Copyright Law of The Philippines

Copyright law of the Philippines
Philippine copyright law is enshrined in the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines,
officially known as Republic Act No. 8293. The law is partly based on United States copyright
law and the principles of the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works.
Unlike many other copyright laws, Philippine copyright laws also protect patents, trademarks, and
other forms of intellectual property.
There are also other laws that protect copyrights: the Optical Media Act (which protects music,
movies, computer programs, and video games) is an example of such.
The law is enforced through a body established by the law: the Intellectual Property Office, or IPO,
and its various branches. Copyright implementation is done with the coordination of the IPO and the
Copyright Division of the National Library of the Philippines.
Classes[edit]
The Intellectual Property Code splits works that may be copyrighted into 17 classes, listed from A to
Q. While all the classes listed are specifically for copyrighted material, trademarks and other forms of
intellectual property, depending on what it is, are covered as well. Patents do not have a category.
 [1]
A: Literature (books, pamphlets, etc.)
 B: Periodicals (newspapers, tabloids, magazines, etc.)
 C: Public speeches and other public speaking works (speeches, lectures, sermons, etc.)
 D: Letters
 E: Television or movie scripts, choreography, and entertainment in shows
 F: Musical works (lyrics, songs, song arrangements, etc.)
 G: Art products (drawings, paintings. sculptures, etc.)
 H: Ornamental designs and other forms of applied art (not necessarily industrial designs)
 I: Geographical, topographical, architectural, and scientific works (maps, charts, plans, etc.)
 J: Scientific and technical drawings
 K: Photographs and cinematographic works made in a process similar to photography
 L: Audio-visual works and cinematographic works made in a process similar to making audio-
visual works
 M: Pictures used in advertising (includes logos)
 N: Computer programs
 O: Other works not covered in classes A-N of a literary, scholarly, scientific, or artistic nature
 P: Sound recordings
 Q: Broadcasts
Fair use[edit]
Section 185 of the Intellectual Property Code provides for fair use of copyrighted material. The
criteria for fair use is almost identical to the fair use doctrine in United States copyright law, with the
exception that even unpublished works qualify as fair use under Philippine copyright law.
Moral rights[edit]
Moral rights, which can be exercised by any copyright holders (individuals, corporations, etc.), are
enshrined in Chapter 10 of the Intellectual Property Code. However, Section 193 of the code (which
is also in Chapter 10), which also outlines a copyright holder's moral rights, makes these rights
independent of economic rights outlined in Section 177 of the code.
Under Philippine copyright law, moral rights are relatively expansive on the behalf of the copyright
holder, which are listed below:
 Attribution
 The right to be prominently displayed as the creator of the copyrighted material, in

any form practical to the work
 The right to change or even withhold the work from circulation
 Integrity of ownership
 The right to object to any alteration detrimental to the name of the creator of the
material
 The right to restraining the use of the creator's name in a work not of his making
Copyright holders are not allowed to be forced to create or publish his or her works already
published, as that could be classified as a breach of contract. However, the copyright holder could
also be held liable for breach of contract.
The Intellectual Property Code also permits the waiver of moral rights in most cases, but does not
allow it if the following situations occur:
 If the creator's name will be used to damage the reputation of another person
 If the creator's name will be used to give credit to something he or she did not make
Moral rights are automatically waived in collective works unless the copyright holders expressly
reserve their moral rights. Also, if no objections have been made during the time a copyright holder
waives his or her moral rights or even if moral rights were waived unconditionally, works altered or
even destroyed would not constitute as a violation of moral rights.
In the Philippines, the term of moral rights, unless they were waived, is the same as the term of
copyright of a literary work (lifetime plus 50 years). Violation of moral rights may also be contested
as a violation of the Civil Code. Any damages collected under the Civil Code shall be given to the
copyright holder, or if the holder is already dead, be put in a trust account to be given to the
copyright holder's heirs. If the heirs defaulted, the damages go to the government.
Ownership of copyright[edit]
As the country is a party to the Berne Convention, Philippine copyright law expressly gives copyright
ownership to the copyright holder automatically for creative works which fit in one of the categories.
Government copyright[edit]
Government copyright under Philippine copyright law is established in Section 176 and its
subsections. That section specifies that no copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of
the Philippines. However, it also specifies that prior approval of the government agency or office
wherein the work is created is necessary for exploitation of government works for profit. [2]
There are exceptions to the rule: the author of any public speaking works may have the works
compiled, published, and copyrighted, and the government is permitted to receive and hold
copyrights it received as a gift or assigned. However, such copyrights may not be shortened or
annulled without prior consent of the copyright holder.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_law_of_the_Philippines
WHAT IS COPYRIGHT?
Copyright is the legal protection extended to the owner of the rights in an original work.
“Original work” refers to every production in the literary, scientific and artistic domain. Among the
literary and artistic works enumerated in the IP Code includes books and other writings, musical works,
films, paintings and other works, and computer programs.
Works are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of their mode or form of expression,
as well as their content, quality and purpose. Thus, it does not matter if, in the eyes of some critics, a
certain work has little artistic value. So long as it has been independently created and has a minimum of
creativity, the same enjoys copyright protection.
WHAT ARE THE WORKS COVERED BY COPYRIGHT PROTECTION UNDER THE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
CODE?
Section 172 of the IP Code lists the works covered by copyright protection from the moment of their
creation, namely:
(a) Books, pamphlets, articles and other writings
(b) Periodicals and newspapers
(c) Lectures, sermons, addresses, dissertations prepared for oral delivery, whether or not reduced in
writing or other material form
(d) Letters
(e) Dramatic or dramatico-musical compositions; choreographic works or entertainment in dumb shows
(f) Musical compositions, with or without words
(g) Works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, engraving, lithography or other work of art;
models or designs for works of art
(h) Original ornamental designs or models for articles of manufacture, whether or not registrable as an
industrial design, and other works of applied art
(i) Illustrations, maps, plans, sketches, charts and three-dimensional works relative to geography,
topography, architecture or science
(j) Drawings or plastic works of a scientific or technical character
(k) Photographic works including works produced by a process analogous to photography; lantern slides
(l) Audiovisual works and cinematographic works and works produced by a process analogous to
cinematography or any process for making audio-visual recordings
(m) Pictorial illustrations and advertisements
(n) Computer programs
(o) Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works.
WHAT ARE THE TWO TYPES OF RIGHTS UNDER COPYRIGHT?
There are two types of rights under copyright: (1) economic rights, so-called because they enable the
creator to obtain remuneration from the exploitation of his works by third parties, and (2) moral rights,
which makes it possible for the creator to undertake measures to maintain and protect the personal
connection between himself and the work.
Economic rights include:
Reproduction
Transformation First public distribution
Rental
Public display
Public performance
Other communication to the public of the work.
Moral rights include:
Right of Attribution
Right of Alteration
Right of Integrity (object to any prejudicial distortion)
Right to restrain use of his name.
Exception to the moral rights
When an author contributes to a collective work, his right to have his contribution attributed to him is
deemed waived unless he expressly reserves it. A collective work is a work which has been created by
two (2) or more natural persons at the initiative and under the direction of another with the
understanding that it will be disclosed by the latter under his own name and that contributing natural
persons will not be identified.
In the absence of a contrary stipulation at the time an author licenses or permits another to use his
work, the necessary editing, arranging or adaptation of such work, for publication, broadcast, use in a
motion picture, dramatization, or mechanical or electrical reproduction in accordance with the
reasonable and customary standards or requirements of the medium in which the work is to be used,
shall not be deemed to contravene the author's rights secured by this chapter. Nor shall complete
destruction of a work unconditionally transferred by the author be deemed to violate such rights.
Resale right: In every sale or lease of an original work of painting or sculpture or of the original
manuscript of a writer or composer, subsequent to the first disposition thereof by the author, the author
or his heirs shall have an inalienable right to participate in the gross proceeds of the sale or lease to the
extent of five percent (5%). This right shall exist during the lifetime of the author and for fifty (50) years
after his death.
Related rights
Authors create works to disseminate them to as large an audience as possible. Obviously, they cannot do
the dissemination by themselves. They need the help of persons or entities who contribute substantial
creative, technical or organizational skill in the process of making the works available to the public and
whose interests ought to be protected to encourage them to continue with their work. Hence, their
rights are referred to as “related rights” or “neighboring rights” since they are related to or are
neighboring on the author’s copyright.
Thus, we have the related rights of: (a) performers; (b) producers of sound recordings; and (c)
broadcasting organizations.
Copyright ownership
Generally, the natural person who created the literary and artistic work owns the copyright to the same.
For work created during or in the course of employment (works for hire):
Employee - if the work is not part of his regular duties, even if he used the time, facilities and materials
of the employer;
Employer - if the work is the result of the performance of his regularly assigned duties, unless there is an
express or implied agreement to the contrary.
For commissioned works: the person who commissioned the work owns the work but the copyright
thereto remains with the creator, unless there is a written agreement to the contrary.
For audiovisual works: the producer, the author of the scenario, the composer of the music, the film
director, and the author of the work so adapted.
WHAT IS THE TERM OF PROTECTION OF COPYRIGHT?
In general, the term of protection of copyright for original and derivative works is the life of the author
plus fifty (50) years after his death. The Code specifies the terms of protection for the different types of
works.
In calculating the term of protection, the term of protection subsequent to the death of the author shall
run from the date of his death or of publication, but such terms shall always be deemed to begin on the
first day of January of the year following the event which gave rise to them (i.e. death, publication,
making).
WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS ON COPYRIGHT AND FAIR USE?

Copyright protection is not intended to give the copyright owner absolute control over all possible
exploitation of his work. The law provides for limitations (“statutory fair uses”) on the economic rights of
authors comprising of acts which do not constitute copyright infringement even if done without the
consent of the copyright holder, such as:
The recitation or performance of a work, once it has been lawfully made accessible to the public, if done
privately and free of charge or if made strictly for a charitable or religious institution or society; (Sec.
10(1), P.D. No.49)
The making of quotations from a published work if they are compatible with fair use and only to the
extent justified for the purpose, including quotations from newspaper articles and periodicals in the
form of press summaries: Provided, That the source and the name of the author, if appearing on the
work, are mentioned;
The reproduction or communication to the public by mass media of articles on current political, social,
economic, scientific or religious topic, lectures, addresses and other works of the same nature, which are
delivered in public if such use is for information purposes and has not been expressly reserved: Provided,
That the source is clearly indicated;
The reproduction and communication to the public of literary, scientific or artistic works as part of
reports of current events by means of photography, cinematography or broadcasting to the extent
necessary for the purpose;
The inclusion of a work in a publication, broadcast, or other communication to the public, sound
recording or film, if such inclusion is made by way of illustration for teaching purposes and is compatible
with fair use: Provided, That the source and of the name of the author, if appearing in the work, are
mentioned;
The recording made in schools, universities, or educational institutions of a work included in a broadcast
for the use of such schools, universities or educational institutions: Provided, That such recording must
be deleted within a reasonable period after they were first broadcast: Provided, further, That such
recording may not be made from audiovisual works which are part of the general cinema repertoire of
feature films except for brief excerpts of the work;
The making of ephemeral recordings by a broadcasting organization by means of its own facilities and for
use in its own broadcast;
The use made of a work by or under the direction or control of the Government, by the National Library
or by educational, scientific or professional institutions where such use is in the public interest and is
compatible with fair use;
The public performance or the communication to the public of a work, in a place where no admission fee
is charged in respect of such public performance or communication, by a club or institution for charitable
or educational purpose only, whose aim is not profit making, subject to such other limitations as may be
provided in the Regulations;
Public display of the original or a copy of the work not made by means of a film, slide, television image
or otherwise on screen or by means of any other device or process: Provided, That either the work has
been published, or, that original or the copy displayed has been sold, given away or otherwise
transferred to another person by the author or his successor in title; and
Any use made of a work for the purpose of any judicial proceedings or for the giving of professional
advice by a legal practitioner.
These limitations, however, should be interpreted in such a way as to allow the work to be used in a
manner which does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably
prejudice the right holder’s legitimate interest.
The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including multiple
copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes are not an infringement of
copyright. Decompilation, which is understood here to be the reproduction of the code and translation
of the forms of the computer program to achieve the inter-operability of an independently created
computer program with other programs may also constitute fair use.
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be
considered shall include:
The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for
non-profit education purposes;
The nature of the copyrighted work;
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Aside from the provisions on the limitations on copyright and on fair use, the law allows the following
reproductions:
the private reproduction of a published work in a single copy, where the reproduction is made by a
natural person exclusively for research and private study, shall be permitted, without the authorization of
the owner of copyright in the work.
any library or archive whose activities are not for profit may, without the authorization of the author of
copyright owner, make a single copy of the work by reprographic reproduction:
(a) Where the work by reason of its fragile character or rarity cannot be lent to user in its original form;
(b) Where the works are isolated articles contained in composite works or brief portions of other
published works and the reproduction is necessary to supply them; when this is considered expedient, to
person requesting their loan for purposes of research or study instead of lending the volumes or
booklets which contain them; and
(c) Where the making of such a copy is in order to preserve and, if necessary in the event that it is lost,
destroyed or rendered unusable, replace a copy, or to replace, in the permanent collection of another
similar library or archive, a copy which has been lost, destroyed or rendered unusable and copies are not
available with the publisher.
the reproduction in one (1) back-up copy or adaptation of a computer program shall be permitted,
without the authorization of the author of, or other owner of copyright in, a computer program, by the
lawful owner of that computer program: Provided, That the copy or adaptation is necessary for:
(a) The use of the computer program in conjunction with a computer for the purpose, and to the extent,
for which the computer program has been obtained; and
(b) Archival purposes, and, for the replacement of the lawfully owned copy of the computer program in
the event that the lawfully obtained copy of the computer program is lost, destroyed or rendered
unusable.
WHAT CONSTITUTES INFRINGEMENT?
Under the IP Code
Copyright infringement consists in infringing any right secured or protected under the Code. It may also
consist in aiding or abetting such infringement. The law also provides for the liability of a person who at
the time when copyright subsists in a work has in his possession an article which he knows, or ought to
know, to be an infringing copy of the work for the purpose of:
Selling or letting for hire, or by way of trade offering or exposing for sale or hire, the article;
Distributing the article for the purpose of trade, or for any other purpose to an extent that will prejudice
the rights of the copyright owner in the work; or
Trade exhibit of the article in public.
WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION?
The owner of the copyright may file an application for a certificate of registration and deposit of copies
or reproduction of the works or works personally or via registered mail with the Copyright Division of the
National Library and the Supreme Court Library. The application must contain the following:
A duly accomplished form in duplicate for each work, provided, that a separate application is submitted
for each number of a periodical containing a notice of copyright.
A support document evidencing ownership of the copyright, the manner of its acquisition if the claimant
is not the original author translator, or editor, and where and in what establishment the work was made,
performed, printed, or produced, and the date of its completion and publication.
Receipt showing payment of the registration fee if the application is filed personally, or by postal money
order if the application is filed by registered mail.
Documentary stamps in the correct amount, which shall be affixed to the registration and deposit
certificate.
Two (2) complete copies or reproduction of the work or replica or picture

Two (2) printed copies with the copyright notice printed in front or at the back of the title page or on any
conspicuous space for a non-book material, if the work is a published work.
If the work is in a musical work, two (2) copies of the original work, in the form of a music sheet, in
cassette, optical disk, or multimedia.
A technical description of the design, if the work is an original ornamental design.
Two (2) duplicate originals or certified true copies of the deed of assignment.
- See more at: http://www.ipophil.gov.ph/services/copyright/ownership-and-

rights#sthash.fEXHHtNI.dpuf
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: COPYRIGHT

INFRINGEMENT
Copyright infringement was previously governed by Presidential Decree No. 49.

At present, all laws dealing with the protection of intellectual property rights
have been consolidated under Republic Act No. 8293. Notwithstanding the
change in the law, the same principles are reiterated in the new law under
Section 177. It provides for the copy or economic rights of an owner of a
copyright as follows:
Sec.177. Copy or Economic rights. – Subject to the provisions of chapter VIII,
copyright or economic rights shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out,
authorize or prevent the following acts:
177.1 Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;
177.2 Dramatization, translation, adaptation, abridgement, arrangement or other
transformation of the work;
177.3 The first public distribution of the original and each copy of the work by
sale or other forms of transfer of ownership;
177.4 Rental of the original or a copy of an audiovisual or cinematographic work,
a work embodied in a sound recording, a computer program, a compilation of
data and other materials or a musical work in graphic form, irrespective of the
ownership of the original or the copy which is the subject of the rental; (n)
177.5 Public display of the original or copy of the work;
177.6 Public performance of the work; and
177.7 Other communication to the public of the work
The law also provided for the limitations on copyright, thus:

Sec. 184.1 Limitations on copyright. – Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter
V, the following acts shall not constitute infringement of copyright:
(a) the recitation or performance of a work, once it has been lawfully made
accessible to the public, if done privately and free of charge or if made strictly
for a charitable or religious institution or society; [Sec. 10(1), P.D. No. 49]
(b) The making of quotations from a published work if they are compatible with
fair use and only to the extent justified for the purpose, including quotations
from newspaper articles and periodicals in the form of press summaries;
Provided, that the source and the name of the author, if appearing on the work
are mentioned; (Sec. 11 third par. P.D.49)
xxxxxxxxxxxx
(e) The inclusion of a work in a publication, broadcast, or other communication
to the public, sound recording of film, if such inclusion is made by way of
illustration for teaching purposes and is compatible with fair use: Provided, That
the source and the name of the author, if appearing in the work is mentioned;
In the above quoted provisions, â€œworkâ€ has reference to literary and artistic
creations and this includes books and other literary, scholarly and scientific
works.
In a 1999 case, the authors and copyright owners of COLLEGE ENGLISH FOR
TODAY (“CET”), Books 1 and 2, and WORKBOOK FOR COLLEGE FRESHMAN
ENGLISH, Series 1, sued the author/publisher and distributor/seller of another
published work entitled â€œDEVELOPING ENGLISH PROFICIENCYâ€ (“DEP”),
Books 1 and 2 (1985 edition). When the case reached the Supreme Court, the
Court found that several pages of the book DEP are similar, if not identical, with
the text of CET.
In determining the question of infringement, the amount of matter copied from

the copyrighted work is an important consideration. To constitute infringement,
it is not necessary that the whole or even a large portion of the work shall have
been copied. If so much is taken that the value of the original is sensibly
diminished, or the labors of the original author are substantially and to an
injurious extent appropriated by another, that is sufficient in point of law to
constitute piracy. The essence of intellectual piracy should be essayed in
conceptual terms in order to underscore its gravity by an appropriate
understanding thereof. Infringement of a copyright is a trespass on a private
domain owned and occupied by the owner of the copyright, and, therefore,
protected by law, and infringement of copyright, or piracy, which is a
synonymous term in this connection, consists in the doing by any person, without
the consent of the owner of the copyright, of anything the sole right to do which
is conferred by statute on the owner of the copyright.
When is there a substantial reproduction of a book? It does not necessarily

require that the entire copyrighted work, or even a large portion of it, be copied.
If so much is taken that the value of the original work is substantially diminished,
there is an infringement of copyright and to an injurious extent, the work is
appropriated.
The next question to resolve is to what extent can copying be injurious to the
author of the book being copied. Is it enough that there are similarities in some
sections of the books or large segments of the books are the same?
In that case, several pages of the books CET and DEP have more or less the
same contents. It may be correct that the books being grammar books may
contain materials similar as to some technical contents with other grammar
books, such as the segment about the â€œAuthor Cardâ€. However, the numerous
pages presented showing similarity in the style and the manner the books were
presented and the identical examples can’t pass as similarities merely because
of technical consideration.
In cases of infringement, copying alone is not what is prohibited. The copying

must produce an â€œinjurious effectâ€. Here, the injury consists in that
respondent lifted from petitionersâ€™ book materials that were the result of the
latterâ€™s research work and compilation and misrepresented them as her own.
She circulated the book DEP for commercial use and did not acknowledge
petitioners as her source.
Petitionersâ€™ work as authors is the product of their long and assiduous

research and for another to represent it as her own is injury enough. In
copyrighting books the purpose is to give protection to the intellectual product of
an author. This is precisely what the law on copyright protected, under Section
184.1 (b). Quotations from a published work if they are compatible with fair use
and only to the extent justified by the purpose, including quotations from
newspaper articles and periodicals in the form of press summaries are allowed
provided that the source and the name of the author, if appearing on the work,
are mentioned.
Source: Habana vs. Robles (1999)

Republic Act No. 10372
February 28, 2013
S. No. 2842
H. No. 3841
Republic of the Philippines
Congress of the Philippines
Metro Manila
Fifteenth Congress
Third Regular Session
Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the twenty-third day of July, two
thousand twelve.
[REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10372]
AN ACT AMENDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8293,
OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE “INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF THE
PHILIPPINES”, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines
in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. Section 6 of Republic Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the
“Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines”, is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“SEC. 6. The Organizational Structure of the IPO. – x x x
“6.2. The Office shall be divided into seven (7) Bureaus, each of which shall
be headed by a Director and assisted by an Assistant Director. These
Bureaus are:
“x x x
“(f) The Administrative, Financial and Personnel Services Bureau; and
“(g) The Bureau of Copyright and Other Related Rights.”
SEC. 2. Section 7 of Republic Act No. 8293 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“SEC. 7. The Director General and Deputies Director General. –
“x x x
“(b) Exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all decisions rendered by
the Director of Legal Affairs, the Director of Patents, the Director of
Trademarks, the Director of Copyright and Other Related Rights, and the
Director of the Documentation, Information and Technology Transfer Bureau.
The decisions of the Director General in the exercise of his appellate
jurisdiction in respect of the decisions of the Director of Patents, the Director
of Trademarks and the Director of Copyright and Other Related Rights shall
be appealable to the Court of Appeals in accordance with the Rules of Court;
and those in respect of the decisions of the Director of the Documentation,
Information and Technology Transfer Bureau shall be appealable to the
Secretary of Trade and Industry;
“(c) Undertake enforcement functions supported by concerned agencies such
as the Philippine National Police, the National Bureau of Investigation, the
Bureau of Customs, the Optical Media Board, and the local government units,
among others;
“(d) Conduct visits during reasonable hours to establishments and
businesses engaging in activities violating intellectual property rights and
provisions of this Act based on report, information or complaint received by
the office; and
“(e) Such other functions in furtherance of protecting IP rights and objectives
of this Act.”
SEC. 3. A new Section 9A is hereby inserted after Section 9 of Republic Act
No. 8293, to read as follows:
“SEC. 9A. The Bureau of Copyright and Other Related Rights. – The Bureau of
Copyright and Other Related Rights shall have the following functions:
“9A.1. Exercise original jurisdiction to resolve disputes relating to the terms
of a license involving the author’s right to public performance or other
communication of his work;
“9A.2. Accept, review and decide on applications for the accreditation of
collective management organizations or similar entities;
“9A.3. Conduct studies and researches in the field of copyright and related
rights; and
“9A.4. Provide other copyright and related rights service and charge
reasonable fees therefor.”
SEC. 4. Section 171.3. of Republic Act No. 8293 is hereby amended to read
as follows:
“SEC. 171. Definitions. – x x x
“171.3. ‘Communication to the public’ or ‘communicate to the public’ means
any communication to the public, including broadcasting, rebroadcasting,
retransmitting by cable, broadcasting and retransmitting by satellite, and
includes the making of a work available to the public by wire or wireless
means in such a way that members of the public may access these works
from a place and time individually chosen by them;”
as follows:
“171.9. ‘Reproduction’ is the making of one (1) or more copies, temporary or
permanent, in whole or in part, of a work or a sound recording in any manner
or form without prejudice to the provisions of Section 185 of this Act (Sec.
41[E], P.D. No. 49a);”
SEC. 6. There shall be two new subsections to be added at the end of Section
171.11. to be known as 171.12. and 171.13., both to read as follows:
“171.12. ‘Technological measure’ means any technology, device or
component that, in the normal course of its operation, restricts acts in
respect of a work, performance or sound recording, which are not authorized
by the authors, performers or producers of sound recordings concerned or
permitted by law;
“171.13. ‘Rights management information’ means information which
identifies the work, sound recording or performance; the author of the work,
producer of the sound recording or performer of the performance; the owner
of any right in the work, sound recording or performance; or information
about the terms and conditions of the use of the work, sound recording or
performance; and any number or code that represent such information, when
any of these items is attached to a copy of the work, sound recording or
fixation of performance or appears in conjunction with the communication to
the public of a work, sound recording or performance.”
SEC. 7. The Chapter Title of Chapter VII, Part IV, the Law on Copyright, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
“CHAPTER VII
TRANSFER, ASSIGNMENT AND LICENSING OF COPYRIGHT”
follows:
“SEC. 180. Rights of Assignee or Licensee. – 180.1. The copyright may be
assigned or licensed in whole or in part. Within the scope of the assignment
or license, the assignee or licensee is entitled to all the rights and remedies
which the assignor or licensor had with respect to the copyright.
“180.2. The copyright is not deemed assigned or licensed inter vivos, in
whole or in part, unless there is a written indication of such intention.
“x x x
“180.4. Any exclusivity in the economic rights in a work may be exclusively
licensed. Within the scope of the exclusive license, the licensee is entitled to
all the rights and remedies which the licensor had with respect to the
copyright.
“180.5. The copyright owner has the right to regular statements of accounts
from the assignee or the licensee with regard to assigned or licensed work.”
follows:
“SEC. 181. Copyright and Material Object. – The copyright is distinct from the
property in the material object subject to it. Consequently, the transfer,
assignment or licensing of the copyright shall not itself constitute a transfer
of the material object. Nor shall a transfer or assignment of the sole copy or
of one or several copies of the work imply transfer, assignment or licensing
of the copyright. (Sec. 16, P.D. No. 49)”
follows:
“SEC. 183. Designation of Society. – The owners of copyright and related
rights or their heirs may designate a society of artists, writers, composers
and other right-holders to collectively manage their economic or moral rights
on their behalf. For the said societies to enforce the rights of their members,
they shall first secure the necessary accreditation from the Intellectual
Property Office. (Sec. 32, P.D. No. 49a)”
as follows:
“SEC. 184. Limitations on Copyright. – x x x
“(1) The reproduction or distribution of published articles or materials in a
specialized format exclusively for the use of the blind, visually- and reading-
impaired persons: Provided, That such copies and distribution shall be made
on a nonprofit basis and shall indicate the copyright owner and the date of
the original publication.”
as follows:
“SEC. 185. Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work. – 185.1. The fair use of a
copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including
limited number of copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and
similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright. Decompilation, which is
understood here to be the reproduction of the code and translation of the
forms of a computer program to achieve the interoperability of an
independently created computer program with other programs may also
constitute fair use under the criteria established by this section, to the extent
that such decompilation is done for the purpose of obtaining the information
necessary to achieve such interoperability.
“x x x.”
as follows:
“SEC. 188. Reprographic Reproduction by Libraries. – 188.1. Notwithstanding
the provisions of Subsection 177.1., any library or archive whose activities
are not for profit may, without the authorization of the author or copyright
owner, make a limited number of copies of the work, as may be necessary
for such institutions to fulfill their mandate, by reprographic reproduction:
“x x x
“(c) Where the making of such limited copies is in order to preserve and, if
necessary in the event that it is lost, destroyed or rendered unusable,
replace a copy, or to replace, in the permanent collection of another similar
library or archive, a copy which has been lost, destroyed or rendered
unusable and copies are not available with the publisher.”
SEC. 14. Sections 190.1. and 190.2. of Republic Act No. 8293 are deleted in
their entirety.
SEC. 15. Section 190.3. of Republic Act No. 8293 is hereby renumbered and
amended as the sole provision under Section 190 to read as follows:
“SEC 190. Importation and Exportation of Infringing Materials. – Subject to
the approval of the Secretary of Finance, the Commissioner of Customs is
hereby empowered to make rules and regulations for preventing the
importation or exportation of infringing articles prohibited under Part IV of
this Act and under relevant treaties and conventions to which the Philippines
may be a party and for seizing and condemning and disposing of the same in
case they are discovered after they have been imported or before they are
exported. (Sec. 30, P.D. No. 49)”
SEC 16. Section 191 of Republic Act No. 8293 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
“SEC 191. Deposit and Notice of Deposit with the National Library and the
Supreme Court Library. – At any time during the subsistence of the copyright,
the owner of the copyright or of any exclusive right in the work may, for the
purpose of completing the records of the National Library and the Supreme
Court Library, register and deposit with them, by personal delivery or by
registered mail, two (2) complete copies or reproductions of the work in such
form as the Directors of the said libraries may prescribe in accordance with
regulations: Provided, That only works in the field of law shall be deposited
with the Supreme Court Library. Such registration and deposit is not a
condition of copyright protection.”
follows:
“SEC. 198. Term of Moral Rights. – 198.1. The right of an author under
Section 193.1. shall last during the lifetime of the author and in perpetuity
after his death while the rights under Sections 193.2. 193.3. and 193.4. shall
be coterminous with the economic rights, the moral rights shall not be
assignable or subject to license. The person or persons to be charged with
the posthumous enforcement of these rights shall be named in a written
instrument which shall be filed with the National Library. In default of such
person or persons, such enforcement shall devolve upon either the author’s
heirs, and in default of the heirs, the Director of the National Library.”
follows;
“x x x
“203.2. The right of authorizing the direct or indirect reproduction of their
performances fixed in sound recordings or audiovisual works or fixations in
any manner or form;
“203.3. Subject to the provisions of Section 206, the right of authorizing the
first public distribution of the original and copies of their performance fixed in
sound recordings or audiovisual works or fixations through sale or rental of
other forms of transfer of ownership;
“203.4. The right of authorizing the commercial rental to the public of the
original and copies of their performances fixed in sound recordings or
audiovisual works or fixations, even after distribution of them by, or pursuant
to the authorization by the performer; and
“203.5. The right of authorizing the making available to the public of their
performances fixed in sound recordings or audiovisual works or fixations, by
wire or wireless means, in such a way that members of the public may
access them from a place and time individually chosen by them. (Sec. 42,
P.D. No. 49A).”
as follows;
“204.1. Independently of a performer’s economic rights, the performer shall,
as regards his live aural performances or performances fixed in sound
recordings or in audiovisual works or fixations, have the right to claim to be
identified as the performer of his performances, except where the omission is
dictated by the manner of the use of the performance, and to object to any
distortion, mutilation or other modification of his performances that would be
prejudicial to his reputation.”
follows:
“SEC. 208. Scope of Right. – x x x
“208.4. The right to authorize the making available to the public of their
sound recordings in such a way that members of the public may access the
sound recording from a place and at a time individually chosen or selected
by them, as well as other transmissions of a sound recording with like
effect.”
follows:
“SEC. 212. Limitations on Rights. – The provisions of Chapter VIII shall
apply mutatis mutandis to the rights of performers, producers of sound
recordings and broadcasting organizations.”
follows:
“SEC. 216. Infringement. – A person infringes a right protected under this Act
when one:
“(a) Directly commits an infringement;
“(b) Benefits from the infringing activity of another person who commits an
infringement if the person benefiting has been given notice of the infringing
activity and has the right and ability to control the activities of the other
person;
“(c) With knowledge of infringing activity, induces, causes or materially
contributes to the infringing conduct of another.
“216.1. Remedies for Infringement. – Any person infringing a right protected
under this law shall be liable:
“x x x
“(b) To pay to the copyright proprietor or his assigns or heirs such actual
damages, including legal costs and other expenses, as he may have incurred
due to the infringement as well as the profits the infringer may have made
due to such infringement, and in proving profits the plaintiff shall be required
to prove sales only and the defendant shall be required to prove every
element of cost which he claims, or, in lieu of actual damages and profits,
such damages which to the court shall appear to be just and shall not be
regarded as penalty: Provided, That the amount of damages to be awarded
shall be doubled against any person who:
“(i) Circumvents effective technological measures; or
“(ii) Having reasonable grounds to know that it will induce, enable, facilitate
or conceal the infringement, remove or alter any electronic rights
management information from a copy of a work, sound recording, or fixation
of a performance, or distribute, import for distribution, broadcast, or
communicate to the public works or copies of works without authority,
knowing that electronic rights management information has been removed
or altered without authority.
“x x x
“The copyright owner may elect, at any time before final judgment is
rendered, to recover instead of actual damages and profits, an award of
statutory damages for all infringements involved in an action in a sum
equivalent to the filing fee of the infringement action but not less than Fifty
thousand pesos (Php50,000.00). In awarding statutory damages, the court
may consider the following factors:
“(1) The nature and purpose of the infringing act;
“(2) The flagrancy of the infringement;
“(3) Whether the defendant acted in bad faith;
“(4) The need for deterrence;
“(5) Any loss that the plaintiff has suffered or is likely to suffer by reason of
the infringement; and
“(6) Any benefit shown to have accrued to the defendant by reason of the
infringement.
“In case the infringer was not aware and had no reason to believe that his
acts constitute an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may
reduce the award of statutory damages to a sum of not more than Ten
thousand pesos (Php10,000.00): Provided,That the amount of damages to be
awarded shall be doubled against any person who:
“(i) Circumvents effective technological measures; or
“(ii) Having reasonable grounds to know that it will induce, enable, facilitate
or conceal the infringement, remove or alter any electronic rights
management information from a copy of a work, sound recording, or fixation
of a performance, or distribute, import for distribution, broadcast, or
communicate to the public works or copies of works without authority,
knowing that electronic rights management information has been removed
or altered without authority.
“x x x
“216.2. In an infringement action, the court shall also have the power to
order the seizure and impounding of any article which may serve as evidence
in the court proceedings, in accordance with the rules on search and seizure
involving violations of intellectual property rights issued by the Supreme
Court. (Sec. 28, P.D. No. 49a)
“The foregoing shall not preclude an independent suit for relief by the injured
party by way of damages, injunction, accounts or otherwise.”
SEC. 23. Section 217.2. of Republic Act No. 8293 hereby amended to read as
follows:
“217.2. In determining the number of years of imprisonment and the amount
of fine, the court shall consider the value of the infringing materials that the
defendant has produced or manufactured and the damage that the copyright
owner has suffered by reason of the infringement: Provided, That the
respective maximum penalty stated in Section 217.1. (a), (b) and (c) herein
for the first, second, third and subsequent offense, shall be imposed when
the infringement is committed by:
“(a) The circumvention of effective technological measures;
“(b) The removal or alteration of any electronic rights management
information from a copy of a work, sound recording, or fixation of a
performance, by a person, knowingly and without authority; or
“(c) The distribution, importation for distribution, broadcast, or
communication to the public of works or copies of works, by a person without
authority, knowing that electronic rights management information has been
removed or altered without authority.”
as follows:
“SEC. 218. Affidavit Evidence. – x x x
“(c) The copy of the work or other subject matter annexed thereto is a true
copy thereof.
“The affidavit shall be admitted in evidence in any proceedings under this
Chapter and shall be prima facie proof of the matters therein stated until the
contrary is proved, and the court before which such affidavit is produced
shall assume that the affidavit was made by or on behalf of the owner of the
copyright.”
SEC. 25. A new Section 220A shall be inserted after Section 220.2. of
Republic Act No. 8293 to read as follows:
“SEC. 220A. Disclosure of Information. – Where any article or its packaging or
an implement for making it is seized or detained under a valid search and
seizure under this Act is, or is reasonably suspected to be, by an authorized
enforcement officer, in violation of this Act, the said officer, shall, wherever
reasonably practicable, notify the owner of the copyright in question or his
authorized agent of the seizure or detention, as the case may be.”
follows:
“SEC. 226. Damages. – No damages may be recovered under this Act after
the lapse of four (4) years from the time the cause of action arose. (Sec. 58,
P.D. No. 49).”
SEC. 27. Chapter XX of Republic Act No. 8293 is hereby amended by adding
a new section at the end thereof to be denominated as Section 230, to read
as follows:
“SEC. 230. Adoption of Intellectual Property (IP) Policies. – Schools and
universities shall adopt intellectual property policies that would govern the
use and creation of intellectual property with the purpose of safeguarding
the intellectual creations of the learning institution and its employees, and
adopting locally-established industry practice fair use guidelines. These
policies may be developed in relation to licensing agreements entered into
by the learning institution with a collective licensing organization.”
SEC. 28. Section 230 of Republic Act No. 8293 is hereby renumbered as
Section 231, and all succeeding sections of the same Act are hereby
renumbered accordingly.
SEC. 29. Implementing Rules and Regulations. – Within one hundred eighty
(180) days from the effectivity of this Act, the Intellectual Property Office, in
consultation with the National Book Development Board, the National
Library, the Supreme Court Library and other relevant agencies, shall
promulgate the rules and regulations necessary to effectively implement the
provisions of this Act.
SEC. 30. Repealing Clause. – All laws, decrees, executive orders, issuances or
regulations inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby revised or
amended accordingly.
SEC. 31. Separability Clause. – If any part of this Act is declared
unconstitutional or invalid, such parts or provisions thereof not so declared
shall remain valid and subsisting.
SEC. 32. Effectivity Clause. – This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after
its publication in at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.
http://www.gov.ph/2013/02/28/republic-act-no-10372/
Transcript of Copyright Law and Plagiarism Of the Philippines

Report by:
Peque, Kimberly
Malino, Nissy
Javier, Honeylett
Com21 Copyright Law of the Philippines is enshrined in the Intellectual Property

Code of the Philippines, officially known as Republic Act No. 8293. The law is partly
based on United States copyright law and the principles of the Berne Convention for
the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works. Unlike many other copyright laws,
Philippine copyright laws also protect patents, trademarks, and other forms of
intellectual property. Philippine Copyright Law Section 185 of the Intellectual
Property Code provides for fair use of copyrighted material. The criteria for fair use
is almost identical to the fair use doctrine in United States copyright law, with the
exception that even unpublished works qualify as fair use under Philippine copyright
law. Fair use Literature
B: Periodicals
C: Public speeches and other public speaking works
D: Letters
E: Television or movie scripts, choreography, and entertainment in shows
F: Musical works
G: Art products
H: Ornamental designs and other forms of applied art
I: Geographical, topographical, architectural, and scientific works
J: Scientific and technical drawings
K: Photographs and cinematographic works made in a process similar to
photography
L: Audio-visual works and cinematographic works
M: Pictures used in advertising
N: Computer programs
O: Other works not covered in classes A-N of a literary
P: Sound recordings
Q: Broadcasts Classes Moral rights, which can be exercised by any copyright holders
(individuals, corporations, etc.), are enshrined in Chapter 10 of the Intellectual
Property Code. However, Section 193 of the code (which is also in Chapter 10),
which also outlines a copyright holder's moral rights, makes these rights
independent of economic rights outlined in Section 177 of the code.
Moral rights are automatically waived in collective works unless the copyright
holders expressly reserve their moral rights. Also, if no objections have been made
during the time a copyright holder waives his or her moral rights or even if moral
rights were waived unconditionally, works altered or even destroyed would not
constitute as a violation of moral rights. Moral rights As the country is a party to the
Berne Convention, Philippine copyright law expressly gives copyright ownership to
the copyright holder automatically for creative works which fit in one of the
categories. Ownership of copyright Government copyright Government copyright
under Philippine copyright law is established in Section 176 and its subsections.
That section specifies that no copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government
of the Philippines. However, it also specifies that prior approval of the government
agency or office wherein the work is created is necessary for exploitation of
government works for profit.
There are exceptions to the rule: the author of any public speaking works may have
the works compiled, published, and copyrighted, and the government is permitted
to receive and hold copyrights it received as a gift or assigned. However, such
copyrights may not be shortened or annulled without prior consent of the copyright
holder.
https://prezi.com/pd-8qrnkdfou/copyright-law-and-plagiarism-of-the-philippines/
Philippines Heads Toward Expanded

Copyright Law
13/11/2012 BY MARICEL ESTAVILLO FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY WATCH 2 COMMENTS
The Philippine Senate, the upper house of the country’s bicameral congress, has
approved a bill that seeks to put teeth into its copyright law as the island nation fights a
bad reputation as one of the Asian states with high piracy rates. But it also seeks to
protect fair use of copyrighted material. [update: bill text added]
Senate Bill 2842 [pdf], passed on third and final reading last week, calls for the creation
of a dedicated copyright office, to be called the Bureau of Copyright, which, if this
measure becomes law, will come on top of the existing agency tasked with overseeing
intellectual property rights protection – the IP Office of the Philippines.
The mandate of the new office is to “handle policy formulation, rule-making,

adjudication, research and education,” according to a release.
The bill also seeks to expand the scope of what could be considered as infringing
activities. “Provisions on copyright infringement will include contributory infringement,
circumvention of technological measures and rights management information as
aggravating circumstances, and the option to collect statutory damages instead of
actual damages,” the release added.
The bill also includes new provisions on technological protection measures and rights
management, made in compliance with the World Intellectual Property Organization
Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, and gives an
additional mandate to the IP Office to monitor collective management organisations.
While the bill seeks stronger copyright enforcement, it also calls for the expansion of the
scope of its copyright law’s fair use provision by exempting the blind and visually-
impaired persons from securing permission for their use of non-commercial production
of copyrighted works. This provision would enable the Philippines to “genuinely adhere
to the international principle of fair use,” said Sen. Manuel Villar, Jr., the bill’s principal
sponsor, as quoted by infojustice.org, a blog of American University law school.
The bill still needs to be approved by the lower house of Congress, the House of
Representatives, before the Philippine President could sign it into law.
The Philippines has been sensitive to the fact that it remains on the watch list of the
Office of the United States Representative for 2012 which unilaterally decides in its
“Special 301 Report” [pdf] whether its trading partners are providing adequate protection
of US IP rights protection and enforcement.
http://www.ip-watch.org/2012/11/13/philippines-heads-toward-expanded-copyright-law/
Criminalizing Plagiarism in the Philippines

Posted by Jonathan Bailey on Oct 8, 2012 1:00:00 PM
On October 3rd, the Philippines Cybercrime Prevention Act (RA 10175) took effect and, with it, the
country instituted criminal penalties for a variety of online acts, including spamming, identity theft and,
most controversially, libel.
However, the law may have had a somewhat unintended side effect - criminalizing some forms of
plagiarism.
The reason is that the new law adds penalties to “special laws” under the the country’s legal code, one of
those special laws is the Intellectual Property Code, which the nation’s copyright law is under.
This, according to Department of Justice, means that plagiarism itself is not a crime but that plagiarism
that also amounts to copyright infringement is. Such plagiarism now carries a penalty of 3-6 years
imprisonment and a fine of P50,000 - P150,000 ($1,200 - $3,600), if prosecuted under the law.
However, Justice Secretary Lella de Lima was also quick to point out that this does not apply to copying
news items or to works created by the government.
The move comes shortly after a plagiarism scandal broke out involving Filipino Senate Majority Leader
Vicente Sotto who was accused of lifting from five bloggers, including at least two in the U.S. and from
a speech by Robert Kennedy.
Sotto’s speeches, which were part of a heated debate on new birth control legislation, became the subject
of national attention and criticism, which only grew after Sotto lashed out at his accusers, even saying
that plagiarism was not a crime in the Philippines.
Sotto was a supporter of the Cybercrime legislation.
Most nations have laws against plagiarism when it rises to the level of copyright infringement and many
have “moral rights” laws that can add penalties for plagiarism beyond copyright. However, those laws are
typically civil in nature and not criminal.
In most nations, criminal penalties in copyright matters are reserved for cases where the infringement is
of a massive commercial nature, such as with commercial counterfeit CD/DVD rings and high-profile
online piracy cases. Single allegations of plagiarism rarely qualify for criminal action.
Many have expressed concern that the new law could be used to stifle Internet freedoms in the country
and some have even likened the restrictions to those placed by Philippine Dictator Ferdinand Marcos in
the 1970s.
The bill was signed by the nation’s President on September 12th and took effect October 3rd.
Following the implementation of the bill, some 10 petitions have been filed with the Supreme Court in the
Philippines seeking to overturn the law. However, an earlier attempt to obtain a restraining order barring
the law from coming into effect was already denied.
http://www.ithenticate.com/plagiarism-detection-blog/bid/87800/Criminalizing-Plagiarism-in-the-
Philippines#.VylDw_krLcc
Congress erased every Filipino’s right to bring

home music, movies and books from abroad
February 14, 2013
xclusive
By Raïssa Robles
Everyday, many Filipinos arrive in

Manila, bringing back with them books as well as DVDs and CDs of
music and movies they bought in other countries for their personal
use.
They can do this without fear of being questioned because it’s a right
specifically granted “to persons or families arriving from foreign
countries” under Section 190 of the Intellectual Property Code of the
Philippines or Republic Act 8293.
What these Filipinos probably do not know is Congress has just passed
a law erasing this right. The law — a consolidated measure amending
RA 8293, was sent to Malacañang Palace on January 29, 2013 and
just needs the signature of President Benigno Aquino III to become
effective.
That’s not all.
Under this new law, once you modify a device (for instance
“jailbreaking” an Apple product such as an iPhone or iPad) in order to
remove restrictions on what and how apps and content can be stored
and used — you can be held criminally liable for ”copyright
infringement.” The amended version introduces for the first time in our
criminal law the concept of “digital rights management” (DRM) – which
also covers how we use digital devices on the Internet and which
behaviors are considered criminal.
Penalties for “jailbreaking” and other forms of copyright infringement
range from three years in jail and at least P150,000 for the first
offense, and up to nine years in jail and P1.5 million pesos for the third
and subsequent offenses.
There’s more.
If you happen to be leasing out space — for instance, if you’re a mall or
building owner — to someone who infringes copyright, you could be
held liable.
And that’s not all.
If someone else had downloaded music from the Internet and shared
the file with you, and you then uploaded it onto your technological
device and listened to it, you could also be held liable if the download
site was one that the US recording and movie companies have been
trying to shut down.
Downloading music was the sixth most popular reason for surfing cited
by 683 Internet users ages 10 to 17 in a 2009 study conducted by the
Asian Institute of Journalism and Communications for UNICEF.
Authorities say that downloading music was made illegal as far back
as the year 2000, when then President Joseph Estrada signed the E-
Commerce Act into law. They point to Section 33 of the E-Commerce
Act which punishes with fines and jail “piracy or the unauthorized…
downloading” of, among others, “copyrighted works including legally
protected sound recordings or phonograms…through the use of
telecommunication networks…in a manner that infringes intellectual
property rights.”
They neglect to point out, though, that the last part in Section 33
contains a qualifying clause which states that downloading becomes
illegal only when done “in a manner that infringes intellectual property
rights.”
Intellectual property rights are spelled out in RA 8293 – the
Intellectual Property Code.
Here is the particular section in RA 8293 which states when the
economic rights of performers (as spelled out in Section 203) and
sound recording producers (as spelled out in Section 208) have to give
way:
CHAPTER XV
LIMITATIONS ON PROTECTION
Section 212. Limitations on Rights. – Sections 203, 208 and 209 shall not apply where the acts referred to
in those Sections are related to:
212.1. The use by a natural person exclusively for his own personal purposes;
212.2. Using short excerpts for reporting current events;
212.3. Use solely for the purpose of teaching or for scientific research; and
212.4. Fair use of the broadcast subject to the conditions under Section 185. (Sec. 44, P.D. No. 49a)
I will repeat – Section 212.1 states that the economic rights of
performers and sound recording producers have to give way when the
copyright material is for “the use by a natural person exclusively for
his own personal purposes.”
What can be clearer than that? A natural person means you and me.
Not a corporation.
Now guess what.
Our lawmakers erased the entire Section 212 and replaced it with
something else that no longer contains this particular exception – “the
use by a natural person exclusively for his own personal purposes.”
That exception is NOW GONE from the just-approved congressional
measure amending RA 8293.
Later in another post, I will show you how they did it in such a totally
confusing way that it would make you quite dizzy to understand it. It
took me a long while to understand it. And at the end, I thought – Wow!
I will also try to answer the question posed to me by my hubby Alan:
What do ordinary Filipinos get out of the amended RA 8293?
Just out of curiosity, I did a word search of the phrase “personal
purpose” in RA 8293, our present Intellectual Property Code. The
phrase was repeated THREE TIMES.
I then inserted all the approved congressional amendments to RA 8293
and did the same word search for the phrase “personal purpose”. It’s
now ALL GONE.
Because our lawmakers not only excised Section 212, which I just
mentioned. They also erased the following:
Section 190. Importation for Personal Purposes. –
190.1. Notwithstanding the provision of Subsection 177.6, but subject to the limitation under the
Subsection 185.2, the importation of a copy of a work by an individual for his personal purposes shall be
permitted without the authorization of the author of, or other owner of copyright in, the work under the
following circumstances:
(a) When copies of the work are not available in the Philippines and:
(i) Not more than one (1) copy at one time is imported for strictly individual use only; or
(ii) The importation is by authority of and for the use of the Philippine Government; or
(iii) The importation, consisting of not more than three (3) such copies or likenesses in any one invoice, is
not for sale but for the use only of any religious, charitable, or educational society or institution duly
incorporated or registered, or is for the encouragement of the fine arts, or for any state school, college,
university, or free public library in the Philippines.
(b) When such copies form parts of libraries and personal baggage belonging to persons or families
arriving from foreign countries and are not intended for sale: Provided, That such copies do not exceed
three (3).
I was greatly disturbed by that, especially after I learned that no
organization of overseas workers was invited to attend the lone public
hearing that Senator Manuel Villar, the measure’s main sponsor, called
on March 9, 2011. My Senate sources told me only representatives
from the following were invited to that public hearing:
 Department of Trade and Industry,
 Department of Justice
 Department of Science and Technology
 Intellectual Property Office (IPO)
 National Library
 National Book Development Board
 Quisumbing, Torres Law Offices
 Congressional Oversight Committee on Sicence and Technology
 Ateneo Innovation Center
 Intellectual Property Association of the Philippines ( a lawyers’ group)
 Resources for the Blind
 Intellectual Property Coalition (however John Lesaca sent his regrets)
 Business Software Alliance (also sent regrets)
 Business Process Assocation of the Philippines
 Philippine Software Industry Association
 OPM (Original Pilipino Music)
In this case, it was the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) under the
Department of Trade and Industry which had played an active role in
drafting the amendments to RA 8293. And so I asked Ricardo
Blancaflor, the IPO Director General, why they felt the need to
erase Section 190.1 – which specifically guaranteed the rights of
ordinary Filipinos flying home from overseas to bring home copyright
materials such as DVD movies, music CDs and books.
And does this mean that Filipinos could now be open to extortion at
the airport and harbors when they bring in such copyright materials?
Blancaflor’s initial reply to me was the following:
“The greater good has to be served. This law is for everybody.
I think instead of people criticizing it, I think people should recognize it’s a long awaited legislation. It was
done within the bounds of the law.
The good side of the law should also be highlighted. Hindi negative that some interest groups are
pushing.
We should be congratulated for the great work we are doing.”
These are only some of the amendments to RA 8293.
In the next article, I will discuss at length what Blancaflor told me and
what University College of Law Professor JJ Disini also told me about
the amendments’ vast implications on the listening and viewing habits
of ordinary Filipinos.
And especially on their Internet behavior and the way they transfer
music from the PC, to an MP3, to an Android Phone and a Pad.
The amendments to RA 8293 could make them liable and open to
extortion.
I have to hand it to Blancaflor. He gave me a very lengthy interview
past office hours last Friday and although tired, he was very patient in
explaining the law to me. He explained how provisions – which I
thought favored foreign movie, recording and software companies –
were in fact “pro-Filipino.”
My thanks, too, to Prof. Disini who answered my questions for many
hours. I think we were both bleary-eyed when we ended our discussion
past midnight.
Both of them talked passionately about a topic that would put most
people to sleep.
After realizing the amendments’ implications, however, you just might
end up doing this –
Categories: Big business pressures government on policies, Congress - Senate and House, Politics
https://raissarobles.com/2013/02/14/congress-erased-every-filipinos-right-to-bring-home-music-
movies-and-books-from-abroad/
Copyright Reform in the
Philippines
AMENDED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW (OR RA
10372), IS THERE GOOD IN IT FOR FILIPINOS?
President Benigno Aquino III on Wednesday signed amendments to the Intellectual Property Code without
vetoing some of its controversial measures.1
The Amended Republic Act 8293 or Republic Act 10372 was passed into law on February 28, 2013 despite
the public going against it as expressed in the article of Raissa Robles’ “Congress Erased Every Filipino’s Right to
Bring Home Music, Movies, and Books From Abroad”2. In her article, she pointed out that under this law jail
breaking or modifying a device shall make the person criminally liable, that downloading a song or movie and
sharing it will make one criminally liable. She also made mentioned the deletion of Sections 190.1 and 190.2 which
allows importation of a copy of a work by an individual for his personal use without the authorization of the author
of, or other owner of copyright in under the circumstances provided by the Intellectual Property Code
The new law deleted the entire Section 190.1 and 190.2. This deletion is interpreted by bloggers like Raissa
Robles to disallow such acts. By removing such provisions, it means for them that Filipinos cannot bring to the
Philippines a copyrighted work, even if it is for personal use. This also curtails the right of a person to his right to
property, which is one of the basic human rights. Further, if such copyrighted work is not available in the
Philippines and could only be available abroad and such copyrighted work is for educational purpose, because of the
new law, this will not be possible unless the person will run the risk of facing criminal charges. What is the law
trying to protect? Is it more of the copyrighted work of foreign authors or owners under the Philippine jurisdiction?
What is the practice of other countries compared to the practice of the Philippines? Will this new law benefit the
Filipinos or will it infringe their right?
________________
In the website of the Intellectual Property Office, it clarified the issues tackled by Raissa Robles, issue by
issue. To quote, “By deleting these provisions under the amendment, there is no longer any limit to the number of
copies that can be imported. xxx Contrary to Ms. Robles’ insinuations that OFWs can no longer bring home
copyrighted works, they can in fact bring home more copies for personal use that fall under the fair use exceptions.
The deletion of Sections 190.1 and 190.2 in fact allows for religious, charitable, or educational institutions to
import more copies, for as long as they are not infringing or pirated copies, so that more Filipino students in the
country may use such works”3. Interestingly, these provisions that were deleted were provisions lifted or adopted
from Copyright Law of the United States. Section 602 of that said law expressly provides the same exception of the
importation or exportation of infringing items 4. According to the Intellectual Property Office, this will be clarified in
the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). If that is how to interpret the deletion of those provisions
mentioned, why did our lawmakers maintain Section 190.3 and became Section 190 which states Importation and
Exportation of Infringing Materials. – Subject to the approval of the Secretary of Finance, the Commissioner of
Customs is hereby empowered to make rules and regulations for preventing the importation or exportation of
infringing articles prohibited under this Section Part IV of this Act and under relevant treaties and conventions to
which the Philippines may be a party and for seizing and condemning and disposing of the same case they are
discovered after they have been imported or before they are exported. This expands the power of the Commissioner
of Customs to seize any infringing material and shall expand his power to arrest the person who brought the
infringing work without a warrant of arrest. As Raissa Robles puts it, it is an open invitation to extortion.
What would be our country’s direction for protecting the intellectual rights of the people? Why did
lawmakers create the amendment of the current intellectual property law? What should be our country’s direction in
terms of copyright reform particularly in cover songs, articles, games or software?
Cover songs5 or cover version or simply cover, is a new performance or recording of a contemporary or
previously recorded, commercially released song or popular song, usually by someone other than the original artist.
Filipinos, artists and ordinary internet use render their favorite songs and upload it in Youtube or social media. CNN
Travel 6 has identified 13 Most Overplayed Cover Songs by
Filipinos. Among of which is ‘It’s my Life by Bon Jovi’, ‘Moves Like Jagger by Maroon 5’ and the number one in
the list, ‘Faithfully by Arnel Pineda’. Interestingly, are cover songs illegal in the Philippine jurisdiction? Yes,
because cover songs are considered derivative works in the Philippines. Section 173.1 (a) of Republic Act
82937 defines the form of derivatives work such as dramatizations, translations, adaptations, abridgments,
arrangements, and other alterations of literary or artistic works. It is another form of alteration of a literary work.
Thus, under Philippine jurisdiction, this right is protected. However, if it is shared and uploaded in the Youtube and
other social media network, the copyright owner or author will have the difficulty of running after the infringer.
In the Unites States, in order to share cover songs, one must obtain license. Sharing of an audio recording
in any form, paid or unpaid, constitutes distribution. Distribution can be in the form of downloads, streaming from
any website, including yours, or any physical product such as CD or vinyl. When you distribute a recording a song
somebody else wrote, whether it’s for commercial use (making it for sale) or promotional use (giving it away for
free), you are still required to obtain a compulsory license and pay royalties 8. In Philippine jurisdiction, cover songs
or any of its genre is not specifically stated but it can be covered under the allcatch phrase of ‘any form’ stated in
the provision of the law. This, I think is the direction that the amended copyright law is going. It is to protect the
copyright of the original owner or author of an artistic or literary work. However, it should not be cut and paste
provision wherein the text of the law was copied from another jurisdiction but pasted only the relevant provisions to
the Philippine jurisdiction. If this is being done, the essence of the law is lost, creating more confusion and may
violate other basic rights. Raissa Robles mentioned in her article that, “Under this new law, once you modify a
device (for instance “jailbreaking” an Apple product such as an iPhone or iPad) in order to remove restrictions on
what and how apps and content can be stored and used — you can be held criminally liable for ”copyright
infringement.9” If this law protects the right of the copyright owner or author, the lawmakers must strike a balance
between protecting the copyright of the owner and right of the person to due process and right against self
incrimination. The law must be clearly expressed so as not to be subjected to several interpretations. Or it cannot be
expanded in the Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). The IRR cannot be greater than the law. This is against
the principles of statutory construction.
One of the issues prevalent in this worldwide web era is software infringement. Technology is dynamic and
changes in a blink of an eye. Software creation keeps on evolving. Sometimes the later technology is an improved
version of earlier ones. This makes software creation vulnerable to infringement.
In another jurisdiction, it remains to be a debate whether software should be protected by copyright law or
patent law10. Where we adapted our Intellectual Property Law, the United States Patent and Trademark provides on
how to protect software. It is considered a patent on an invention and the grant of a property right to the inventor is
issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Generally, the term of a new patent is 20 years from the
date on which the application for the patent was filed in the United States. U.S. patent grants are effective only
within the United States, U.S. territories, and U.S. possessions 11. Such right conferred to the inventor excludes the
others from making, using, altering selling the invention to the United States. Wikipedia defines Software
copyright 12 as the extension of copyright law to machinereadable software. In Canada, software is protected as a
literary work under the Copyright Act of Canada. Copyright is acquired automatically when an original work is
generated, the creator is not required to register or mark the work with the copyright symbol in order to be
protected13.Software is copyrightable in India. Recently, Copyright Office, New Delhi has copyrighted the Hindi to
Punjabi Machine Translation Software developed by Dr. Vishal Goyal and Dr. G.S.Lehal, Punjabi University
Patiala14.
Under the Intellectual Property Law of the Philippines, software creation is protected by the Copyright
Law. Although Section 172.1 (n) of the Intellectual Property Code 15 specifies on computer programs, software
creations are computer programs. However, no reports were ever made as to any violation related to the
infringement of software creation. It is either the Filipino people understand the laws by heart or it is rampantly
violated because it has never been implemented. There are good laws that were created to protect the rights of
people, however when it comes to the implementation of these laws our government is weak in doing so. By force of
habit, our government leaders lack the political will to do so. They become incapable in executing these laws. Then,
it comes the amendment of a law that was never implemented. As if it was studied thoroughly by our lawmakers, we
have a new version of the amended law which was cut and pasted from another jurisdiction. Instead of clarifying,
this becomes the subject of confusion and deprivation of the basic rights.
http://crazynutzhell.blogspot.com/2013/03/amended-intellectual-property-law-or-ra.html
It’s official — the amendments to the Intellectual Property Code will soon come
into effect. On28 February 2013, President Benigno Aquino III signed into
law Republic Act No. 10372 [full text], which is an Act Amending Certain
Provisions of Republic Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the “Intellectual
Property Code of the Philippines”, and for Other Purposes. It will come into full
force 15 days after its publication in at least two newspapers of general
circulation.
Let’s start with the more controversial amendment: the removal of the sections
on importation for personal use. For comparison, the old text under R.A. 8293 is
reproduced in full, as follows:
Section 190. Importation for Personal Purposes. – 190.1. Notwithstanding the
provision of Subsection 177.6, but subject to the limitation under the Subsection
185.2, the importation of a copy of a work by an individual for his personal
purposes shall be permitted without the authorization of the author of, or other
owner of copyright in, the work under the following circumstances:
(a) When copies of the work are not available in the Philippines and:
(i) Not more than one (1) copy at one time is imported for strictly individual use
only; or
(ii) The importation is by authority of and for the use of the Philippine
Government; or
(iii) The importation, consisting of not more than three (3) such copies or
likenesses in any one invoice, is not for sale but for the use only of any religious,
charitable, or educational society or institution duly incorporated or registered,
or is for the encouragement of the fine arts, or for any state school, college,
university, or free public library in the Philippines.
(b) When such copies form parts of libraries and personal baggage belonging to
persons or families arriving from foreign countries and are not intended for sale:
Provided, That such copies do not exceed three (3).
190.2. Copies imported as allowed by this Section may not lawfully be used in
any way to violate the rights of owner the copyright or annul or limit the
protection secured by this Act, and such unlawful use shall be deemed an
infringement and shall be punishable as such without prejudice to the
proprietor’s right of action.
190.3. Subject to the approval of the Secretary of Finance, the Commissioner of
Customs is hereby empowered to make rules and regulations for preventing the
importation of articles the importation of which is prohibited under this Section
and under treaties and conventions to which the Philippines may be a party and
for seizing and condemning and disposing of the same in case they are
discovered after they have been imported.
The new law, Republic Act No. 10372, deleted the entire Section 190.1 and 190.2.
This deletion is interpreted by some quarters as a clear intent to disallow such
acts. In other words, they argue, Filipinos and foreigners alike cannot bring to the
Philippines a copyrighted work, even if it is for personal use.
On the other hand, Section 190.3 was retained, expanded to cover exportation as
well, and renumbered simply as Section 190, with the following text (underscored
portions are the amendments):
Section 190. Importation and Exportation of Infringing Materials . – Subject to the

approval of the Secretary of Finance, the Commissioner of Customs is hereby
empowered to make rules and regulations for preventing the importation or
exportation of infringing articles prohibited under this Section Part IV of this
Act and under relevant treaties and conventions to which the Philippines may be
a party and for seizing and condemning and disposing of the same in case they
are discovered after they have been imported or before they are exported.
It would be interesting to see how the deletion of old Sections 190.1 and 190.2
will be interpreted in the Implementing Rules and Regulations. [Full text of RA
10372]
Related Posts:
1. Republic Act 10372: Amending the Intellectual Property Code of the
Philippines (RA 8293)
2. Intellectual Property: Copyright Infringement
3. Changes in the Application and Issuance of Importer’s Clearance
Certificate (ICC), Broker’s Clearance Certificate (BCC)
4. FILSCAP and the OPM Development Act of 2014 (House Bill 4218)
http://jlp-law.com/blog/amendments-to-the-intellectual-property-code-importation-for-personal-use/
FAQs on the amendments to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines
Republic Act No. 10372, signed on February 28, 2013, amends certain provisions
of Republic Act No. 8293, otherwise known as the Intellectual Property Code of the
Philippines. The following are some frequently asked questions about these
amendments, and some short answers.
[Click here for an infographic version]
Am I still allowed to import books, DVDs, and CDs from abroad?
Yes. In fact, the amendments to the Intellectual Property Code have removed the
original limitation of three copies when bringing legitimately acquired copies of
copyrighted material into the country. Only the importation of pirated or infringed
material is illegal. As long as they were legally purchased, you can bring as many
copies you want, subject to Customs regulations.
Is the reproduction of copyrighted material for personal purposes punishable by
this law?
No. Infringement in this context refers to the economic rights of the copyright owner. So,
if you transfer music from a lawfully acquired CD into a computer, then download it to a
portable device for personal use, then you didn’t commit infringement. But if, for
example, you make multiple copies of the CD to sell, then infringement occurs.
Is the possession of, for example, a music file procured through an infringing
activity a violation of this law?
Only if it can be proven that the person benefitting from the music file has knowledge of
the infringement, and the power and ability to control the person committing the
infringement.
Is jailbreaking or rooting{{*}} my phone or device illegal?
No. Jailbreaking or rooting by themselves are not illegal. However, downloading pirated
material, or committing infringement with a “jailbroken” phone increases the penalty and
damages imposed on the person found guilty of infringement.
Are mall owners liable for infringement activities of their tenants?
Mall owners are not automatically penalized for the infringing acts of their tenants.
When a mall owner or lessor finds out about an infringement activity, he or she must
give notice to the tenant, then he or she will be afforded time to act upon this
knowledge. As stated above, the law requires that one must have both proven
knowledge of the infringement, and the ability to control the activities of the infringing
person, to be held liable. The mall owner must also have benefitted from the
infringement.
Is it legal for the Intellectual Property Office (IPO) to visit businesses to conduct
searches based on reports, information, and complaints?
The IPO may visit establishments based on reports and complaints; this in itself is
constitutional. However, if the IPO intends to perform a search and seizure, it must
comply with constitutional requirements, such as having a search warrant. A warrant
wouldn’t be required, however, if the IPO is accompanied by the Bureau of Customs or
the Optical Media Board—two agencies that can perform a search and seizure on their
own right without a warrant (per Republic Act No. 1937 and 9239, respectively).
The procedure and safeguards for this are to be spelled out in the Implementing Rules
and Regulations.
[[*]] Jailbreaking (for iOS) and rooting (for Android) are examples of decompilation, the
process of removing the vendor-imposed limitations of tablets, mobile devices and other
electronic gadgets. Though not illegal, decompilation may be in violation of your
operating system’s terms of use, and therefore may void your warranty.[[*]]
http://www.gov.ph/2013/03/08/faqs-on-the-amendments-to-the-intellectual-property-code-of-the-
philippines/
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES - AN

OVERVIEW
This web page features the
Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines - An Overview
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE

OF THE PHILIPPINES
GENERAL OVERVIEW
The law:

State policy declaration:
The State recognizes that an effective intellectual and industrial property

system is vital to the development of domestic and creative activity, facilitates
transfer of technology, attracts foreign investments, and ensures market access
for our products. It shall protect and secure the exclusive rights of scientists,
inventors, artists and other gifted citizens to their intellectual property and
creations, particularly when beneficial to the people, for such periods as
provided in this Act.
The use of intellectual property bears a social function. To this end, the State
shall promote the diffusion of knowledge and information for the promotion of
national development and progress and the common good.
It is also the policy of the State to streamline administrative procedures of
registering patents, trademarks and copyright, to liberalize the registration on
the transfer of technology, and to enhance the enforcement of intellectual
property rights in the Philippines.
Effect on international conventions and on principle of reciprocity:
Any person who is a national or who is domiciled or has a real and effective
industrial establishment in a country which is a party to any convention, treaty
or agreement relating to intellectual property rights or the repression of unfair
competition, to which the Philippines is also a party, or extends reciprocal rights
to nationals of the Philippines by law, shall be entitled to benefits to the extent
necessary to give effect to any provision of such convention, treaty or
reciprocal law, in addition to the rights to which any owner of an intellectual
property right is otherwise entitled by this Act.
Laws repealed:
Republic Act No. 8293 repealed all Acts and parts of Acts inconsistent
therewith, more particularly:
1. Republic Act No. 165, as amended [An Act Creating a Patent Office,
Prescribing its Powers and Duties, Regulating the Issuance of Patents, and Appropriating Funds
Therefor];
2. Republic Act No. 166, as amended [An Act to Provide for the Registration and
Protection of Trademarks, Trade-Names, and Service-Marks, Defining Unfair Competition and
False Marking and Providing Remedies Against the Same, and for Other Purposes]. cralaw
3. Presidential Decree No. 49 [Decree on the Protection of Intellectual Property];

4. Presidential Decree No. 285, as amended [Decree on the Protection of
Intellectual Property];
5. Articles 188 and 189 of the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines.
Parts of the law:
The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines is divided into five [5] parts, to
wit:
PART I - The Intellectual Property Office
PART II - The Law on Patents
PART III - The Law on Trademarks, Service Marks and Trade Names
PART IV - The Law on Copyright
PART V - Final Provisions
Intellectual property rights under the I. P. Code:
The intellectual property rights under the Intellectual Property Code are as
follows:
1. Copyright and related rights;
2. Trademarks and service marks;
3. Geographic indications;
4. Industrial designs;
5. Patents;
6. Layout designs [topographies] of integrated circuits; and
7. Protection of undisclosed information.
Government Agencies:
The agency of the government in charge of the implementation of the

Intellectual Property Code is the Intellectual Property Office which replaced the
Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology Transfer. It is divided into six
[6] Bureaus, namely:
[1] Bureau of Patents;
[2] Bureau of Trademarks;
[3] Bureau of Legal Affairs;
[4] Documentation, Information and Technology Transfer Bureau;
[5] Management Information System and EDP Bureau; and
[6] Administrative, Financial and Personnel Services Bureau.
Functions of the Intellectual Property Office:
The Intellectual Property Office is mandated under the law to:

1. Examine applications for the grant of letters patent for inventions and
register utility models and industrial designs;
2. Examine applications for the registration of marks, geographic

indication and integrated circuits;
3. Register technology transfer arrangements and settle disputes involving

technology transfer payments covered by the provisions of Part II, Chapter IX
on Voluntary Licensing and develop and implement strategies to promote and
facilitate technology transfer;
4. Promote the use of patent information as a tool for technology

development;
5. Publish regularly in its own publication the patents, marks, utility

models and industrial designs, issued and approved, and the technology
transfer arrangements registered;
6. Administratively adjudicate contested proceedings affecting intellectual

property rights;
and
7. Coordinate with other government agencies and the private sector efforts
to formulate and implement plans and policies to strengthen the protection of
intellectual property rights in the country.
Significant features of the law:
1. A shift was made from the "first-to-invent system" under R. A. 165 [old
law] to "first-to-file system" under the new law.
2. In the case of inventions, the period of the grant was increased from
17 years from grant under the old law to 20 years from date of filing under the
new law.
3. In the case of utility models, the previous grant of 5 years plus renewals
of 5 years each under the old law was changed to 7 years without renewal
under the new law.
4. In the case of industrial designs, the previous grant of 5 years plus
renewals of 5 years each was maintained.
5. Under the old law, there was no opposition proceedings and the
examination is mandatory; under the new law, the examination is made only
upon request [possibly with or without examination].
6. Under the old law, publication is made after the grant; under the new
law, publication is effected after 18 months from filing date or priority date.
7. Under the old law, the penalties for repetition of infringement are:
PhP10,000 and/or 5 years of imprisonment and the offense prescribes in 2
years; under the present law, the penalties range from PhP100,000 to
PhP300,000 and/or 6 months to 3 years of imprisonment and the offense
prescribes in 3 years.
Significant changes in the trademark law:
The significant changes in the trademark law under the old law [R. A. No.
166] and the present law are as follows:
1. Under the former, the element of use before filing a local application is
a requirement although this is not required when the application is based on
foreign registration; while under the latter, the element of use has been
eliminated as a requirement for application.
2. Under the former, the term granted is 20 years renewable for 20-year
periods; while under the latter, the term is for 10 years, renewable for 10-year
periods.
3. Under the former, the affidavit of use or non-use is required on the 5th,
10th and 15th anniversaries; while under the latter, proof of use within 3 years
from the filing of the application is required and the affidavit of use should be
filed within 1 year from the 5th anniversary.
4. Under the former, a Supplemental Register is required to be
maintained; while under the latter, it is no longer required.
5. Under the former law, penalties for infringement, unfair competition,
false designation of origin and false description or representation range from
fine of PhP500 to PhP2,000 and/or 6 months to 3 years and 4 months of
imprisonment; while under the latter law, the penalties range from fine of
PhP50,000 to PhP200,000 and/or 2 to 5 years of imprisonment.
Significant changes in the copyright law:
It is now required that after the first public dissemination of performance by

authority of the copyright owner of certain specified work, there shall, for the
purpose of completing the records of the National Library and the Supreme
Court library, within three (3) weeks, be registered and deposited with it, by
personal delivery or by registered mail, two (2) complete copies or
reproductions of the work in such form as the directors of said libraries may
prescribe.cralaw
The scheme of penalties for infringement has also been changed. From the
previous fine of Php200 to Php2,000 and/or imprisonment of 1 year, the
current range of penalties are as follows:
For first offenders - fine of PhP50,000 to PhP150,000 and/or imprisonment of 1 to 3

years
For second offenders - fine of PhP150,000 to PhP500,000 and/or

imprisonment of 3 to 6
years
For third and subsequent offenders - fine of PhP500,000 to PhP1.5
Million and/or
imprisonment of 6 to 9 years.
In case of insolvency, the offender shall furthermore suffer subsidiary
imprisonment.
http://www.chanrobles.com/legal7code.htm#.VylFFPkrLcc
Breakdown Of The Major Online
Indie Film Distribution
Platforms
Seeking out distribution can be a very scary task for independent
filmmakers. The good news is that now there are more online
distribution platforms than ever…and many of them can be
quite lucrative if approached properly.
Before the Internet paved the way for online film distribution platforms (like
Netflix, Amazon, iTunes, etc.), the only real path to distribution was to find a
sales agent or a distribution company that could get your film out there into
the world. For most indie films up until the last 5 years or so, the most
realistic outcome would be for a straight to DVD release, with profits split
with the distributor. This type of distribution still exists, in some cases it
could still be the best option for certain filmmakers, but personally I’m a lot
more excited by the potential of self distribution as it puts the power back in
the hands of the filmmaker.
Last year, when I was looking for distribution for my first feature film
‘Footsteps‘, I realized almost immediately that self distribution would be the
way to go. I had a number of offers on the table from distribution companies,
but when I really broke down what they were offering, I realized I would be
able to do just about everything that they were offering myself, and I could
avoid paying them a 30% commission on the film’s profits.
That said, I also came to terms with the fact that self distribution is a relatively
new concept and there is a lot of terrain to navigate. There are literally
HUNDREDS of options out there, but below I’ve broken down a few of the
major players that I would recommend looking into as a starting point.
Keep in mind, if you find alternative options that seem to suit your needs
better, than by all means go for it (and be sure to share them in the
comments!) These film distribution platforms should give you a good
baseline to draw comparisons from:
iTunes Film Distribution
Probably the largest and most prevalent distribution platform, iTunes can
connect your film with an absolutely massive audience.
Advantages of iTunes film distribution: For starters, your film will be available on
the same platform as major motion pictures and that alone adds a sense of
legitimacy to your project. If the same person came across a film on an
industry standard platform like iTunes, they may be more likely to actually
watch that film than if it was hosted on a platform that the person was not
familiar with. iTunes users already have accounts set up with their credit card info
plugged in, so if they want to buy your movie it’s really easy – literally just a click
away.
Disadvantages of iTunes film distribution: There are a few downsides to going
through iTunes (other than the fact that it is one of the more costly options).
For instance, in order to get your film on iTunes you’ll need to go through an
‘aggregator’, which is a company that you pay to deliver your film to iTunes
(one example is Distribber). The fee to do this can be fairly hefty (in the
$1500 range), but is well worth it as the aggregator is a sure way in. It is also
possible to submit your film to iTunes yourself, but it is a fairly complex and
difficult process which still may leave you rejected. If you do wind up on
iTunes, they will take 30% of the profit from each sale and leave you with 70%.
BitTorrent Film Distribution
BitTorrent you ask? Yes. BitTorrent. Believe it or not they are quickly
becoming one of the best options forindependent filmmakers that want to self
distribute films after they released their new ‘Bundles’ platform. Essentially a
bundle is a downloadable package that you create which can include your
film, trailer and any other materials you want to share.
The bundle is hosted on BitTorrent and is accessible by their massive user
base of approximately 180 million users, but only if they unlock it by
performing an action that you specify. For example, you might ask users to
pay you $5 for the film. Or you may want to give users the film for free if they
first share a link to your film’s website. You might ask for a kickstarter
donation or an e-mail address. The options are almost limitless.
Personally speaking, I think their model is structured better than any other
platform out there today as it gives the content creators the power of choosing how
they want to benefit from their film. I also love the fact that it can deliver
lighting fast download speeds as it is all peer to peer. While I will be
releasing my film on multiple platforms, I chose BitTorrent as a starting point
as I really wanted to be a part of what they are doing. Now my feature
‘Footsteps’ is amongst the first films to ever be released on the Bundles
platform.
Keep in mind though that Bundles is still in the alpha stages (as of this
writing) and not yet available to the public.
Vimeo On Demand Distribution
Another big up and coming platform, Vimeo On Demand effectively lets

anyone with a pro account upload their film to Vimeo and charge a fee to
view it. It’s one of the best options out there as it’s open to anyone and is
directly accessible by the filmmaker.
Unlike iTunes where you need to go through an aggregator, Vimeo On
Demand allows you to go straight to the source and really simplifies the
process. Once your film is hosted with them, it’s also being seen by a
growing number of users who are not only accessing Vimeo on their
computers, but also through devices like their Apple TV’s.
I think Vimeo’s platform is ideal for filmmakers that have preexisting websites or
any other forms of a preexisting online presence and are able to direct their traffic
to Vimeo. I would speculate that it may be harder to get your film discovered
on Vimeo than let’s say iTunes, without heavily promoting it yourself as there
is an abundance of unregulated content populating the site. The other factor
to consider is the cost involved which is about $200 a year for the pro
account.
All in all, Vimeo is offering a really nice alternative solution here.
Netflix Film Distribution
Like iTunes, Netflix offers one of the best platforms for getting your film seen by a
massive amount of people. Their user base is huge and growing everyday, and
with the new original content that they’re producing, it’s likely they will grow
exponentially over the next few years.
Also like iTunes, the most effective way of getting on Netflix is to go through
an aggregator (like Distribber), which will in turn cost you somewhere in the
$1500 range, depending on which service you choose.
That said, Netflix doesn’t have the best track record with independent
filmmakers as their payment structure isn’t flexible. Typically they will offer
an up front fee (let’s say $12,000) which will give them unlimited usage for
anywhere from 1 – 2 years. This isn’t bad if you have a no-budget film and
just want to get it out there and get noticed, but if you are really trying to
monetize your film there are better options out there.
Amazon On Demand / CreateSpace Film Distribution

I’ve always really liked the way Amazon’s platform is set up. As a filmmaker,
you can upload your film, DVD artwork and other materials to their service
‘CreateSpace’. You can instantaneously start selling DVD’s online while also
streaming your film as you would on any other streaming site.
If a user wants to buy your DVD, they can order it off of Amazon like any
other DVD, but you as the filmmaker aren’t responsible for actually producing
the copies. It’s fully automated by Amazon. They print the DVDs, label them
and ship them off themselves.The user can also download your film either as
a rental or as a purchase (much like iTunes), which allows for a more flexible
pricing structure.
There aren’t many downsides to this platform other than the fact
that Amazon takes a larger percentage than most other online platforms (50%).
That said, the 50% fee is completely reasonable as they have more costs
associated with the physical creation of the DVD discs and cases.
So, Which Option Is Best For Your Film?
None of the above options are necessarily better than the other, they simply
provide alternatives for different types of distribution strategies.
If you have a no-budget film and your primary goal is exposure, you might be
best off going through a service likeBitTorrent or Vimeo On Demand where your
costs are kept low and you have access to a large audience.
Conversely, if your budget is a bit healthier and you can afford to go through
an aggregator, iTunes is a standardized platform that has the potential to get
your film seen by the masses. Netflix would fall into this category as well.
Amazon is a flexible platform that may be suitable for many films, but
generally might be preferable for those filmmakers who have an audience
that is going to want physical DVDs, as right now it seems to be the best
solution for delivering DVD content to your audience.
The key to choosing a platform is deciding what is best for your film and your
career. Do you need exposure? Profit? Accessibility? Answering these
questions will help you determine which path is best for you.
We want to hear about your film distribution experiences. Share your thoughts
in the comments below!
http://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/breakdown-of-the-major-online-indie-film-
distribution-platforms/
ONLINE DISTRIBUTION
This is a growing list of online retail/rental/streaming sites that pay filmmakers something
for their content. This is due for an update- expect to see a new version in the next few
weeks.
Please share your own experiences working with these or other companies.
Amazon VOD (was Unbox)- Amazon’s new service is direct streaming to TiVo and online,
as well as through the Roku Box. Studios have their own spaces on the site and there is a
somewhat nebulously-defined “Independent” section. CreateSpace is the indie portal to
access this market.
Ameibo & The Content Bay- This site buys both distributed content and the very
independent, including adult.
Revenue is based on a referral system and a per-use charge. It’s on a BitTorrent
infrastructure. Somewhat hard to understand but possibly useful for microbudget projects
with all worldwide rights.
BigStar.tv- Slick, independent site aiming at the young male audience with a filmmaker-
friendly site with rentals, downloads, and contests for short docs and short comedies
announced.
Babelgum- Free internet TV/video channel. Ad-supported, producer receives 50% of ad
revenues. To upload you “must be a company in the business of producing or distributing
content.”
BitTorrent- “ad-supported” network, utilizing P2P technology to deliver legal content.
Caachi – Features independent and documentary, with ITVS as a main partner. Pretty
niche but if this is your niche, maybe you will find some sales. Download and/or streaming.
Filmmaker sets price, 75/25 split.
CinemaNow – Does streaming and downloads. Does not even have an “independent” section, let alone
foreign or documentary. Just did a deal with Blockbuster Online (surprise!) to provide content. An
article from TechDirt.

Documentary Film Network – UK site. While it looks a little sketchy, it allows filmmakers
to upload docs and stream for free or to assess a commission of their choice- in the latter
case, the site charges a fee of €1.50. They can also sell the DVD.
EZ-Takes – With quite a few distribution partners and a large catalog, this is one of the
bigger DL-to-disc services. They have a sophisticated web site and offer iPod downloads in
addition to the downloads to DVD. Filmmakers can deal directly with them “if they have
over 20 titles” (!) otherwise they have a partner called “Picture Palace” whom you should
contact first.
Film Annex- A mixture of social networking, ads, trailers, self-financed films for free and for
fee.
Film Baby- Sell DVDs and downloads for small-budget films.
Film Fresh – another site focusing on independents. They both sell physical DVDs and
downloads.
Hulu – mostly TV but do buy films- as evidenced by Cinetic’s recent placement of HOOP
DREAMS. An independent producer might face challenges to place here, worth trying.
They also just introduced a trailers site.
HungryFlix – Aimed at the portable market, features more “user-generated” and
undistributed content, revenues are split 60/40 and filmmaker sets price though featured
downloads are typically $.99. No DRM.
imeem- Social networking/ film sharing.
Indiepix- Sells DVDs and downloads to disc. Filmmaker friendly.
iTunes – the biggest player in pay-for-download at present, they offer both sales and
rentals and the filmmaker generally gets a cut of the gross, minus fees- you need to
negotiate. (see TuneCore)
ITV- – UK TV station with a large online presence.
Jaman.com- focuses on independent film. Rentals are $1.99-$3.99 and play on Jaman’s
software. They can’t currently migrate to iPod. Of the standalone websites, they have the
most sophisticated apparatus for selling smaller arthouse and documentary films.
Filmmakers can contact them here.
Joost- – monetized through ad revenue (interspersed throughout the film in short breaks),
the site is becoming more sophisticated and aims to be more oriented towards film, which
is increasing in traffic or at least time spent on site. They work with Cinetic and a number of
TV-oriented channels.
MovieFlix- Offers streaming, charges a monthly fee for unlimited views, mostly older films
and B-movies.
Movielink- Now owned by Blockbuster Online. Download rentals to PC or TV (no Mac).
Major studio affiliation as well as IFC.
Netflix – - Now offers streaming in addition to their DVD subscription service- will probably
become much more popular with the growth of the Roku set-top box that allows streaming
to conventional TV sets as well as direct streaming to some newer TVs and Blu-Ray
players. The licensing fee is very low and is a flat fee, as a rule, but being on Netflix is good
profile.
The Orchard- Primarily a music licensing service, they also provide advertising and other
licensing services for film and video.
Reeltime Australia DL to DVD + DLs. TechCrunch article (unflattering).
Re:frame: A partnership between Tribeca Film Institute and Amazon.com’s CreateSpace,
this project has a focus on educational and nontheatrical digital distribution.
SnagFilms- Distribution of full-length documentaries by way of a widget that allows users
to share via blogs and social networking sites. Monetization is supposed to come from ads
played throughout the films.
TuneCore- get your films onto iTunes for a fee (and no matter who you go through to get
on iTunes, you pay, so this is actually a pretty good deal, even at about $800 for a feature).
Vongo – all-but-defunct defunct Starz network.
Vudu- Specializing in HD streaming, Vudu sells its own set-top box (for $299) and rents
and sells DLs. At the moment their selection of Indie/Arthouse/Doc is limited.
- See more at: http://filmfwd.com/online-distribution/#sthash.FQq2CNfy.dpuf
http://filmfwd.com/online-distribution/
Is Downloading Torrent Legal or Illegal,

And How Safe Is It? [MTE Explains]
Miguel Leiva-Gomez 28th Jun 2013 Internet 114 Comments










A vast majority of the public understands that piracy is a violation of intellectual property rights
laws and is illegal. Some question whether that is a legitimate reason to stop piracy, while others
do not. Of course, such controversial issues should be left to other areas. Currently, torrent
clients, such as uTorrent, are used to download immense amounts of data on the web, most of
which is illegally acquired. What we will discuss here is what makes downloading torrent legal
or illegal and what could possibly get you in trouble, in addition to some words about privacy
with regards to torrents.
Let’s Start With Torrent Privacy
Whatever it is you’re doing is not any of my business. But it is my business to make sure you
know just how “anonymous” you are in the torrent network. The short answer is: you totally
aren’t!
I don’t really need to prove this, as I have a decent understanding of how the torrent
protocol works. Theoretically you should have some level of privacy since you’re not
downloading any data from one particular server. For example, if you download a file directly
from Microsoft, you’re downloading from a central server. That server now has evidence that
you downloaded the entire contents of the file.
But through the torrent system, you download directions to a file. That means that the torrent file
is actually just a list of trackers and some hash codes. It doesn’t really prove that you
downloaded the torrent file. What you do inside your torrent client is more important, and that’s
all managed by a decentralized list of servers. Once you start the download of the actual file you
want to get to, you end up downloading little pieces of the file from a bunch of people.
And here’s where the problem starts: Government agents have been known to snoop around
these networks, downloading files and listing all the IP addresses they find under the “Peers” list.
This will, of course, compromise your address eventually.
The best route to privacy, in this case, is to utilize something like the onion routing network and
configure it as a proxy for your torrent client.
So, What’s Legal or Illegal?
The short answer: As long as the item is copyrighted and you don’t own it, then downloading it
(for free) via torrent is illegal.
The long answer: This varies from case to case. Most countries have basic common laws against
intellectual property theft. If a piece of music is copyrighted and you don’t own it, you can’t
download it legally. The same goes for a movie, a game, or anything else you may want. The line
gets kind of fuzzy here, since people ask themselves many different questions about their own
countries’ laws.
In general, a copyright is registered to an individual or organization that creates something. This

copyright has a time limit, usually equivalent to the lifetime of the creator and a set amount of
additional years. Some copyrights are for life plus fifty years. Others are for life plus seventy
years. Look up your country in the previous link if you’re unsure of your laws. Of course, your
mileage may vary, as some things may not be protected by the law where you live, or copyright
law may not be enforced at all.
Of course, you may want artwork from an individual who’s currently alive or has recently died.
Here’s where it gets complicated: Some artists create works under a creative commons license
(or other free distribution license), meaning that they give anyone the ability to freely distribute
what they make. However, it’s difficult to make the distinction between these individuals and
publishing companies. A simple web search may help, but you don’t always get the information
you want that way. All you can do is be careful. Many national laws don’t care if you didn’t
know that the work was copyrighted or not when prosecuting you for downloading something.
If you’re downloading a free Linux distribution through your torrent client, you don’t need to
worry. But if you’re getting John Lennon’s “Imagine” from The Pirate Bay, you’re doing
something that in all likelihood is breaking a law.
Conclusion
One thing for sure, torrent is not equal to piracy. The torrent protocol is just a transmission mean
for users to download files more easily. It is the content (not the protocol) that makes the act
illegal. When it comes to downloading through the torrent protocol, there’s no real way to stay
completely safe. However, it remains one of the most effective peer-to-peer protocols in the
world. If you’re worried that you may be downloading something that’s against the laws in your
country, ask below!
Posts You Will Like
Learn What Privacy Policies Really Mean with Usable Privacy Project
Protect Your Privacy and Unblock Websites with Betternet

5 Adjustments You Need to Make to Protect Your Facebook Account
114 comments
1.
NoWay
thx for the info.. i should download via torrent more
Jun 28, 2013 at 8:19 pm
1.
dio
me too..i download regular basis. I will do more
Jun 29, 2013 at 9:41 am
2.
ghost
i got caught downloading movies games books everything i got a big fine 5 years in feudal
prison it sucks i ant doing it no more 25,000,000 fine it not a joke they can take your house
your car everything they did it to me my friends told me about it and i was home and got a
letter from the cable and looked it up it not a joke please don’t download unless you pay for
it. it not worth going to jail for or getting everything you worked for and have it all taken
away
Jun 3, 2014 at 1:56 am
2.1.
brochacho
I feel you, bro. I’m 13, caught by my cable company, luckily It was only a 3000
dollar fine, which my parents payed out of my bank account, and weren’t even
angry. At least it wasn’t juvenile detention.
Jun 13, 2014 at 5:46 pm
3.
ghost
i got caught downloading movies games books music i got a big fine 5 years in feudal prison
it sucks i ant doing it no more 25,000,000 fine it not a joke they can take your house your car
everything they did it to me my friends told me about it and i was home and got a letter from
the cable and looked it up it not a joke please don’t download unless you pay for it. it not
worth going to jail for or getting everything you worked for and have it all taken away
Jun 3, 2014 at 1:59 am
2.
Anna
Recently I just download a movie from a torrent site and my relative (who signed the contract with the
internet provider) got a warning via email… It was a scary experience to me since I have never known
that downloading a movie via torrent is illegal. Honestly speaking, that was not the first time I download
a file via torrent but I was wondering why only this time I got a warning ???
Aug 1, 2013 at 1:18 am
1.
Damien
The ISPs are stepping up their effort to combat piracy. You might not have received any
warning in the past, but that doesn’t mean they are not watching. They are simply gathering
evidence and catch you red-handed. A word of caution: be very careful what you download.
If you are downloading blockbuster movies via torrent, most likely they are illegal.
Aug 1, 2013 at 1:35 am
1.1.
TorrentScan
I always search with http://torrent-scan.org and download movies, I don’t think
this can be illegal.
Aug 28, 2013 at 9:33 am
1.1.1.
rockerred
of course it’s illegal! idiot
Jan 12, 2014 at 11:36 am
1.1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
You’re replying to an advertisement.
Jan 22, 2014 at 11:03 am
2.
Nate
I got the same warning. It was for a brand new movie that was still in theaters. I believe since
it was a copy of a screening for audiences before theater release the production company kept
track of who was downloading it and sharing it. Scared the crap out of me and I talked to a
guy from the firm that handled legislation for the production company. Needless to I deleted
all the movies I downlaoded that day and the Torrent site. Kind of scared to use UTorrent
again…
Jan 13, 2014 at 6:05 pm
2.1.
John Cena
Many of you keep telling that you got a warning . can you be more specific what
the warning was . If torrentz is illegal why use it. If you feel its legal then simply
use it. First gather some information about it and study it . then come to a
conclusion about it.
Feb 9, 2014 at 6:03 am
3.
duh
that was a scam lol
May 28, 2014 at 3:35 pm
3.
Kyle Fenole
I have a question. I recently downloaded a bunch of software via torrents thinking that it was fine and that
it was really stealing. After discussing it with some friends I realized I was wrong. Do you think that if I
delete all the software it will be ok. Please respond.
Sep 30, 2013 at 7:16 pm
1.
Fingrapyro
You have already broken the law, but to be honest…considering the mass amount of pirates
out there no one will even care. Deleting them would most certainly help your case, but as I
said, there is no case to begin with. Law enforcement has enough problems as it is with
millions of people illegally downloading content on a regular basis. You will be fine.
Oct 4, 2013 at 9:11 am
2.
shaheer
IF U deleate it …it is not a remedy for ur offence,………..
Nov 17, 2013 at 8:45 pm
2.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Deleting is helpful, but not entirely vindicating.
Nov 18, 2013 at 1:15 am
4.
Mr_Barcode
I have Downloaded over 1000+ torrents;
Movies | TV Shows | Music | Games | Applications | Anime | Books
All of them From: http://kickass.to/
What do you have to say about this?
Thanks in advance.
Oct 9, 2013 at 8:34 am
1.
Lala_666
i do it too so if we both do it it’s probably OK…genius think alike and do things alike
Nov 5, 2013 at 6:24 am
2.
shaheer
how it will be an offece.. if it is a offence ..can the government to stop this sites moving
illeglly… they run today freely…. this means it is not a illegal…………..
am i right
Nov 17, 2013 at 8:47 pm
2.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
To shut down a website, the government has to go through a lot of bureaucracy. I
prefer it that way. The less the government can interfere, the better it is for all of
us, even non-pirates. Piracy can be solved through private solutions.
Nov 18, 2013 at 1:17 am
2.1.1.
bob
Torrent sites are next to impossible to shut down. Governments
have raided and seized all the computers and stuff at a location
where the website was at. The torrent website was thus shutdown,
and it was open once again in less than 48hrs.
These sites do a lot of backups of their systems and can get a new
location for their servers quickly, but they still have to buy new
computers and get everything setup on them, before the website can
be up and running again.
Some sites have been shut down several times, but it keeps coming
back.
Whereas others, such as Mininova.org have gone legit.
The site is hosted in the Netherlands, and decided to comply with
their law that was passed (They were shutdown and moved several
times before this).
Jan 1, 2014 at 12:03 am
3.
chris
carfull doing so, ive been downloading to and need to stop its too risky and i wouldnt want to
get caugth. i know its nice to watch free movies but it can and well catch up to you, my
advice quit while still can. if you do still do it well go off of wireless they cant catch you
then. hahah
Apr 20, 2014 at 6:44 pm
5.
shaheer
halo…. i too downlaoded some files like movies.. from kikkas ….. my friend warned me ….. is it illegal
… if it illegal …how can upload for them in sites …
Nov 17, 2013 at 8:36 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
It is illegal in most jurisdictions. Untaxed cigarettes are illegal, yet people can still find them.
The fact that a website isn’t shut down is because of the red tape that the state has to go
through in order to accomplish such a thing.
Nov 18, 2013 at 1:18 am
6.
GGEplayer Aritaleres
I recently tried to download a game not by torrent and it gave me 164 threats on my computer. Should I
switch to torrent? I scan regularly about once a week with MalwareBytes Anti-malware.
All this stuff seems very important and it seems very confusing for me. I’m 12.(ha, you cant you tell?)
Nov 19, 2013 at 1:36 am
1.
JR
If you don’t have an anti-virus that blocks the sites that are known to have viruses, then you
should get one. I’d recommend Webroot or a well-known anti-virus. Now, I hope you are
aware that downloading games is also illegal. But if you insist. I’ve read that torrenting has
less viruses, if you download the files with the most downloads. For example, if there are two
identical files, but one has a million downloads and the other has a thousand, then maybe you
should go with the one with the millions. Hope this helped. :)
Mar 12, 2014 at 11:10 pm
1.1.
ThinkMC
:I You really think downloading games is illegal. Well it is illegal if someone
copied it and made it free, but some games from the original publisher are free.
Actually 50% of computer games are free. So next time put your wording better
or else your saying that if you spent 20$ on Minecraft and download it it’s illegal
Apr 9, 2014 at 5:46 am
1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
I highly doubt that 50% of computer games are free. Yes, there is a
surge in FTP (free-to-play) games, however they have to keep their
servers running, too. For this reason, they restrict you significantly
until you purchase in-game privileges. There’s nothing wrong with
that business model. In fact, it’s one of the ways that a company
makes itself immune to piracy while making a hefty enough profit
to be motivated to continue innovating. I like it.
Apr 9, 2014 at 12:42 pm
1.1.1.1.
FurSur
actually they still hack/pirate in game coins in FTP
games ^^
May 9, 2014 at 2:39 am
1.1.1.2.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Well, the games themselves aren’t paid content. Of
course, anything that is paid content *will*, as a rule of
thumb, be hacked in one way or another. At least
someone will try. But there’s not as much of this going
on as there is paid-game pirating. It’s just much easier
to override DRM checks than it is to counterfit Hay
Day diamonds.
May 9, 2014 at 2:58 am
7.
Sergio Fonseca
I got one warning via a letter from my cable provider, I then switched to Verizon FiOS as my provider. I
then got a nother warning: however it was a phone call. Three years later I got a guy in a suit and tie
knocking on my door with a list of all the downloads I had done in an amount for me to pay as a lovely
fine! so I would recommend not downloading too many because they are looking for those people
downloading and selling them and in my case they thought I was selling them, I was not and they did not
have proved so they close the case… but it scared the shit out of me!
Dec 27, 2013 at 4:28 pm
1.
Raul
Ha ha ha…..!
I think Torrent is not illegal, but downloading copyrighted material from torrent is illegal.
So buddy, download things that are legal and leave stuffs illegal.
Countries like India and China have billion + population. No body can monitor them. So
downloading copyrighted stuffs through torrents can work in such countries.
Dec 31, 2013 at 9:07 pm
1.1.
chris
this is what i fill and only what i fill
torrenting is not illegle because you arnt selling what you torrented whitch
makes it not pireted i know that i am misspelling all of my words but thank you
for reading
Jan 31, 2014 at 4:45 am
2.
Jonk
Yes this exactly what can happen. Some people here say ‘hey i’ve been doing this for years
and no problem’, but they can get your IP address and from the IP they canfigure out where
you live, and they CAN come after you, some day. Just like people use to buy untaxed
cigarettes on the internet, but some states cracked down and forced those buyers to pay taxes,
after years. So it is a real risk.
Mar 31, 2014 at 6:37 pm
8.
bob
I have been getting warning emails from my ISP (Comcast) for about 10 years because of my torrent
downloads. I have yet to see them take any action against me.
Friends uncle is an FBI agent that investigates internet crimes. He said that they are not going after the
average citizen who downloads from torrents, but more going after those supplying the illegal content to
the torrent sites and those bootlegging and trying to sell the stuff on the street, etc.
I said to him, in light of this new information. I wish to confess to downloading illegal content via
torrents, and clapped my writs together in prep. for handcuffs. He laughed and told me that even if he did,
it would get thrown out before it made it to court. It would cost the court system over a million dollars to
prosecute me and such, even if I said I was guilty and made a written statement to the fact. It costs too
much for NOTHING.
Jan 1, 2014 at 12:12 am
1.
Jerry
Interesting anecdote, thanks for sharing. I too have been downloading for years and have
received a few warnings from my ISP from time to time without any other more substantial
consequence. I believe the average person who occasionally downloads a movie/show/music
for personal use is much more at risk of being booted from their service provider than they
are of running into any legal trouble.
Apr 1, 2014 at 4:50 pm
9.
Austin Nuker
The Raleigh Boyz control craigslist and the staff love them.
Jan 6, 2014 at 8:23 pm
10.
Joe Roberts
What about pay sites like USeNext and Graboid? Are they safer than sites like kickass?
Jan 14, 2014 at 11:40 am
1.
John
They cost money.. and no they are less safe unless you use a VPN.
Jan 22, 2014 at 10:34 am
11.
Sara Conner
Just so that everyone is clear. Downloading copyrighted material is in fact NOT illegal. It is not you
responsibility as a downloader to determine if a distributor has a legal right to distribute a copyrighted
work. If it was, then you would have to request a copy of Itunes’s contract with every artist, movie
company, video game maker, etc before shopping at the site. What IS illegal when bit-torrenting, is the
distribution a copyrighted product without license to do so. By default when downloading in a swarm you
are uploading, hence distributing the copyrighted product. Aviod identification by this by using an open
VPN. A quick google search and 60 minutes of reading up and learning how to use tools such as this will
keep you anonymous and keep the torrent market booming.
Jan 16, 2014 at 10:15 pm
1.
John
I actually run through a paid VPN and a open VPN also remote connect to a server that was
paid for with bitcoin that has rutorrent on it. I travel alot, and use a live cd distro of linux on a
256mb encrypted thumbdrive to access all of it. The lesson here is, one can be to paranoid, or
one can avoid being detected and avoid the threat letters and possible jail time waiting to see
a judge.. this can be up to 3 years alone.
Jan 22, 2014 at 10:37 am
1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Why pay for a private VPN when you can use onion routing? :)
Jan 22, 2014 at 11:05 am
1.1.1.
Miguel Is A Noob
Why waste your time or money on either of those when you could
just pay $10 a month for a Seedbox and never have to worry
period? Who the hell uses onion routing for Torrents? That’s SO
much unnecessary work.
Feb 20, 2014 at 7:59 pm
1.1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Using OR doesn’t cost money, and doesn’t require a lot
of work. :P
Feb 20, 2014 at 8:36 pm
12.
John Anthony
i had just gotten a warning email for a torrent that i downloaded a week or two ago. I didnt know it was
illegal and im panicking. ive been downloading torrents for about a year. my computer was formatted a
while ago (not in relation to the torrents) and most of what ive downloaded i dont even have anymore.
can they still get me for that? i dont even have it anymore. I have maybe a movie or 2 and three cds
downloaded on my computer now.
any help?
Jan 21, 2014 at 8:57 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
First of all, don’t panic. Second of all, they can’t legally persecute you without evidence that
you currently have the copyrighted materials. They need more than a warning and a record of
you downloading something to persecute you, if it ever even gets to that. Of course, this
depends on the country/state you’re in. Anyway, not knowing that something is illegal just
scores you a warning and that’s it.
Jan 22, 2014 at 11:07 am
13.
steve
would downloading mac osx 10.8.5 via torrent be legal. At one point I had that software on my mac but
now I have the newer version 10.9.1 via a free update distributed by apple.
Jan 21, 2014 at 9:41 pm
1.
John
Of course it is… but other than the worry of backdoors and keyloggers/trojans virus’s there is
not other worry attached.
Jan 22, 2014 at 10:32 am
14.
Isaac Lloyd Gomez Humarang

hi i download movies at proxykat.me i think no one will persecute me for doing this here in the.
philippines but in a year i will be travelling to Japan and will live there for good. you think a law there
will persecute me if i continued my downloading habits there? thank you
Feb 1, 2014 at 3:35 am
15.
Jo
Hi. I am an expat who lives in China. Over the past few years I have torrented about one terabyte of
movies, music, and TV shows which I then copied onto a removable hard drive upon download
completion. I plan to return to the U.S. for University in a little over six months with this hard drive, but
not with the computer that I did all the torrenting on. My question is, is there a way for the government to
track my torrents to my removable hard drive? and Is this something I need to be worried about?
Feb 2, 2014 at 2:27 am
1.
Joe
Of course not dipshit
Feb 6, 2014 at 2:47 pm
2.
akira
hahahaha….this guy’s too much
Feb 10, 2014 at 9:02 pm
3.
FurSur
oh my god, you’re not getting laid if you act like this
May 9, 2014 at 2:47 am
4.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
I didn’t notice this comment until now. No, they can’t track anything to your hard drive since
it doesn’t have a global network identity (that thing that distinguishes your computer from
others on the Internet, which is managed by your OS and network card). Of course, don’t
take any burned DVDs and CDs with you. They may confiscate them (no charges, depending
on the country) and just send you on your merry way.
May 9, 2014 at 2:56 am
16.
Megan
My landlord just contacted me to let me know the internet provider (the landlord provides it) had
contacted them to tell that someone on the account was downloading “from an illegal website.” I freaked
a little bit thinking it was something really crazy, but turns out it was a popular television series. And yes,
I did. But this whole “illegal website” business sounded like scare tactics. Of course, now I’m afraid to
download anything else, and I’ve deleted whatever I might’ve had on my computer. I’m annoyed. I feel
spied on. I guess that’s the downside to being on the wrong side of the law. Yarrr.
Feb 12, 2014 at 7:15 pm
1.
jewsanta@yahoo.com
I received a “warning” email from my ISP showing just a few of the movies/shows I’ve
downloaded. Their obligation was to tell me that they received complaints from someone
representing the copyright holder. I was like “f*ck these b*tches”. I don’t agree with DMCA.
When a show is aired for free on TV (regular over-the-air channels like NBC, CBS, FOX,
etc.) and is downloaded the next night, who cares. If you pay to see a movie in theaters, or
purchase the DVD or download a torrent of the DVD, who cares? We can all thank f*cking
Metallica for this BS ever since their suit against Napster ages ago.
Apr 8, 2014 at 1:03 pm
17.
joey
Crazy! I thought it was only illegal to do the coping and sharing of files. Guess I better stop downloading.
Thanks for the info.
Feb 17, 2014 at 5:56 pm
18.
Miguel Is A Noob
All of you – just go check out Seedboxes – been using them for ages. Super fast, easy, simple. You can
access from anywhere in the world, even mobile phones. You can stream the stuff after you download it
(if you have to). And best of all I get download speeds of 80 MB/s average most times. And about 3 MB/s
from the seedbox to my computer (my internet speed is mediocre, IMO).
Feb 20, 2014 at 8:03 pm
19.
223BDB58
I learned from my son and it is simple. You are not so clever as you may think. At this point it is a matter
of ethics and moral responsibility. If you are downloading something that the public has to purchase (buy)
you are stealing. No more torrents, no more media theft. Stop it. It is not worth it.
Feb 28, 2014 at 9:24 pm
20.
Arpit
I recently downloaded Daz Studio Michelle 6 and Victoria 6 Bundle from kickasstorrent.
Though original software is for free but some of its contents are paid version and the torrent file which I
downloaded was not on most of the torrents site so will it be easier for me to be get arrested.
And If torrenting is illegal so why are the downloaders arrested, I think the one who uploads it should be
arrested.
Mar 3, 2014 at 11:40 pm
21.
hoodini
What about if you use a blocker such as PeerBlock, do these programs help ?
Mar 6, 2014 at 8:24 am
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
PeerBlock isn’t going to help you much. They don’t always update IP ranges properly. It’s
unbelievably easy to circumvent such IP blocks. I used to fall into one of PB’s IP ranges,
which made things a bit difficult. I circumvented it by using onion routing. All it took was
downloading a program and clicking “Connect” and I was in. PB isn’t a solution. It’s just
duct tape on an aircraft wing.
Mar 6, 2014 at 12:26 pm
22.
JR
Shouldn’t the government just prosecute you if you are distributing it? Leave the innocent people alone
and go after the real bad guys.
Mar 12, 2014 at 11:20 pm
23.
Hoffman
I just downloaded an software from a torrent which I found on the pirate bay… When it was about 5 %
complete my computer restarted and when I tried to log on i couldn’t get into my account and discovered
a threat from Interpol. It stated I have downloaded illegally and I have to pay a $25000 fine within 48
hours.. I’m pretty scared by this threat and I don’t even download that much.. Should this worry me??
Mar 19, 2014 at 8:05 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Was it an email? Did it contain your IP address and a time stamp, and the file you were
downloading? Or was it just saying how much you have to pay and how many hours you
have? These are questions you should ask in the process of scrutinizing an email. Interpol
usually deals with maritime piracy, not digital piracy.
If you receive something in the post, I’d say there’s a chance it’s a government body.
Through email it’s doubtful and probably a scare tactic by some individual.
Mar 20, 2014 at 12:37 am
1.1.
Hoffman
No it wasn’t an email. It was a document that appeared after my computer
suddenly, “without warning,” restarted and I couldn’t gain access to my account
anymore. And yes it had a time frame which was counting down from 48 hours.
They had my IP address and they even knew my location and the user name of
my computer. And plus they stated if you want to gain access to your computer
you have to pay $250,000 within 48 hours, which was on a countdown that I
could clearly see.. So I immediately disconnected my internet on all accounts
and went into safe mode, using system restore to get my computer working
again… So getting to a conclusion this is possibly, maybe, just someone trying
to scare me?
Mar 20, 2014 at 9:42 am
1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Is it anything like this?
http://forums.anvisoft.com/viewtopic-54-4759-0.html
It could be a variant of this virus.
Mar 20, 2014 at 11:42 am
24.
Joe
Well when I first started using torrents, I truly felt that that biggest part I needed to worry about was
redistribution; We’re all familiar with the F.B.I. warning. As silly as that might sound, I thought I’d be
okay since I NEVER plan to redistribute anything I download…Certainly never for financial gain. I do
know better now and have decided to stop fooling myself, because messing with the Federal Government
is something I have BEYOND ZERO interest in. My real question is what should I do now? I’m at the
point where I’ve download a few hundred items now…do I just STOP and hope it all works out? Or
should I also get rid of any and all items, maybe even the hard drive I was using? I’ve only used uTorrent,
but HOW is it possible that website go undetected? Seems to me like the F.B.I. might just set them up and
let people come to them. Either way, just thought I’d ask to what level you’d recommend “purging”; I’m
then going to figure out the best way to grovel to my country.
Mar 25, 2014 at 7:20 pm
25.
Logan
i am downloading call of duty world at war on torrent is that illegal
Apr 3, 2014 at 7:27 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Technically, it is.
Apr 8, 2014 at 1:11 pm
26.
Link TheProgrammer
Torrents aren’t bad… perhaps the porn though is the only exception I find. While downloading
copyrighted material via a torrent from http://kickass.to is illegal, think for a moment: Gee, alot of people
just want that game or just REALLY want that song… Look at minecraft for instance! getting a minecraft
torrent isn’t much different than getting a cracked launcher to download it from their own host server
amazon!!! I MEAN WTF!!! Here is my reasoning: I’m just too poor to buy it right now and I am not even
15 (yet, but will be soon). I will just get this game for free and then when I work for Mojang AB (Gosh,
how Ironic; I download a cracked MC and work for them :P) and then I buy the game! Makes up for
being illegal no? HMM? ITS ONLY LOGICAL!!! WHAT WOULD SPOCK SAY!? “That is the logical
choice…” I think the Vulcan would agree…. :3
Apr 11, 2014 at 8:48 pm
27.
Link TheProgrammer
or Tuvok :P
Apr 11, 2014 at 8:49 pm
28.
Coolboy
lmao trust me .. i downloaded literally thousands of videos nothing will ever happen… i downloaded
some much to the point i didnt have no space on my computer that how much i downloaded stuff…
nothing well ever happen to you…
Apr 17, 2014 at 9:15 pm
29.
Corduroy
Hi,
In some countries its very difficult to buy Original DVDs of movies, games and music etc. All you find in
the shops everywhere are the pirated DVDs and Not the Originals .. These DVDs would cost you not
more than 1USD. So, living in a country where the original content is not available in the shops, what do
you recommend people should do?
Pay 1USD for the pirated content available in the markets.
or
Download content freely from the internet using torrents.
P.S. I have not heard of any law that stops pirated content to be sold in the shops (in the country im
talking about) .. Or may be there is a law but im not aware of it.
Apr 21, 2014 at 9:17 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Your country most likely has a law against piracy, but doesn’t enforce it.
Also, even if it’s not illegal to pirate copyrighted content in your country, you can still be
legally sued in the nation where the content was produced. To be totally honest, given your
situation, you may not be risking a lot, but I’m just telling you all of the possible
circumstances you can encounter.
And… A site hosted in your country still must adhere to DMCA takedown requests from
Google’s SERPs or from the host server if the host server is in a country that must comply
with DMCA or a similar law. Just food for thought.
Apr 23, 2014 at 4:17 pm
30.
Don't need to know

Is downloading a torrent of Windows 7 illegal or legal
Apr 23, 2014 at 4:11 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
This is technically illegal.
Apr 23, 2014 at 4:13 pm
1.1.
Don't need to know

So what happen if I get caught?
Apr 23, 2014 at 4:59 pm
1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
At first? I’d say you get a notification that such files are suspected
on your machine. If they can’t access your machine, they don’t have
evidence that you still hold the files. However, they can get clear
evidence that you downloaded them, and that could be enough for a
lawsuit.
Usually, cases of piracy are tried in civil court, although I have
heard of countries in which it was moved or initiated through the
penal system. Very few people get caught, but I recommend not
risking it if you are afraid.
Apr 24, 2014 at 12:14 am
31.
Nick
Long story short as long as I don’t torrent a lot of stuff frequently and don’t seed I should be fine?
Apr 29, 2014 at 1:53 am
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
That’s up to your discretion. I can’t tell you whether you’ll be fine or not. Chances are you
might. But without getting into too much detail, it’s best to simply exercise discretion when
downloading anything from the web.
Apr 29, 2014 at 9:42 am
32.
hajiji
Hellow sir/mam/friendz, i’ve got a question that there is this website i know with which im a registered
member of and download whole lota apps for music production and samples from companies. A am i
really a big “D-bag”? I mean my inside tells me that i’m a theif but on the other side im not selling or
making any money of it just hobbiest, so is this bad…i mean i feel that its messedup inside but i do like to
do my music. But when i tell my self that “ok when i’ll make money with it, i’ll buy it legitmatly” . but
the guilt still doesn’t go away. Also i feel that i am addicted to downloading torrents. please respond . i
hope i have’t …..i meant what the helll…i dn’t know what im saying.. any way i think what im dong is
effdup! :(
Apr 29, 2014 at 11:34 am
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
It’s up to you how you feel about the whole ordeal. I can’t pass judgment on what you do.
Apr 29, 2014 at 1:26 pm
33.
hajiji
about the website that im registered to, are they at…or hell am i also doing it wrong and ….
Apr 29, 2014 at 11:35 am
34.
hajiji
you know what i mean!
Apr 29, 2014 at 11:38 am
35.
sy06
Hi,
my quistion is
to download movies in holland is being illegal from 11-04-2014
how big is the chance to get caught for being downloading movies and have it effect on wifi
if wifi not being protected so everyone can connect the network and download it.
and whats your advice to download safe I use Utorrent :D
thanks for your time !
May 26, 2014 at 11:35 am
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
1) I can’t tell you what chance you have of being caught. The longer you do this, though, the
higher your chances are.
2) If you have unprotected Wi-Fi, people can do anything they want on it, even see what
passwords you log in with. Turn on WPA/WPA2.
3) uTorrent is a great client. Most people use this.
May 26, 2014 at 1:48 pm
1.1.
sy06
How can we get caught it? If i download it from example Ipad and they come to
the door and just hide the Ipad and turn off can they find it then :D?
May 27, 2014 at 1:22 am
36.
sy06
How can we get caught it? If i download it from example Ipad and they come to the door and just hide the
Ipad and turn off can they find it then :D?
May 27, 2014 at 1:22 am
37.
greed
Im moving from Croatia to Germany next week so wondering how to dl torrent and be safe. Im
downloading torrent to some Franch server (justseed.it) and then file (not torrent) to my mac to watch it.
Is that safe enough? What do you suggest?
May 30, 2014 at 3:31 am
38.
greed
Hi guys,
Im moving from Croatia to Germany next week so wondering how to dl torrent and be safe. Im
downloading torrent to some Franch server (justseed.it) and then file (not torrent) to my mac to watch it.
Is that safe enough? What do you suggest?
May 30, 2014 at 6:10 am
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
What do you mean “safe?” Are you defining it as the possibility of getting caught? I cannot
speculate on this, since this is a highly sensitive matter that could have legal implications.
Sorry.
May 30, 2014 at 6:49 am
1.1.
greed
I am asking if this is legal what I am doing since the torrent is being downloaded
to franch server and I just dl completed file with out any sharing to my mac?
May 30, 2014 at 11:23 am
1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Since the server belongs to you, it’s still you who’s performing the
action. You’d still be penalized if caught, and French law punishes
this very harshly. The same can be said for German law.
May 30, 2014 at 11:44 am
39.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Since the server belongs to you, it’s still you who’s performing the action. You’d still be penalized if
caught, and French law punishes this very harshly. The same can be said for German law.
May 30, 2014 at 11:41 am
40.
Ashik
Hello, I live in Bangladesh. I know torrent is legal here since everybody download via torrent and nothing
happens. I downloaded over 2 TB of movies and tv shows and copied everything in a hard drive. I will go
to california for university within a couple of months and take the hard drive full of movies with me. Will
I get caught if I watched theses torrent downloaded videos from the hard drive over there in my pc.
Another thing is are streaming websites for tv shows available in usa such as watchseries.it ?
May 30, 2014 at 6:46 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
1) Bangladesh has anti-piracy laws, and they are enforced by the Bangladesh Copyright & IP
Forum.
2) Nobody can search your hard drive without a warrant. If it has pirated films, only you
would know that.
3) Anything you were able to reach in Bangladesh, you can reach in the USA. To be safe, I
tried the site you mentioned from a remote computer in the United States, and it worked fine.
It’s a parked domain, though, so I’m not sure if you gave me the proper URL.
May 30, 2014 at 7:04 pm
1.1.
Junaid
Will the customs not check the hard drive or DVD one is carrying ? How safe is
it to carry a hard disk into US?
Jun 1, 2014 at 11:02 pm
41.
Ashik
I’m sorry, the website should be : watchseries.lt
Jun 1, 2014 at 3:50 pm
42.
Ashik
Junaid makes a good point. what should I do then? Do I take my external hard drive and laptop with me
in my carry on bag or do I put my external hard drive in my suit case? I’ll probably reach US at the LAX
airport. By the way, I’m a US citizen. Do US customs check the contents of my external hard drive and
laptop?
Jun 2, 2014 at 10:07 pm
43.
paul
The internet, the final frontier, these are the downloads from those bold enough to share what no man has
shared before.
What is any law enforcement group going to do really….spend rediculous money and time going to court
claiming that someone illegally downloaded half a mb of a product from someone. They cant say you did
it, only that it was done using your internet connection. You could claim a virus did it on your computer.
Basically i couldnt imagine any court deciding that based on your ownership of an internet service policy
that you are responsible for things downloaded (without knowing that you were the one to download it).
That would be like saying that you are responsible for a car crash when your car was stolen just because
you owned it, this shit wont ever make it through the system based on expense and the fact that they cant
pick and choose who they want the prosecute (they cant ignore part of the list and send different parts of it
to gaol, that would be discrimination)
If you are concerned with the ethics behind it then consider that you basically still pay the full amount to
see the movie at the cinemas. Paying the full price to watch the movie once and then paying the full price
to get the movie to watch again is a scam anyway.
Jun 3, 2014 at 5:53 pm
44.
paul
If your still concerned then use your work internet or the free wifi at mcdonalds haha
Jun 3, 2014 at 5:57 pm
45.
Messy
I’ve been using torrent for downloading for about 2 years in a country, where any movie, TV series or
music is nearly impossible to get legally (What you get in stores, are illegally recorded on CDs).
It’s been a month, I came to USA & I used torrent to download 3-4 TV series & a movie.. When I
informed my husband, he warned me to do that anymore, as it may fine him million of dollars (that’s what
he said). So, I googled & found this post…
I understand, I’ve done something illegal, (& probably wont do that again!), but do I have to delete my
files, or even uninstall torrent software (I’ve deleted the download record to stop from seeding, though)?!
& If I want to watch movies or series, what can be the best or cheapest option? Does NETFLIX show
everything or just some limited shows?
& well, I am 80% satisfied with Youtube for music! :)
Jun 14, 2014 at 8:24 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
I think you’ll find that Netflix has a very wide selection of film entertainment.
As for the torrent software, you do not have to delete it. There are cases when downloading
certain things through Torrent is either legal or permissibly decriminalized. I can tell you
more details if you want to know.
The files that were downloaded must be deleted in order for you to clear yourself of any
probable cause for infringement. It’s not like SWAT is going to knock down your door. Most
likely, nothing will happen. But if you want to completely clear yourself of any wrongdoing,
eliminate anything that may show signs you still possess the copyrighted material.
Jun 16, 2014 at 2:11 pm
1.1.
Messy
Thank you very much for your reply! :)
& well, yes I would love to know which type of files can be downloaded from
torrent?! As far as I can see, everything is copyrighted.. Even the softwares &
the books too!
Jun 17, 2014 at 7:51 am
1.1.1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Works of art that are either in the public domain (music, movies,
etc.) or have a Creative Commons license can be downloaded and
distributed for free under copyright law. There are different public
domain requirements depending on the country you’re living in. I
think that for the US, the author has to have been dead for at least
70 years. Some of Disney’s work is reaching public domain.
As for software, anything with a GNU license can be distributed
freely.
This very much limits what you can do with torrents legally, but it’s
not nothing :D
Jun 17, 2014 at 8:22 am
46.
Ammar
Hello, i live in Syria, in the middle east, here we have no copyrights law, i can’t remember how many
things i’ve downloaded via torrent ! here people can’t afford to buy original software when your salary is
25000 sp ( syrian pound = sp ) and right now every 165 SP = 1 USD so buying for example a software for
about 40 USD it will be 6760 SP imagine that and your salary is 25000 !! so thanks for utorrent and
thanks for every torrent website on the internet :D
Jun 15, 2014 at 4:46 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
Syria has copyright law (here).
Jun 16, 2014 at 2:08 pm
47.
Ammar
you know i’m Syiran and live there and i didn’t know about it at all -_- maybe because they never
enforced it and never told us about it :s
Jun 17, 2014 at 1:29 pm
1.
Miguel Leiva-Gomez
To be completely honest, Syria doesn’t necessarily enforce this law so much. The
government there has many more things to worry about than someone downloading music,
software, or films illegally.
Jun 17, 2014 at 3:13 pm
48.
anom
A friend of mine who lives in Berlin just downloaded the new “Godzilla” on 6th June. 3 days ago, he got
a warning letter from a legal firm in Munich called Waldorf Frommer . I have been doing research online
regarding this case and came across this website : http://www.wbs-law.de/eng/copyright-infringement-
warning-letter/
According to the warning letter , if he wants to settle the case out-of-court, he has to pay a compensation
of Euro815.00 and sign a “cease and desist” contract.
So, if you are in Germany, watch out!
Jun 25, 2014 at 9:42 am
1.
anom
p/s : we was using utorrent.
Jun 25, 2014 at 9:53 am
49.
ROZBA
SYRIA is the best :D . I have watched 20 2014 movies in the last few days . I think they will hang out me
+_+ if I go to the USA :D
Jun 25, 2014 at 5:49 pm
Comments are closed.
Legal issues with BitTorrent

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
See also: Legal aspects of file sharing

The use of the BitTorrent protocol for sharing of copyrighted content generated a variety of novel
legal issues. While the technology and related platforms are legal in many jurisdictions, law
enforcement and prosecutorial agencies are attempting to address this avenue of copyright
infringement. Notably, the use of BitTorrent in connection with copyrighted material may make
the issuers of the BitTorrent file, link or metadata liable as an infringing party under some copyright
laws.[1] Similarly, the use of BitTorrent to procure illegal materials could potentially create liability for
end users as an accomplice.
BitTorrent files can be seen conceptually as a hyperlink. However, it can also be a very specific
instruction for how to obtain content on the internet. BitTorrent may transmit or include illegal or
copyrighted content. Court decisions in various jurisdictions have deemed some BitTorrent files
illegal.
Complicating the legal analysis are jurisdictional issues that are common when nation states attempt
to regulate any activity. BitTorrent files and links can be accessed in different geographic locations
and legal jurisdictions. Thus, it is possible to host a BitTorrent file in geographic jurisdictions where it
is legal and others where it is illegal. A single link, file or data or download action may be actionable
in some places, but not in others. This analysis applies to other sharing technologies and platforms.
Contents
[hide]
 1Jurisdictional variations
o 1.1Finland: Finreactor
o 1.2Hong Kong: individual actions
o 1.3Singapore: Odex actions against users
o 1.4Slovenia: Suprnova
o 1.5Sweden: Pirate Bay
o 1.6United States: 2005–present
 1.6.1LokiTorrent
 1.6.2EliteTorrents
 1.6.3Newnova
 1.6.4TorrentSpy
 1.6.5isoHunt
 2Copyright holder actions
 3Settlements
 4Infringement's sales impact
 5Patent infringement
 6See also
 7References
 8External links
Jurisdictional variations[edit]
Legal regimes vary from country to country. BitTorrent metafiles do not store copyrighted data and
are ordinarily unobjectionable. Some accused parties argued that BitTorrent trackers are legal even
if sharing the copyrighted data in question was a copyright violation. [2] Despite these arguments,
there has been tremendous legal pressure, usually on behalf of the MPAA, RIAA and similar
organizations around the world, to shut down BitTorrent trackers.
Finland: Finreactor[edit]
In December 2004, Finnish police raided Finreactor, a major BitTorrent site.[3][4] Seven system
administrators and four others were ordered to pay hundreds of thousands ofeuros in damages. The
defendants appealed the case all the way to the Supreme Court of Finland, but failed to overturn the
verdict.[5] Two other defendants were acquitted because they were underage at the time, but were
held liable for legal fees and compensation for illegal distribution ranging up to 60,000 euros. The
court set their fine at 10% of the retail price of products distributed. [6]
Hong Kong: individual actions[edit]
On 24 October 2005, BitTorrent user Chan Nai-ming (陳乃明), using the handle 古惑天皇 (The Master
of Cunning, although the magistrate referred to him as Big Crook) was convicted of violating
copyright by uploading Daredevil, Red Planet and Miss Congeniality to a newsgroup (Chapter 528
of Hong Kong law).[7] The magistrate remarked that Chan's act significantly damaged the interest of
copyright holders. He was released on bail for HK$5,000, awaiting a sentencing hearing, though the
magistrate himself admitted the difficulty of determining how he should be sentenced due to the lack
of precedent. On 7 November 2005 he was sentenced to jail for three months, but was immediately
granted bail pending an appeal. [8] The appeal was dismissed by the Court of First Instance on 12
December 2006 and Chan was immediately jailed. On 3 January 2007, he was released pending
appeal to the Court of Final Appeal on 9 May 2007.
In 2008 and 2009, an unidentified woman and man were arrested for illegally uploading files with
BitTorrent in September 2008 and April 2009, respectively. [9][10]
Singapore: Odex actions against users[edit]
Anime distributor Odex actively took down and sent legal threats against individual BitTorrent users
in Singapore beginning in 2007. These Internet users allegedly downloadedfansubbed anime via
BitTorrent. Court orders required ISPs to reveal subscribers' personal information. This led to cease-
and-desist letters from Odex to users that led to out-of-court settlements for at least S$3,000
(US$2,000) per person. One person who received such a letter was 9 years old. [11][12] These actions
were considered controversial by the local anime community and attracted criticism, as they were
seen by fans as heavy-handed. [13]
Slovenia: Suprnova[edit]
In December 2004, Suprnova.org, a popular early BitTorrent site, closed purportedly due to the
pressure felt by Andre Preston, aka Sloncek, the site's founder and administrator. In December
2004, Sloncek revealed that the Suprnova computer servers had been confiscated by Slovenian
authorities.[14]
Sweden: Pirate Bay[edit]
The Pirate Bay torrent website, formed by a Swedish anti-copyright group, is notorious for the "legal
threats" section[2] of its website in which letters and replies on the subject of alleged copyright
infringements are publicly displayed. On 31 May 2006, their servers in Sweden were raided by
Swedish police on allegations by the MPAA of copyright infringement.[15] The site was back online in
less than 72 hours, and returned to Sweden, accompanied by public and media backlash against the
government's actions.[16] Steal This Film, was made to cover these incidents.[17] On 17 April 2009, as a
result of the trial following the raid, the site's four co-founders were sentenced to one year of jail time
each and to collectively pay 30 million SEK in damages.[18] All the defendants appealed the decision,
although two later served their sentences. In 2012, to minimize legal exposure and save computer
resources, The Pirate Bay entirely switched to providing plaintext magnet links instead of traditional
torrent files.[19] As the most popular and well-known facilitator of copyright infringement, The Pirate
Bay continues to shift between different hosting facilities and domain registrars in the face of legal
prosecution and shutdown threats.[20]
United States: 2005–present[edit]
Soon after the closure of Suprnova, civil and criminal legal actions in the United States began to
increase.[citation needed]
LokiTorrent[edit]
In 2006, Edward Webber (known as "lowkee"), webmaster of LokiTorrent, was ordered by a U.S.
court to pay a fine and supply the MPAA with server logs (including the IP addresses of visitors).
[21]
Webber began a fundraising campaign to pay legal fees for actions brought by the MPAA. Webber
raised approximately US$45,000 through a PayPal-based donation system. Following the
agreement, the MPAA changed the LokiTorrent website to display a message intended to discourage
filesharers from downloading illegal content.[21][22]
EliteTorrents[edit]
On 25 May 2005, the popular BitTorrent website EliteTorrents.org was shut down by the United
States Federal Bureau of Investigation and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Ten search
warrants relating to members of the website were executed. [23]
Six site administrators pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement and
criminal copyright infringement of a pre-commercial release work. [24]Punishments included jail
time, house arrest and fines.[25] Jail sentences were issued to some defendants violations of criminal
law, the Family Entertainment and Copyright Act.[25][26]
Newnova[edit]
In June 2006, the popular website Newnova.org, a replicate of Supernova, was closed. [27]
TorrentSpy[edit]
On 29 May 2007, a U.S. federal judge ordered TorrentSpy to begin monitoring its users' activities
and to submit logs to MPAA. TorrentSpy ultimately removed access for US visitors rather than
operate in an "uncertain legal environment." [28] In the face of destruction of evidence charges and a
$111 million legal judgement, TorrentSpy voluntarily shut down and filed for bankruptcy in 2008,
although appeals continued through 2009.[29]
isoHunt[edit]
On 21 December 2009 a federal district court found the founder of isoHunt guilty of inducing
copyright infringement. The ruling was upheld on appeal in Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v.
Fung in March 2013 and the site finally shut down in October 2013.
Copyright holder actions[edit]

Copyright owners have undertaken a variety of tactics and strategies to try to curtail BitTorrent
transmittal of their intellectual property. In 2005 HBO began "poisoning" torrents of its show Rome,
by providing bad chunks of data to clients.[30] In 2007 HBO sent cease and desist letters to
the Internet Service Providers of BitTorrent users. Many users reported receiving letters from their
ISP's that threatened to cut off their internet service if the alleged infringement continued. [31] HBO,
unlike the RIAA, has not been reported to have filed suit over file sharing as of April 2007.
Beginning in early 2010, the US Copyright Group, acting on behalf of several independent movie
makers, has obtained the IP addresses of BitTorrent users illegedly downloading specific movies.
The group then sued these users, in order to obtain subpoenas forcing ISPs to reveal the users' true
identities. The group then sent out settlement offers in the $1,000–$3,000 range. About 16,200
lawsuits were filed between March and September 2010. [32]
In 2011, United States courts began determining the legality of suits brought against hundreds or
thousands of BitTorrent users. Nearly simultaneously, a suit against 5,000 IP addresses was
dismissed.[33] A smaller suit, Pacific Century International, Ltd. v. Does against 100 ISPs, has also
been dismissed.[citation needed]
In October 2011, John Wiley and Sons brought suit against 27 New York "John Does" for illegally
copying books from the For Dummies series.[34] According to TorrentFreak, Wiley is thus "the first
book publisher to take this kind of action". [35]
Settlements[edit]
On 23 November 2005, the Motion Picture Association of America and Bram Cohen, the CEO
of BitTorrent Inc., signed a deal to remove links to illegal content on the official BitTorrent website.
Other notable search engines also voluntarily self-censored licensed content from their results, or
became "content distribution"-only search engines. Mininova, announced that it would only allow
freely licensed content (especially free content distributed by its author under a Creative Commons
license) to be indexed after November 2009, resulting in the immediate removal of a majority of
Mininova's search.
Infringement's sales impact[edit]

Some evidence suggests that copyright violation through BitTorrent does not mean the loss of all
sales in all instances.
The actual story is probably a bit more nuanced. There’s plenty to suggest, for instance, that HBO
doesn’t necessarily lose business when someone pirates "Game of Thrones" -- in all likelihood, that
person would never subscribe to the network, anyway.
— Caitlin Dewey, The Washington Post[36]

In addition, the Game of Thrones director, HBO programming president and Time Warner CEO Jeff
Bewkes spoke about the positive effects of file sharing. [36][37]
"If you go around the world, I think you're right, that 'Game of Thrones' is the most pirated show in
the world," he said. "Now that's better than an Emmy."
— Jeff Bewkes[38]
Bewkes further commented that he did not consider the unauthorized distribution to result in the loss
of HBO subscriptions, rather: "Our experience is, it all leads to more penetration, more paying subs
and more health for HBO."[37] The show is the most infringed TV show, and "the show’s first season
was the best-selling TV DVD of 2012. [36]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_issues_with_BitTorrent
How People Are Caught Illegally

Downloading Music, Movie
Torrents
B Y J E F F S T O N E O N 0 9 / 1 2 / 1 2 AT 5 : 0 3 P M



Sites like the Pirate Bay and uTorrent haven't enticed hundreds of millions of
people to download endless amounts of free media content without making a
few enemies. Those BitTorrent giants -- and others like them -- have built their
businesses by outwitting the seemingly hapless MPAA and RIAA. The
increased acceptance of illegally downloading media has affected the bottom
line of the movie and music industry over the past decade, and that isn't good
news for torrent fans.
Earlier this month, the BBC reported on a study by computer scientists at

Birmingham University designed to find out how risky it is for file-sharers to
upload and download files online. When someone downloads a torrent file
from an open site like the Pirate Bay or uTorrent, their IP address is linked with
other IP addresses around the world that are hosting that file. The risk is that
an IP address is akin to a computer's online fingerprint, an often ignored fact
that the MPAA and RIAA haven't hesitated to exploit.
Now, those organizations are planting files online that they think people are
the most likely to download. The Birmingham University researchers told the
BBC they were "surprised" by theamount of monitoring agencies hired by the
MPAA and RIAA do online. The study, which spanned three years, found that
IP addresses and other data are being collected for future use.
"You don't have to be a mass downloader. Someone who downloads a single
movie will be logged as well," the lead researcher told the BBC. "If the content
was in the top 100 [most popular downloads] it was monitored within hours.
Someone will notice and it will be recorded."
The copyright police are banking on the idea that there are more people
illegally sharing major movies like "The Avengers" than stealing music from
small, independent record labels.
It is still unclear how willing courts will be to prosecute individuals based only
on the fact that their IP address was recorded. This month a U.S. appellate
court ruled that is was not unconstitutional for the RIAA to sue for $222,000,
according to Torrent Freak.
The New Scientist reports that "anyone who has downloaded pirated music,
video or eBooks using a BitTorrent client has probably had their IP address
logged by copyright-enforcement authorities within three hours of doing so."
Since the SOPA/PIPA legislation, which was designed to allocate boost the
federal government's copyright enforcement powers, failed to make it through
Congress last year, the MPAA and RIAA have gone into a full war footing.
They successfully pressured the Department of Justice to halt Megaupload
and managed to prod the Ukrainian government into shutting down
Demonoid, the popular private tracker.
The next step seems to be bring Internet service providers like Comcast and
Time Warner into the act. Someone breaking copyright laws by regularly
downloading movies is using more bandwidth than the next-door neighbor
who's just streaming funny videos on YouTube. At that point, third-party
monitors might take a closer look into what someone is doing online.
Lifehacker reports that perhaps the most common way for ISPs to fight
BitTorrenting is to "throttle" a user's Internet connection, slowing it down or
even cutting the connection off. The practice is most prevalent in Canada,
where it's had little effect. ISPs are also known to have fielded requests from
copyright enforcers who pressure them to give up an Internet user's contact
information, most often to send the offender a warning letter or a subpoena.
BitTorrent users can avoid throttling or legal trouble by hooking up to virtual
private networks and proxies for their connection online. In the latter scenario,
someone's IP address is re-routed through another one so a BitTorrenter's
real IP stays relatively anonymous to the other users they are connecting with.
There are also newer piracy sites that subvert peer-to-peer connections
altogether, avoiding the inherent risk of linking to someone who could be
working for the MPAA.
Until those methods catch on, the Pirate Bay and other BitTorrent sites will
continue their arms race against law enforcement.
http://www.ibtimes.com/how-people-are-caught-illegally-downloading-music-
movie-torrents-783071
s file sharing or torrents illegal or legal?

Notice: Computer Hope is not meant to
be used as legal advise or representation. This document is general
information to assist users who've asked this question on our site.
Is file sharing illegal?
No, it's 100% legal. In no state in the United States or in any other country
is file sharing illegal. However, if you're sharing copyrighted content with
other people, this is considered illegal. Below are some good examples of
when file sharing becomes illegal in many places around the world.
1. Downloading or sharing a copyrighted movie.
2. Sharing copyrighted songs (music) to other people who have not
purchased those songs or downloading songs from other people when
you've not purchased that song.
3. Sharing or downloading computer software (programs, games, etc.).
4. Downloading or sharing a copyrighted TV show or program.
How do I know if something is copyrighted?

A good general rule to follow is to think about if the song, movie, or other
software can be purchased. Examples of copyrighted or otherwise protected
data are:
 A popular song that you'd buy online or at store
 A movie that you'd see at a movie theater or buy on DVD
 A TV show that could be sold as a DVD
 A software program or game you'd buy at a store
Are P2P programs such as BitTorrent, KaZaA, Napster,
etc. legal?
The programs or technologies behind file sharing are not illegal. It's the data
being shared that may be illegal. Using BitTorrent or other file sharing
programs to download a software patch, a game demo, movie trailer, or
similar is legal. However, using that same program to download a new hit
song or a movie still in theaters is illegal.
What could happen if I get caught?
This all depends on your local laws. However, a good example of what could
happen is a fine for each song, movie, or software program you've
downloaded or shared. If you've downloaded hundreds of songs or other
files, this could be a large fine if found guilty. In Hong Kong, a man was
sentenced to a maximum of four years in prison for sharing files on a
BitTorrent website.
I haven't been caught.
Although it's very likely you or someone you know has not been caught for
sharing or downloading copyrighted or otherwise protected data, it's still
considered illegal. If caught, you could be convicted of a crime by your local
laws. You may not have been caught yet, but the longer you continue
downloading copyrighted or protected material, you increase the chances of
being caught eventually.
Comelec asks candidates to

remove propaganda materials 3
days before campaign period
By: Ferdinand G. Patinio, Philippines News Agency
February 3, 2016 10:42 AM
FILE PHOTO
InterAksyon.com
The online news portal of TV5
MANILA - Candidates in the May 9 national and local polls are reminded by the Commission on
Elections (Comelec) to remove their prohibited propaganda materials three days before February 9,
the start of the campaign period for national positions.
According to Comelec Resolution 10049 or the Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Fair
Elections Act for the May 2016 polls, it is mandatory that all prohibited campaign materials are
removed 72 hours before the start of the campaign period.
Those responsible for the prohibited campaign paraphernalia will be held liable if such propaganda
materials are not removed.
“Otherwise, the said candidate or party shall be presumed to have committed the pertinent election
offense during said campaign period for national or for local candidates, as the case may be,” the
resolution added.
Prohibited forms of election propaganda materials include newspaper, newsletter, newsweekly,
gazette or magazine advertising, pamphlet, leaflet, card, decal, bumper sticker, poster, comic book,
circular, handbill, streamer, sample list of candidates, or any published or printed political matter and
to air or broadcast any election propaganda or political advertisement by television or radio or on the
internet for or against a candidate or group of candidates to any public office, unless they bear and
be identified by the reasonably legible, or audible words “political advertisement paid for” followed by
the true and correct name and address of the candidate or party for whose benefit the election
propaganda was printed or aired.
The IRR said that all campaign materials donated for a particular candidate cannot be printed,
published, or broadcast unless they are accompanied by a written acceptance by the said candidate
or party.
It is also illegal to post, display, or exhibit any election campaign or propaganda material outside of
authorized common poster areas, in public places, or in private properties without the consent of the
owner.
Public places include electronic announcement boards, such as LED display boards located along
highways and streets, and LCD TV displays posted on walls of public buildings; motor vehicles used
as patrol cars, ambulances, and for other similar purposes that are owned by local government units,
government-owned and -controlled corporations; waiting sheds, sidewalks, street and lamp posts,
electric posts and wires, traffic signs and other signboards erected on public property, pedestrian
overpasses and underpasses, flyovers, and underpasses, bridges, main thoroughfares, center
islands of roads and highways; schools, shrines, barangay halls, health centers, public structures
and buildings or any edifice; public transport vehicles owned and controlled by the government, such
as the Metro Rail Transit (MRT), Light Rail Transit (LRT) and Philippine National Railways (PNR)
trains; and within the premises of public transport terminals, such as bus terminals, airports,
seaports, docks, piers, train stations, that are owned and controlled by the government.
It noted that violations constitute an election offense, which carries the penalty of one to six years
imprisonment, removal of right to vote, and disqualification from holding public office.
On the other hand, the Comelec allows political parties and independent candidates to put up their
own common poster areas aside from those designated by the local election officers (EOs).
There will be one common poster area per 5,000 registered voters or less, and an additional one for
every additional of 5,000 voters or a fraction of it. The size of the common poster areas for political
parties and party-list groups shall be no bigger than 12 feet by 16 feet; while independent candidates
may put up 4 feet by 6 feet.
Designated as common poster areas include plazas, markets, barangay centers and the like where
posters may be readily seen or read, with the heaviest pedestrian and/or vehicular traffic in the city
or municipality.
The IRR also states that candidates and registered political parties for a national elective position
are allowed not more than a total of 120 minutes of television advertising, on a per station basis,
whether appearing on national, regional, or local, free, or cable television, and 180 minutes of radio
advertising, on a per station basis, whether airing on national, regional, or local radio, whether by
purchase or donation.
As for candidates and registered political parties for a local elective position, they are allowed to
have not more than a total of 60 minutes of television advertising, on a per station basis, whether
appearing on national, regional, or local, free, or cable television, and 90 minutes of radio
advertising, on a per station basis, whether airing on national, regional, or local radio, whether by
purchase or donation.
On the other hand, campaigning is not allowed on March 24 (Maundy Thursday), March 25 (Good
Friday), May 8 (Eve of Election Day), and May 9 (Election Day).
The campaign period for local bets is from March 25 to May 7.
Comelec warns local bets vs unlawful

campaign materials
(The Philippine Star) | Updated February 20, 2016 - 12:00am
1 43 googleplus0 0
The Commission on Elections will take down unlawful propaganda materials of local candidates even if it is not
yet their campaign period. BOY SANTOS
MANILA, Philippines - The Commission on Elections will take down unlawful propaganda materials of local
candidates even if it is not yet their campaign period.
Chairman Andres Bautista said yesterday Operation Baklas, in partnership with the Metro Manila Development
Authority and the Department of Public Works and Highways, will not spare anyone.
“Yes, all posters that are not in the proper places or oversized will be removed,” he said. “We take no sides.”
Bautista spoke to reporters after inspecting the MMDA storage facility for collected materials under the
Santolan flyover in Quezon City.
Bautista said propaganda materials recklessly posted anywhere would be torn down.
“You will only be wasting your money,” he said.
“We don’t spare anyone, we are colorblind in this campaign. You will just see your posters in the storage facility
of the MMDA.”
MMDA Chairman Emerson Carlos said they have collected at least seven tons of illegal posters and streamers
since Feb. 9 when the campaign period for national candidates started.
“In the beginning, we were collecting some 1.81 tons (a day),” he said.
“But as the days passed by, we were getting less materials so maybe they saw that it’s all for naught for them
to put up posters.”
Carlos said he hopes the trend would continue, especially since the campaign period for local candidates is set
to start on March 25.
“This actually requires behavioral change,” he said.
“If they see that they are just wasting their money, they will realize it is better not to put up unlawful materials.”
Seniors and PWDs

Bayan Muna Rep. Neri Colmenares urged yesterday the Comelec to designate voting precincts for senior
citizens and persons with disability on May 9.
He saw the special precincts in Cubao, Quezon City when the Comelec conducted mock polls last Saturday.
“I hope this will be done in other polling places,” he said.
“We just need the proper implementation of the law and not rely on mall voting, which may be questioned
before the Supreme Court.”
Colmenares was referring to Republic Act 10366, of which he was one of the authors and which President
Aquino signed into law on Feb. 15, 2013.
It is titled: An Act Authorizing the Commission on Elections to Establish Precincts Assigned to Accessible
Polling Places Exclusively for Persons with Disabilities and Senior Citizens.
Colmenares counted about five million senior citizens and more than a million PWDs.
The law aims to help them exercise their right of suffrage, he said.
The Comelec plans to set up precincts in several malls in Metro Manila to facilitate voting.
Some of the precincts will be for senior citizens and PWDs.
Military: Vote freely and safely

Armed Forces chief Gen. Hernando Iriberri has urged soldiers to “let the people vote freely and safely” on May
9.
Speaking to members of the Armed Forces Eastern Mindanao Command Thursday, Iriberri said they must not
engage in partisan politics.
“Just focus on your job, let us ensure that our people can exercise their right to vote, freely and safely. Just
implement the law so you cannot go wrong.”
Iriberri visited the Eastmincom headquarters to check on the progress of security operations and the morale of
soldiers.
Eastmincom commander Maj. Gen. Rey Leonardo Guerrero led the field commanders and men in welcoming
Iriberri.
Iriberri also congratulated the officers and men of Eastmincom for a job well done.
He urged the soldiers to continue the pursuit with all the concerned parties of Bayanihan and maintain the good
rapport with communities in achieving peace in the region. – Sheila Crisostomo, Jess Diaz, Edith Regalado
PAULIT-ULIT NA SULIRANIN
ANG isang probisyon ng batas na panghalalan na hindi ganap na naipatutupad ay ang

limitasyon sa pagkakabit ng campaign materials ng mga kandidato. Batay sa Electoral
Reforms Law of 1987, Republic Act 6646, maaari lamang ilagay ng mga kandidato ang kani-
kanilang campaign materials sa mga common poster area o sa bahay o campaign
headquarters ng kandidato.
Ngayong nagsimula na ang pangangampanya para sa mga kandidato sa mga lokal na

posisyon, nagsimula na ring magsulputan ang election campaign materials sa mga
karaniwang lugar sa mga bayan at siyudad sa bansa—sa mga poste ng kuryente, isinasabit
sa mga kable ng kuryente sa gitna ng mga kalye, partikular na sa mga intersection malapit
sa traffic lights, at maging sa mga punongkahoy. Hanggang hindi nakapaglulunsad ng isang
seryosong kampanya upang ipatupad ang batas na ito, lagi nang magmumukhang kabitan
ng iba’t ibang sukat ng campaign poster ang mga kalye hanggang sa sumapit ang araw ng
halalan sa Mayo 9.
Sa unang bahagi ng taong ito, gumawa ng mga hakbangin ang Commission on Elections
(Comelec) upang maipatupad ang batas tungkol sa campaign materials. Sa pakikipag-
ugnayan sa Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, sa Philippine National Police, at sa
mga lokal na pamahalaan, nag-organisa ito ng mga grupo na magbabaklas ng campaign
posters at streanmer na ilegal na ikinabit, alinsunod sa “Operation Baklas”. Napuno ng mga
binaklas na poster ang ilang truck.
Bilang suporta sa kampanyang ito, naglunsad ang Comelec ng isang citizen reporting
system, upang hikayatin ang publiko na magpadala ng mga litrato ng campaign materials
na nasa mga ipinagbabawal na lugar sa opisyal na website ng Comelec at sa mga account
ng komisyon sa Facebook at Twitter. At dahil halos lahat ngayon ay may camera ang cell
phone, dapat na pumatok ang “shame campaign” ng Comelec sa dami ng campaign
materials na nangagsabit sa mga bayan at lungsod sa bansa.
Gayunman, matitigas ang ulo ng mga kandidato at ng kani-kanilang tagasuporta at hindi
alintana ang anumang shame campaign. Mas matitinding hakbangin ang kinakailangan,
gaya ng mungkahi ng isang opisyal ng Comelec sa Quezon City na lahat ng nahuhuling
nagkakabit, nagsasabit, o naglalagay ng election paraphernalia sa mga ipinagbabawal na
lugar ay dapat na pagmultahin o isailalim sa community service ng kahit 30 araw.
Isa itong kampanya na madaling masusubaybayan. Ang kailangan lamang gawin ng publiko
ay luminga-linga sa paligid.
Agad niyang mapapansin kung epektibo ba ang kampanya at kung naipatutupad ba ang
batas—o gaya lamang ito ng mga nakaraang eleksiyon na ang mga campaign slogan at
litrato ng mga kandidato ay naghambalang sa bawat pader, poste, at puno.
http://balita.net.ph/2016/04/02/paulit-ulit-na-suliranin/

Copyright Law of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright Law of The Philippines

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright law of the Philippines

 B: Periodicals (newspapers, tabloids, magazines, etc.)

 E: Television or movie scripts, choreography, and entertainment in shows

 F: Musical works (lyrics, songs, song arrangements, etc.)

 G: Art products (drawings, paintings. sculptures, etc.)

 J: Scientific and technical drawings

 K: Photographs and cinematographic works made in a process similar to photography

 M: Pictures used in advertising (includes logos)

 The right to be prominently displayed as the creator of the copyrighted material, in

 The right to change or even withhold the work from circulation

(a) Books, pamphlets, articles and other writings

(b) Periodicals and newspapers

(e) Dramatic or dramatico-musical compositions; choreographic works or entertainment in dumb shows

(f) Musical compositions, with or without words

(j) Drawings or plastic works of a scientific or technical character

(m) Pictorial illustrations and advertisements

(n) Computer programs

(o) Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works.

WHAT ARE THE TWO TYPES OF RIGHTS UNDER COPYRIGHT?

Economic rights include:

Transformation First public distribution

Other communication to the public of the work.

Moral rights include:

Right of Integrity (object to any prejudicial distortion)

Right to restrain use of his name.

Exception to the moral rights

WHAT IS THE TERM OF PROTECTION OF COPYRIGHT?

WHAT ARE THE LIMITATIONS ON COPYRIGHT AND FAIR USE?

The nature of the copyrighted work;

WHAT CONSTITUTES INFRINGEMENT?

Under the IP Code

Trade exhibit of the article in public.

WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COPYRIGHT REGISTRATION?

Two (2) complete copies or reproduction of the work or replica or picture

A technical description of the design, if the work is an original ornamental design.

- See more at: http://www.ipophil.gov.ph/services/copyright/ownership-and-

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY: COPYRIGHT

Copyright infringement was previously governed by Presidential Decree No. 49.

The law also provided for the limitations on copyright, thus:

In determining the question of infringement, the amount of matter copied from

When is there a substantial reproduction of a book? It does not necessarily

In cases of infringement, copying alone is not what is prohibited. The copying

Petitionersâ€™ work as authors is the product of their long and assiduous

Source: Habana vs. Robles (1999)

Transcript of Copyright Law and Plagiarism Of the Philippines

Com21 Copyright Law of the Philippines is enshrined in the Intellectual Property

Philippines Heads Toward Expanded

The mandate of the new office is to “handle policy formulation, rule-making,

Criminalizing Plagiarism in the Philippines

Congress erased every Filipino’s right to bring

Everyday, many Filipinos arrive in

end up doing this –

Section 190. Importation and Exportation of Infringing Materials . – Subject to the

FAQs on the amendments to the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES - AN

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY CODE

Republic Act No. 8293

The State recognizes that an effective intellectual and industrial property

3. Presidential Decree No. 49 [Decree on the Protection of Intellectual Property];

The agency of the government in charge of the implementation of the

The Intellectual Property Office is mandated under the law to:

2. Examine applications for the registration of marks, geographic

3. Register technology transfer arrangements and settle disputes involving