cultural and intellectual rights. They shall have the right to special measures to control, develop and protect their sciences, technologies and cultural manifestations, including human and other genetic resources, seeds, including derivatives of these resources, traditional medicines and health practices, vital medicinal plants, animals and minerals, indigenous knowledge systems and practices, knowledge of the properties of fauna and flora, oral traditions, literature, designs, and visual and performing arts.

[2] Sec. 32. Community Intellectual Rights. - ICCs/IPs have the right to practice and revitalize their own cultural traditions and customs. The State shall preserve, protect and develop the past, present and future manifestations of their cultures as well as the right to the restitution of cultural, intellectual, religious, and spiritual property taken without their free and prior informed consent or in violation of their laws, traditions and customs. (emphasis supplied)

Copyright and the Visual Artist

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Precious Leano, FILVADRO Executive Director

Mobile: 0917 828 8690

Email: precious.leano@gmail.com

FILVADRO UPHOLDS COPYRIGHT OF VISUAL ARTISTS

Collective Management Organization to be launched in Copyright Forum at the CCP

The Filipino Visual Arts and Design Rights Organization (FILVADRO), the country’s collective management organization (CMO) for the visual arts, will be launched in a copyright forum at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) on 22 September, 2-5 pm.

International copyright expert Atty. KT Ang from the Confederation of International Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) will speak to visual artists about how to manage the licensing of artworks and how CMOs, with focus on models abroad, support the visual artist’s work.  Also speaking during the forum will be Atty. Mark Robert Dy of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines who will present the Copyright law including, the national system of Registration.

FILVADRO was organized by key visual artists and cultural workers after a series of consultations was conducted in 2009 by the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines. Visual artists, including painters, photographers, sculptors, and graphic artists,  have stated in the consultations that there is a need for a visual arts CMO that would assert copyright for the individual. An informal survey conducted during the consultations showed that 100% of visual artists who participated in the survey have not received resale royalties.  

 “FILVADRO acts on behalf of its members to address copyright concerns, mainly the collection of resale rights for artwork sold after the first purchase, the licensing of art images for publication on all kinds of print and digital media, and the reproduction of art on items used for profit and promotion.  It will represent artists in the collection of royalties from copyright users and will be able to extend this representation to other countries where FILVADRO has  partner CMOs,” said Karen Ocampo Flores, noted visual artist and President of FILVADRO.

FILVADRO has recently signed a sister society agreement with the French La Societies Des Auteurs Dans Les Arts Graphiques Et Plastiques (ADAGP), the oldest visual arts CMO in the world. Likewise, FILVADRO is working closely with BONO, the Norwegian CMO for the visual arts.

FILVADRO was founded by noted artists Alex Baluyut, Yael Buencamino, Tina Colayco, Noel Cuizon, Egai Talusan Fernandez, Karen Ocampo Flores, Emmanuel Garibay, Jeannie Javelosa, and cultural worker Precious Leano.   Sculptor and new media artist Josephine Turalba and ceramicist Rita Badillo has recently joined the current Board of Trustees of FILVADRO.

The FILVADRO Forum and Launch is supported by the Cultural Center of the Philippines, Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines, CISAC, and the Norwegian Copyright Development Association (NORCODE).

Filipino Brands... Chilling

Filipino brands can be quite chilling... 

This one's for an ice cream stall in Market Market, Taguig City.

The Stylistic Mr. Lee

Clearly, our trademark system has failed.

This shop is in Taguig.

iSchools SAPOT develops IP sensitive Content for Students; IPO status Scored

Original article found at:

http://www.ischools.ph/project_updates/ischools-sapot-develops-ip-sensitive-content-for-students-ipo-status-scored.html

by: Kairos Dela Cruz

“Safeguarding the rights of others is the most noble and beautiful end of a human being”.

We all know our rights, sometimes we even overshoot on assuming them. The latter even makes some of us neglect the existence of others and the rights that are intrinsic to them. In cases of violence, people know about their human rights. In cases of trials, even the accused parties have the guts to assume their rights to remain silent. In the cases wherein students duplicate or photocopy resource materials, the Philippines appear to be blatant in transgressing intellectual property issues.

Should this be the case and future of Philippine education? Students stealing to become educated?

iSchools Project says NO.

iSchools Project, a government-funded ICT-education integration program, seeks to educate students not just by giving them free computer laboratories and training workshops; but also by providing them with intellectual property- sensitive educational materials.

SAPOT Participants (institutional/individual partners and project staff) pose for a group pick at Angels' Hills, Tagaytay last July 20-22, 2011.

The project seeks to provide high-quality educational content to the project’s high school recipients through its Content Mapping Initiative (CMI), more popularly coined as Supplementary Academic Philippine Online Treasury (SAPOT). The initiative is part of the project’s thrust in empowering the major stakeholders (teachers, students, and community members) of its recipient schools.

Representatives from iSchools partner institutions meet up with iSchools Project Manager, Toni Torres (in maroon) to insure the smooth flow of SAPOT.

As Toni Torres, iSchools Project Manager, puts it “iSchools Project believes that ICT can propel the Philippine education system but the project will not compromise any values in doing so. 

Content, especially in education, comes at a price that not everyone can afford. To help in solving the problem, iSchools would provide free content materials in different subjects, materials that will undergo rigorous academic scrutinizing. Permissions from the “whose” end of these content materials will be coordinated and negotiated by the project”.

In the recent outlining and primary mapping workshop for CMI, iSchools Project joined hands with major academic, cultural and legal institutions at Angels’ Hills, Tagaytay City last June 20-22, 2011. Among the many subject matter experts, Atty. Mark Dy of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO-Phils.) was given the chance to explain the need and implications of insuring that CMI would not transgress any level of the intellectual property rights of the proponents of the content materials that the initiative wishes to include in the final content map.

According to Atty. Dy, “Respect for intellectual property is a strong indicator of quality creative & educational content. Designing world-class educational material always includes proper referencing, attribution and copyright clearance for all the components used in the project. This way, credit is given to those who deserve it and the entire project is kept fresh and original”.

iSchools SAPOT will distribute the content materials to project recipient high schools tentatively through three major media- an online portal, portable external hard disk, and a magazine-type catalog. All of these materials will be distributed free of charge.

Atty. Mark Dy from the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) briefs SAPOT participants about the possible IP implications of the initiative.

During Atty. Dy’s lecture he came across why initiatives such as SAPOT are pushing a holistic change for intellectual property in the Philippines. iSchools SAPOT is one of the first of its kind but it would not be the last of iSchools’ attempts in bridging the digital divide.

“The creative, scientific and academic communities must demand greater institutional support for copyright in the Philippines if we want our creative content to flourish. Senate Bill 2487, once passed into law, will create the Bureau of Copyright under the Intellectual Property Office, dedicated to copyright policies and programs. Presently, our Intellectual Property Office only has an ad hoc team composed of two lawyers and about 10 support personnel manning the entire copyright system of the country. In contrast, South Korea has about 800. We urge everyone to support the passing of Senate Bill 2487 and lift Filipino creativity to the very top”, Dy added.

Attributing the author with due recognition is a basic in respecting intellectual property; here is an example.

Khalil Gibran, an internationally acclaimed philosopher, and author may sound too noble and too ideal when he published the opening line. In all honesty, maybe the world can use a little of this nobility and idealism.

Jollibean

from www.jollibean.com

Yes, Singapore copies too.

I don't know the real story... whether Jollibee has ever tried to sue or whether they can even win this case.

This can certainly be an interesting debate about protecting well-known Filipino marks. 

If Jollibee can't be protected as THE well-known mark, then all others might as well be lost in overseas commerce.

Have a cup of Jollibean while you think about it...

from www.jollibean.com

Guidelines on Copyright Registration and Deposit

The Copyright Registration and Deposit System (CoRDS) of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) will be operational by July 14, 2011. You may then begin registering your copyright-protected works at IPOPHL or any of our ten IP Satellite Offices.


The Guidelines have been published online today at the IPOPHL Website.


You may download a PDF copy of the Guidlelines here.


Copyright is the legal protection over an original literary, scholarly, scientific or artistic work. Registration is not necessary to gain copyright-protection but your registration certificate may serve as evidence of such protection. Registration is also needed to complete the records of the National Library of the Philippines (NLP). 




To learn more about copyright and how to protect your original creations, you may email me at markrobertdy@gmail.com

An Important Letter to Anvil Publishing

Dear Ms. Galvez & Anvil Publishing,


Greetings.


My name is Mark, a creative industries lawyer working for the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL).


Last April 15, 2011, at the World Book and Copyright Day held at the UP Technohub, I bought a book from you entitled 100 Kislap by Abdon M. Balde, Jr. Since Mr. Balde was beside me during that time, I took the opportunity to have him personally sign the copy that I bought.


While talking to Mr. Balde, I absentmindedly grabbed the wrong (unsigned) copy of the book and took it home with me.


The following day, I received a text message from your employee, Nelson or 'Nhyl' Eleda. He informed me that I left my signed copy and offered to deliver the book for swapping at the nearest National Book Store. I thanked him for his efforts and told him to leave the book at NBS Buendia cor. Makati Ave. (the one near the gas station). 


This morning, I was able to swap the wrong copy I had for the one signed by Mr. Balde, which I consider personally valuable.


For all these things, I commend Mr. Eleda and thank Anvil Publishing for having such a diligent and customer-centered employee. I appreciate the effort Mr. Eleda took to find my contact number, inform me of my mistake and deliver the book to a place most convenient for me.


I realized that the least I could do was write this letter of commendation to the company for Mr. Eleda's outstanding work. I have never experienced such care and diligence from someone working in this industry. This is the kind of person you want in management. I hope that he will be given that opportunity someday.


On the surface, this may appear to simply be about a P200 book, but for me, it's another story worth telling -- a reminder that there are people out there who do their work excellently no matter how simple they may seem on the outside. There's a lesson here somewhere.


God bless you all and best regards.




Respectfully,


Mark Robert A. Dy, J.D.








P.S. To share this story, I am furnishing Mr. Abdon Balde, Jr. (the author of the said book), Atty. Louie Calvario (Copyright Head of IPOPHL), Atty. Andrea Pasion-Flores of NBDB and Mr. Alvin Buenaventura of FILCOLS.

Fruit of our Land: Dreaming a Philippine GI System

Just last week, I was in Bangkok to attend a regional seminar called ASEAN-ECAP III Regional Workshop on the control of Geographical Indications (GIs). 


This seminar was designed to discuss the GIs of the different ASEAN and European countries. 


Before I go further, I am obliged to discuss the concept of GIs to the general public --


The TRIPS Agreement defines Geographical Indications (GIs) as 

...indications which identify a good as originating in the territory of a Member, or a region or locality in that territory, where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is essentially attributable to its geographical origin. 

(Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trades, § 3, art. 22.1.)

Simply put, GIs are marks or labels that tell you where a good or service comes from. In order to qualify as a GI product or service, it must come from that place and that place alone. This might be because of some special physical characteristic of that territory or it can be as simple as the reputation of the product itself or the people producing it.  

Image found at www.thewinedoctor.com

The most popular example would be the wine coming from the Champagne province of France. The grapes, soil, and climate from this particular region have certain unique qualities that allow the production of the high-quality Champagne wine as we know it. Because of its popularity, the term Champagne once became generic as a term to describe any type of white wine, but because of GI protection, no wine can bear the name Champagne except those that are produced from the Champagne Province. Others will have to be called sparkling wine.


The Philippines, along with all the other states that signed the TRIPS Agreement, is bound by international law to protect GIs as intellectual property. Under our system, GIs would be protected under the trademark system, although with substantial modifications.

Nakorchaishri Pomelo protected by the Thai GI System.

Regionally, GIs are starting to be protected and promoted across the ASEAN. Our visit to Thailand gave us a chance to visit the pomelo farms of the Nakorchaishri province, where the producers explained to us how these fruits are to be planted, tended and harvested in order to meet GI standards.

At a glance, it's clear that the Philippines has a wealth of local products that deserve GI recognition because of their quality and reputation. The mangoes of Cebu and Guimaras have been well received in Europe and the US for many years. The Barako coffee of Batangas is legendary among Filipino consumers. From these islands, we have so many food products, beverages crafts, and services that have the reputation and quality that could make potential GI-protected assets.

So what are the advantages of using GIs?

1. Quality Control and Consumer Protection. For products to qualify for GI protection, the producers have to follow standards and specifications. This may include the use of organic fertilizers, avoidance of pesticides and the respect for normal seasonal changes.
2. Price Increase. Because quality control increases, so does price. The consumer does not only buy the product but also the guarantee that the product is of good quality. This is true for both the domestic and the international market. In effect, this improves the reputation of a certain region or town, providing better jobs and opportunities locally. 
3. Market Access. Some countries, especially those of the European Union require very strict quality control measures for products entering their countries. Having GI protection helps in meeting these standards. Although it is not an assurance of market access, GI-protection effectively guides producers into the right direction of producing quality products rather than mediocre ones that would be rejected outright.
4. Promotion. Because the GI system is well-known in the global market, having your product qualify as a GI-protected product instantly includes it in the marketing scheme of GIs globally. 

All in all, it is predicted that this system has the potential to supply tremendous benefits to local producers by bolstering the marketability and quality of their goods. It can also protect these producers by providing them with a niche market that can withstand competition from large companies that attempt to invade the industry. This secures both the identity of their products and the commercial success of their enterprises.

So why haven't we established a GI system yet?

Because we are caught between adapting the sui generis system of EU & ASEAN and the certification/collective mark system used by the United States. It's a battle of IP systems that mirror our own history and foreign policy. Adapting the EU system would give us better market access to the old world, while inviting the ire of our largest trading partner. Using the US system will isolate us from the rest of our ASEAN neighbors and prevent regional harmonization of IP laws and the integration of markets.

Difficult choice. But we need to make it soon. Our neighbors are waiting.

______

More on Collective and Certification Marks on my next post.

Who You Calling Spineless? -- The Collective Management of Copyright for Books in the Philippines

I just came from a forum by the Filipinas Copyright Licensing Society (FILCOLS) where they presented a solution to illegal photocopying of copyright-protected works. 

FILCOLS Executive Director Alvin Buenaventura says that copyright is a human right and is necessary to protect the way of life and dignity of the author.

Entitled 'Copyright: Empowering the Research University', the forum was actually a pitch to De La Salle University (DLSU) to convince them to become the first university in the Philippines to enter into a licensing agreement with FILCOLS, as the Philippines' recognized Reprographic Rights Organization (RRO). If the negotiations proceed as planned, DLSU would effectively be the first institution in the country to declare its respect for the intellectual property of authors.


It all sounds so grand, but several questions must come to mind. What is an RRO? What is the deal all about? Why is it so important?


An RRO is an organization that acts as an agent for publishers and authors in order to manage their copyrights. Also known as a Collective Management Organization (CMO), these organizations are tasked to collect royalties from users of copyright-protected works and distribute the same to the authors of these works. This way, the user obtains the freedom to make copies of works without the fear of committing copyright infringement, while the authors receive income for the use of their work.


An example of a working CMO in the Philippines is the Filipino Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (FILSCAP), which manages the copyright-protected works in the music business. FILSCAP has successfully collected income on behalf of artists and composers for several years and now FILCOLS is seeking to do the same for the publishing industry.


The basis for creating RROs or CMOs is found in our IP Code:

Section 183. Designation of Society. - The copyright owners or their heirs may designate a society of artists, writers or composers to enforce their economic rights and moral rights on their behalf. 

So what does FILCOLS offer the university? The freedom to photocopy any material from any publication without fear of incurring liability for copyright infringement. In exchange, the university will pay a per-student fee to FILCOLS per semester, which will be passed on to the students as a minimal increase in their tuition fees (about P100 or $2 per semester). This money will then be used to pay for the administrative costs of FILCOLS and then the remaining amount shall be distributed to the authors being represented by the organization.


In addition, the FILCOLS license acts as a quasi-insurance against liability for copyright infringement because FILCOLS will absorb liability up to a certain amount, even for works they do not represent. This effectively shields the university from legal liability and reputation damage. Theoretically, this license will even cover orphaned works, over which FILCOLS will hold the royalties in trust for the benefit of the missing author, in case he or she turns up.

Mr. Paul Wee, CEO of the Singapore-based Copyright Licensing and Administration Society of Singapore (CLASS), says that they are entering into an agreement with FILCOLS to protect Filipino works being used in Singapore and Singaporean works being used in the Philippines.

This elegant solution to copyright management has been found to be effective in the UK, France, Norway, Singapore, and many other countries. FILCOLS is a member of the International Federation of Reprographic Rights Organisations (IFRRO), which is a global network of CMOs for the publishing industry. To protect foreign works, FILCOLS has entered into agreements with RROs from the United States, Singapore, UK, and other countries to protect the works of their authors here in the Philippines. In turn, these foreign RROs have agreed to protect Filipino works used in their countries and hold any collected royalties in trust for them.


The licensing activities of FILCOLS is an effective first step in promoting respect for copyright in the academe. It bears noting, however, that this license is directed at university-sanctioned copying (e.g. the production of course packs or handout compilations) and does not limit legitimate fair use activities by students and faculty under our IP Code.

Ms. Karen Pitt, General Counsel of the Australia-based Copyright Agency Limited (CAL), says that the educational system in Australia takes copyright very seriously. You cannot be considered a serious institution unless you are copyright compliant.

In the international academic community, respect for intellectual property rights has become an essential condition to be considered among the very best. Quality education requires intellectual honesty, which in turn, demands respect for other people's copyright and hard work.


In this country, where photocopiers and "book-alike" services abound, a major attitudinal change has to yet to be put in place.


FILCOLS is attempting to destroy the myth that respecting copyright is too expensive for a third world country. By spreading out the cost among the entire student population, the personal expense we incur to support our authors and publishers becomes minuscule compared to what we spend on notebooks, pens or mobile phone credit.


Our authors need to feed their families too. We simply cannot choose to pay for electricity and food but not pay for our music, books, art and other intellectual creations. Ignoring the plight of our talented brothers and sisters is to sentence the creative and intellectual industries to a slow and painful death. 


As intelligent and talented as we are, unless we are paid fairly for our hard work, we will never be anything more than slaves. 


... and there's no dignity in that.

Is Copyright a Human Right?

Some writers are convinced that copyright is merely a statutory benefit -- that is, it cannot exist without the law.


Like many writers from Europe, however, I subscribe to the old world philosophy that copyright is a human right -- that it transcends business interests and embraces the sacred relationship between the creator and the creation -- the author and the work.


Although domestic laws and treaties do contain provisions on protecting intellectual property, they cannot be considered the ultimate source of these rights. They do not arise from agreements or legislation, but from human nature as creator.

Two important pieces of international law articulate this philosophy:


1. Article 27 (2) of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), known to be the document of authority for human rights, reads: 

Everyone has the right to protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author;

2. Article 15 (1) of The United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR) also reads: 

The State Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Like any other person of any other profession, artists, authors and scientists deserve to make a living from their talents. More importantly, they must be acknowledged as the creators of their work. 


So is copyright a human right? To give a yes or no answer to the issue would be a serious oversimplification that ignores the history and philosophy behind copyright.


The right answer would have to be "partially" -- copyright is partially a human right. At least in the Philippine legal system, it has to be understood this way. Why? Because our law fuses (or confuses) the concept of copyright in the civil law and the common law sense.


Civil law traditions treat copyright or author's rights (droit d'auteur to the French; Urheberrecht to the Germans) as a sacred bond between the author and the work. These rights form what we call in the Philippine IP Code as moral rights. Moral rights, particularly the right of paternity, ought to last forever (e.g. William Shakespeare's authorship to Hamlet will never expire by mere passage of time). 


This is the part of copyright which I am inclined to declare as a human right -- the right of paternity. Like any other human right, it is imprescriptible, inherent, inalienable and universal. Authorship, therefore, must be likened to a status rather than a right. For a right often disappears after the death of the owner while a status of paternity lasts forever.


So what is the right of Paternity? Section 193.1 of the Philippine IP Code describes it as 

the right to require that the authorship of the works be attributed to him, in particular, the right that his name, as far as practicable, be indicated in a prominent way on the copies, and in connection with the public use of his work 

The old intellectual property law (PD 49) correctly declared that the right of paternity lasts forever. The new law downgraded the right to last only for as long as the economic rights (generally the author's lifetime plus 50 years). This is unacceptable because it limits that part of copyright that is a human right. Today, a bill is being discussed in the Philippine House of Representatives to revert back to the old rule. I hope that the fruit of these discussions finds its way into law very soon.


Common law traditions, on the other hand, tend to focus on the economic benefits of copyright and how it can be used to generate wealth. In Philippine law, these are called economic rights. Economic rights necessarily last only for a certain period of time because they are only statutory grants used to secure a return on investment plus profits for the creator of a work and his or her heirs. 


This is the part of copyright that I consider merely a temporary grant by law, which may be removed or suspended for a greater public purpose. They are not imprescriptible, inherent, inalienable or universal. They, therefore, do not possess the essential characteristics of human rights. 


So here we have the Philippine copyright system. By way of Spain, we carry the long-standing traditions of civil law going back to the Roman Empire -- a philosophy which treats authorship with unique but well-deserved reverence. By way of America, we carry enterprising prowess of the common law tradition -- a philosophy grounded more on giving each creator a livelihood and a chance at survival. And somewhere in the middle of all this, we find ourselves still trying to figure out what to do with our inexhaustible creativity and how it can lift us up to better places. 


For now, we can rest better knowing that we do possess human rights as creators... Partially.

_____

For further reading:

See Mark Robert A. Dy, Teach the World to Sing: Restructuring Philippine Copyright Law under a Regime of Free Expression and Culture (2009) (unpublished J.D. Thesis, Ateneo de Manila University School of Law) (on file with the Ateneo Professional Schools Library).