October 30, 2013

The Law on Copyright

Take note of the definitions under Section 171.

SECTION 171. Definitions. — xxx

171.1. "Author" is the natural person who has created the work;

A natural person can write, draw or paint. Maybe some robots can paint now.

171.2. 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;

Now, this one: Communication to the Public. This is found in the amendment- Republic Act
103 something... I forgot. (R.A. 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)
171.3. ‘Communication to the public’ or ‘communicate to the public’ means any communicate
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;

Just take note of the broadcasting and rebroadcasting because we will take up a case that
involves broadcasting and rebroadcasting.

So, what do you mean by public performance? Just read the definition. It depends on the
work.

171.6. "Public performance", in the case of a work other than an audiovisual work, is the
recitation, playing, dancing, acting or otherwise performing the work, either directly or by means of
any device or process; in the case of an audiovisual work, the showing of its images in sequence and
the making of the sounds accompanying it audible; and, in the case of a sound recording, making the
recorded sounds audible at a place or at places where persons outside the normal circle of a family
and that family's closest social acquaintances are or can be present, irrespective of whether they are
or can be present at the same place and at the same time, or at different places and/or at different
times, and where the performance can be perceived without the need for communication within the
meaning of Subsection 171.3;

This concept on copyright means a lot of provisions which is too much to absorb. So, take
note of published works: Works, which, with the consent of the authors, are made available to the
public. So, this is with the consent.
 171.7. "Published works" means works, which, with the consent of the authors, are made
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: Provided, That availability of
such copies has been such, as to satisfy the reasonable requirements of the public, having regard to
the nature of the work;

“Reproduction” is also brought by the amendment.

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);

This “work of applied art,” take note, it is an artistic creation with utilitarian functions. So,
there is a combination of a copyright, patent, work, utility model parang gano’n. But basically, it is
an artistic creation which can be used. Normally, our art participation is applied, di ba? You read the
book, admire a painting, watch a play or musical. It has a utilitarian function or the artistic creation
is incorporated in a usual article. It is a work of applied art.

171.10. A "work of applied art" is an artistic creation with utilitarian functions or incorporated in
a useful article, whether made by hand or produced on an industrial scale;

So, what is the definition of the COPYRIGHT?

Copyright - An intangible incorporeal right:

1. to certain literary, scholarly and artistic productions,

2. granted by statute to the author or creator of the work,
3. giving him, his heirs and assigns, copyright or economic rights,
4. which shall consist of the exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the acts listed in Sec.
177.

So, take note of economic rights. What are the economic rights?

(Sec. 177) Copyright or Economic Rights – Shall Consist of:

The exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the acts listed in Section 177.

So, the enumerations there are the economic rights of the creator.

What can the creator carry out, authorize or prevent?

1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work;

2. Dramatization, translation, adaptation, abridgment, arrangement or other
transformation of the work;

Maraming novels that are turned into movies like Lord of the Rings, Twilight Saga, Harry
Potter, etc.
 3. The first public distribution of the original and each copy of the work by sale or other
forms of transfer of ownership;
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;
5. Public display of the original or a copy of the work;

Eto yong mga artworks.

6. Public performance of the work;

Siyempre noh, if you are the composer of the song, you do not want any unauthorized
person to sing it in public... ‘a first public performance. It should be the author, writer, or
the composer himself or a person chosen by the composer, di ba? Here in the Philippines,
etong mga reknown composers, they choose the singer who will sing, di ba?

7. Other communication to the public of the work.

So, these are the economic rights of the creator. And take note, unlike inventions, trademarks
and service marks, literary and artistic works NEED NOT BE REGISTERED to be protected. That’s
why there is no task in the Bureau of Copyright that says registration of copyright. No. So, they are
protected from the moment of their creation. Meaning, when an author writes a novel, he has
automatically the exclusive right granted under SECTION 177. That is automatic, okay.

So, this is the enumeration of Literary and Artistic Works.

SECTION 172. Literary and Artistic Works. —

172.1. Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to as "works", are original intellectual
creations in the literary and artistic domain protected from the moment of their creation and
shall include in particular:
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 works 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; and
o. Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works.

Just look at them... ‘even PHOTOGRAPHIC WORKS.

Computer Programs cannot be patented, diba? Remember? But they can be COPYRIGHTED.
They are subject to copyright. Okay, so that is the enumeration. What are the artistic, literary and
scholarly works? Now, this enumeration and concept is NOT EXCLUSIVE. Look at number 10 (or
perhaps the last part): Other or a new kind of scholarly, literary and artistic work is discovered or
invented or whatever, that could also be included.

So, under Section 172.2, works are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of
their mode or form of expression, content, quality and purpose.

Let’s go to DERIVATIVE WORKS.

Sec. 173. Derivative Works

The following derivative works shall also be protected by copyright:

1. Dramatizations, translations, adaptations, abridgments, arrangements, and other

alterations of literary or artistic works; and
2. Collections of literary, scholarly or artistic works, and compilations of data and other
materials which are original by reason of the selection or coordination or arrangement of
their contents.

Derivative works are also protected by copyright, and these are the dramatization, translation,
adaptations, arrangement and others, like the screenwriter of the “Return of the King,” dib a? In
novel form, you can turn it out into a movie. The screenwriter transforms it into a script, then, that
is subject to a copyright.

Who OWNS it?

That’s a long discussion actually. But anyway, that is a derivative work.

What about collections of artistic works or of literary works? The “Tragedies of Shakespeare,”
“Shakespearean Comedies,” this is also considered a derivative work which is original by reason of
the selection or organization or arrangement of their contents. So, in central books, there is a very
thick book there. This is a collection of the decisions of former Chief Justice Reynato Puno on
Constitutional Law. All of these Political Law and Constitutional Law decisions are compiled by our
present SC Administrator, Justice Midas Marquez. So, the copyright of the collection belong to him
even if the original writer of the decisions is former SC CJ Puno. We will see later that the decisions
cannot be copyrightable but the collection is, okay. It is because it is original – it means the
selection or coordination or arrangement of their contents.

So, how are DERIVATIVE WORKS protected?

They shall be protected as new works.

173.2. xxxx however, that such new work shall not affect the force of any subsisting copyright
upon the original works employed or any part thereof, xxxx

So, there is a copyright on the original works. If there is also a derivative work, that is also a
copyright for that.

(con’t. Of 173.2) xxxxxxx, or the new works be construed to imply any right to such use of the
original works, or to secure or extend copyright in such original works.

So, walang pakialam. The copyright owner of the derivative work since no right (extended)
over the original work. Of course, they are presuming when one compiles works of others then they
are presuming there was a permission provided by the creator of the original work.

Let’s go to Section 174.

SECTION 174. Published Edition of Work. — In addition to the right to publish granted by the
author, his heirs, or assigns, the publisher shall have a copyright consisting merely of the right of
reproduction of the typographical arrangement of the published edition of the work. (n)

How do you distribute or publicize your novel? Under siguro a publisher. Ano yan, i-print out
sa computer, basta you can do that man siguro noh... pero normally, authors go to publishers
because they can assist in distributing just like a Rex Bookstore and so is Central Bookstore.

So, the publisher generates copyright consisting merely of the right of reproduction of the
typographical arrangement of the published edition of the work. So, the publisher is under the right
to prevent or authorize... etcetera. (Publishers have) only the right of reproduction.

So, this is one of the longest provisions to absorb but you have to take note of this (Section 175)
as this is one of the important provisions.

Sec. 175. Works NOT Protected by Copyright

No protection shall extend, under this law, to:

1. any idea, procedure, system, method or operation, concept, principle, discovery or mere
data as such, even if they are expressed, explained, illustrated or embodied in a work;

IDEA - I think I have an idea to turn the leaf into a gasoline. You cannot copyright that.
PROCEDURE: you can have it patented - the process, as long as the three (3) requisites are
present.
2. news of the day and other miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press
information; or

This includes newspapers. Not subject to protection.

Ahhhh, hindi pala ito yong mahaba. Sorry, this is not the one, yong mahaba.

3. any official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, as well as any official
translation thereof.

Eto yong mga laws, decisions, they are not protected. 

Ahhh, hindi pala ito yong mahaba.

4. Works of the Government. (under Section 176)

Are these protected by copyright? No. So, the speech of the president can be ---$%^&- or
whoever. (Sorry kaayo, wa gyud nako nasabtan.)

176.1. xxxx.
However, prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall
be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit. xxxxx

So, if you like to get money out of government work, ask PERMISSION from that proper
government agency or office.

Xxxx
Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties.
xxxx
But there are instances where approval is not required for use of any purpose of statutes, rules
or regulation. So, if you want to sell a copy of the Constitution, or this new Intellectual Property
Code, go ahead. The rules of the IPO? Go ahead and no one will stop you.

No prior approval or conditions shall be required for the use for any purpose of statutes, rules
and regulations, and speeches, lectures, sermons, addresses, and dissertations, pronounced, read or
rendered in courts of justice, before administrative agencies, in deliberative assemblies
and in meetings of public character. (Sec. 9, first par., P.D. No. 49)

You do not need permission to publicize or reproduce...

So, what are the rights of the authors of speeches, lectures, etcetera?

176.2. The author of speeches, lectures, sermons, addresses, and dissertations mentioned in
the preceding paragraphs shall have the exclusive right of making a collection of his works. (n)

Under 176.1 is works of the Government. What if, let’s just say, the Justice makes a speech during
the SC Conference or whatever, and this was publicized. What if his office was invited to make
speeches in these public affairs? Can he prevent others from reproducing the speech and
distributing? NO, because this is the work of the official of the government. But with respect to
making a collection of this work and publish it - the speeches of Justice so and so, his the only one
who can publish a collection of his speeches. Nobody can collect his speeches and publish it. It’s
okay noh, let’s say X is a big fan of this particular Justice and he collects all the speeches of that
particular Justice, that’s fine. He can keep it. He can put it in his room or wherever. But he cannot
reproduce the compilation. It is the Justice himself. Okay.

176.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, the Government is not precluded from
receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest or otherwise; xxxxx

So, just like any other right that is owned, copyright of is an incorporeal or intangible right, which
can be disposed of by the owner.

What if the owner wants to donate his copyright to the Government? Is the Government
precluded from receiving it? NO, the government can receive it and become the holder of the
copyright.

Xxxx
nor shall publication or republication by the Government in a public document of any work in
which copyright is subsisting be taken to cause any abridgment or annulment of the copyright or
to authorize any use or appropriation of such work without the consent of the copyright owner.
(Sec. 9, third par., P.D. No. 49)

So, let us say, X donates his collection of literary works (these are poems, let’s say...) to the
Government. What if the government publish his work? Government is not the copyright holder.
According to this, it shall not be taken to cause any abridgment or annulment of the copyright or to
authorize any use or appropriation of such work without the consent of the copyright owner.

Sec. 178. Rules on Copyright Ownership

Copyright ownership shall be governed by the following rules:

1. Original literary and artistic works - copyright shall belong to the author of the work;

2. In the case of works of joint authorship:

a. the co-authors shall be the original owners of the copyright and in the absence of agreement,
their rights shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership

b. if a work of joint authorship consists of parts that can be used separately and the author of
each part can be identified, the author of each part shall be the original owner of the copyright in
the part that he has created;
3. In the case of work created by an author during and in the course of his employment, the
copyright shall belong to the:

a. EMPLOYEE - if the creation of the object of copyright is not a part of his regular duties even if
the EE uses the time, facilities and materials of the ER

b. EMPLOYER - if the work is the result of the performance of his regularly-assigned duties, unless
there is an agreement, express or implied, to the contrary.

Who owns the COPYRIGHT? Very easy noh.

Original literary or artistic works should belong to the author of the work.

JOINT OWNERSHIP - the co-authors shall be the original owners of the copyright and in the absence
of agreement, their rights shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. But if a work of joint
authorship can be separated, let’s say: Chapter 1 is written by X and Chapter 2 is written by Y, then
X will own the copyright of Chapter 1, and so on and forth.

Now, remember the discussion on patents, the same. In the case of work created by an author,
the same. So, the same rule for patents.

But look at the commissioned work:

178.4. In the case of a work commissioned by a person other than an employer of the author and
who pays for it and the work is made in pursuance of the commission, the person who so
commissioned the work shall have ownership of the work, but the copyright thereto shall remain
with the creator, unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary;

In patents, who owns the patent? It is the one who commissions, diba? But look at the
copyright, the person who so commissioned the work shall have ownership of the work, but the
copyright thereto shall remain with the creator, unless there is a written stipulation to the contrary;

So, if Madam X wants to have her portrait done by this famous painter and the painting is
finished, what does Madam X owns? She owns the painting. But the right to distribute or those
rights under Section 177 regarding the copyright belongs to the painter unless there is a stipulation
to the contrary. Definitely, there’s nothing wrong if you agree. Now, I own the painting, I’m the only
one who could reproduce this. NO, you cannot -------------- you agree. (Nah. Ambot sa langit ngano
di nako makuha. Pasensya na po.)

178.5. In the case of audiovisual work, the copyright shall belong to the producer, the author of
the scenario, the composer of the music, the film director, and the author of the work so adapted.
However, subject to contrary or other stipulations among the creators, the producer shall exercise
the copyright to an extent required for the exhibition of the work in any manner, except for the right
to collect performing license fees for the performance of musical compositions, with or without
words, which are incorporated into the work; and

178.6. In respect of letters, the copyright shall belong to the writer subject to the provisions of
Article 723 of the Civil Code.
 In the case of audiovisual work, just read that.

Letters? You already know that. The copyright should belong to the writer. The letter itself
belongs to the recipient but the copyright belongs to the writer.

Now, what if the work is Anonymous? Do you know what’s Pseudonymous Works huh? Yes,
who? Anyone? Have you heard of “The Adventures of Tom Sawyer”? Hmmm... Huckleberry Finn?
Who’s the author? Yesss. Is that his name? Mark Twain is a pseudo name. His real name is Samuel
Clemens.  they are works by anonymous authors

SECTION 179. Anonymous and Pseudonymous Works. — For purposes of this Act, the publishers
shall be deemed to represent the authors of articles and other writings published without the names of
the authors or under pseudonyms, unless the contrary appears, or the pseudonyms or adopted name
leaves no doubt as to the author's identity, or if the author of the anonymous works discloses his
identity. (Sec. 7, P.D. 49)

So, nakalagay dyan sa book that it is Mark Twain but everybody knows his real name. So, who
owns the copyright? Mark Twain? There’s no Mark Twain... or the author of the anonymous works if
he discloses his identity.

Transfer or Assignment of Copyright

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.
xxxx

Now, just like any other thing or right owned, can one transfer, assign the license, the
copyright? YES.

Can it be partly assigned or partly licensed? YES, in whole or in part.

What is the licensee or assignee entitled to? All the rights and remedies which the
assignor or licensor had with respect to the copyright.

E.G. the right to sue for infringement.

What is the form of the assignment? How do you transfer ownership of the copyright to your
assignee? or how do you license somebody to do the works that you want? The broadcasting, the re-
broadcasting, the publication, etcetera. It says here:
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.

So, hindi pwede oral. It has to be written, okay. Well, it did not say that it should be in a
public document. So... what’s the statutory construction? Anyway... 

So, what if the copyright owner submits his work to the newspaper, magazine or periodical
for publication? What is the right given to the publisher? only a license to make a single publication
unless a greater right is expressly granted.

180.3. The submission of a literary, photographic or artistic work to a newspaper, magazine or

periodical for publication shall constitute only a license to make a single publication unless a
greater right is expressly granted. If two (2) or more persons jointly own a copyright or any part
thereof, neither of the owners shall be entitled to grant licenses without the prior written consent of
the other owner or owners. (Sec. 15, P.D. No. 49a)

Okay. So the publisher published 100,000 copies of this book that I wrote. That’s it. What if
it is very popular and the people clamouring for that? Then, another authority must be given to the
licensee or the publisher.

Who can grant a license if two or more persons jointly owned a copyright? So, what is this?
Is this an act of administration or an act alteration? Under 180.3, If two (2) or more persons jointly
own a copyright or any part thereof, neither of the owners shall be entitled to grant licenses without
the prior written consent of the other owner or owners. UNANIMOUS CONSENT is required TO
GRANT LICENSES.

May any exclusivity to the economic rights in a work be exclusively licensed? YES.

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. Xxxx

So under Section 181.

SECTION 181. Copyright and Material Object. — The copyright is distinct from the property in the
material object subject to it. Consequently, the transfer or assignment 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 or assignment of the copyright. (Sec. 16, P.D. No.
49)
 So, we have two things: one is a thing and one is a right. The THING is one created, it cannot
be a right on what was created. It could be a poem, short story or a novel, a sculpture, a painting.
But the COPYRIGHT is the INTANGIBLE INCORPOREAL RIGHT.

So, does the transfer, assignment or licensing of the copyright automatically constitute a
transfer of the material object? The answer is NO. It is separate and distinct. They are separate and
distinct from each other.

What if you transfer, assign or license a sole copy or several copies of the work? Does it follow
automatically the transfer, assignment of the copyright? NO, because they are separate and distinct
from each other.

Okay. Now, when you submit that written assignment or licensed agreement, according to
Section 182:

SECTION 182. Filing of Assignment or License. — An assignment or exclusive license may be filed
in duplicate with the National Library upon payment of the prescribed fee for registration in
books and records kept for the purpose. Upon recording, a copy of the instrument shall be returned
to the sender with a notation of the fact of record. Notice of the record shall be published in the
IPO Gazette. (Sec. 19, P.D. No. 49a)

It does not say here who will inform the IPO. Because the National Library, I do not think it’s
part of the IPO. That’s insane. So, maybe it is the licensee who will go to the IPO. Anyway, I am not a
licensee or the assignee who will publish it to the IPO ---#$^$%&&(*()* (ooppps, sorry, wa nako
nasabtan). Maybe there is an agreement between the IPO and the National Library. Anyway,
according to the provision, it shall be published.

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)”

Anyway, did you take this up in second year? There is the case of Philippine Society of
Composers vs. Tan. JUST READ THAT.

G.R.No. L-36402. March 16,1987

FILIPINO SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS, AUTHORS AND PUBLISHERS, INC.

vs. BENJAMIN TAN

FSCAPI is the owner of certain musical compositions among which are the songs entitled:
"Dahil Sa Iyo", "Sapagkat Ikaw Ay Akin," "Sapagkat Kami Ay Tao Lamang" and "The Nearness Of
You." It filed a complaint with the lower court for infringement of copyright against Tan allowing the
playing in the latter’s restaurant of said songs copyrighted in the name of the former.

Tan countered that the complaint states no cause of action. While not denying the playing of
said copyrighted compositions in his establishment, he maintains that the mere singing and
playing of songs and popular tunes even if they are copyrighted do not constitute an
infringement under the provisions of Section 3 of the Copyright Law.

ISSUE: Whether or not the playing and signing of musical compositions which have been
copyrighted under the provisions of the Copyright Law (Act 3134) inside the establishment
of Tan constitute a public performance for profit within the meaning andcontemplation of the
Copyright Law of the Philippines; and assuming that there were indeed public performances for
profit, whether or not Tan can be held liable therefor.

Held:

NO. It has been held that "The playing of music in dine and dance establishment which was
paid for by the public in purchases of food and drink constituted "performance for profit"
within a Copyright Law." Thus, it has been explained that while it is possible in such establishments
for the patrons to purchase their food and drinks and at the same time dance to the music of the
orchestra, the music is furnished and used by the orchestra for the purpose of inducing the public to
patronize the establishment and pay for the entertainment in the purchase of food and drinks. Tan
conducts his place of business for profit, and it is public; and the music is performed for profit.
Nevertheless, he cannot be said to have infringed upon the Copyright Law. His allegation that the
composers of the contested musical compositions waived their right in favor of the general public
when they allowed their intellectual creations to become property of the public domain before
applying for the corresponding copyrights for the same is correct.

The Supreme Court has ruled that "Paragraph 33 of Patent Office Administrative Order No.
3(as amended, dated September 18, 1947) entitled 'Rules of Practice in the Philippines Patent Office
relating to the Registration of Copyright Claims' promulgated pursuant to Republic Act 165,
provides among other things that an intellectual creation should be copyrighted thirty (30)days
after its publication, if made in Manila, or within the (60) days if made elsewhere, failure of which
renders such creation public property." Indeed, if the general public has made use of the object
sought to be copyrighted for thirty (30) days prior to the copyright application the law deems the
object to have been donated to the public domain and the same can no longer be copyrighted.
Under the circumstances, it is clear that the musical compositions in question had long become
public property, and are therefore beyond the protection of the Copyright Law.

Ahh, eto yong mahaba. My God. Okay. We will not go through this one by one because it is
very, very, very, very long (sakto gyud na nga upat ka VERY hehehehe.) The only thing that i want
you to remember is this noh: we have a song writer. He is both a composer and a lyricist, George
Canseco for example. What is his purpose in writing a song? Is it only for him to listen to? Of
course, he wants the world to know of his talent or hear his song because he has a message in his
song, okay. So under 177, as to the composer, he has the economic rights. He has the automatic
copyright with the song. What this provision is saying is that if the song is performed, once it has
lawfully been made accessible to the public, you compile the record, yong mga kanta na “Mga Bituin
Walang Ningning”?? I’m not sure... that’s already made accessible to the public. If that is done
privately and free of charge for a charitable or religious institution or society, dapat it’s done
privately. How about this karaoke or videoke? It’s not here in the law eh. Maybe this people are
authorized, the ones who made the videoke kits with all the songs noh. Maybe they have the
copyrights to perform.

Sec. 184. The following Acts shall NOT Constitute Infringement of Copyright:

1. 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.

Anyway, those broadway shows apparently they must be subject to a copyright. You can
actually stage a broadway show but you cannot... If you want to copy the entire show, let’s say
“Phantom of the Opera” has been shown abroad kasi the same yan noh, that can fall under, kumbaga,
one company or somebody buys the copyright of the “Phantom of the Opera.” If the songs of the
Phantom are performed on stage in any place, it is... hala! as long as the maximum number of songs
to perform is three (3) songs. So yong mga broadway plays or excerpts that’s fine. No violation of
the copyright. But if you want to stage the entire “Phantom of the Opera” then you have to buy, the
ticket is 100 dollars. You go to the website and buy (the ticket.)

With respect to MAMA MIA (giggling), they have this production, and we staged MAMA MIA
(kaw baya ang nagtake sa lead role Ma’am hehe) and how did we get away with it? Okay. We did not
copy the entire production. Ang gi-copy lang is yong songs  which has already been made public
by ABBA since time immemorial. I think you were not born yet. This is controllable imitation only,
not an exact duplication thereof. But of course noh, who would mind this small Davao productions.
They are big broadway companies, diba J? 

But under Section 184, anything that has been made publicized can be performed if you do
not charge anything. Di ba yong atin naman J is for charitable institution. So pwede na yan sa
exception. (kaw na J! nagpalaban gyud si Ma’am nimo hahaha peace!)

2. 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; xxx

So, if you make a quotation from a published work,... So we have a book written by X,, horrible
book. Do you know who is my least favourite author John Grisham? Why? Things happened.
And there’s this FBI chasing. Then, the person gets from one place to another without the
author explaining how.  (Then, her story about Grisham continues.......)

(Going back) So, you make a quotation from a published work if they are compatible with fair
use..
3. 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;

...and recording made in schools. Do you record my lectures? Then you must delete it ha within
reasonable time after transcribing and pass on.. and send. Okay. hehehehe

8. 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;

Eto, public performance where no admission fee is charge for charitable or educational
purposes.. paulit ulit lang man ito ba. Just read.

Eto, gwapo ito.

(part of the amendment)

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.

Sec. 185. Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work

The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including
multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement
of copyright. xxxxx

Now, de-compilation may also constitute fair use. Just read what decompilation is.

(con’t of 185) xxx

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 decompilation is done for the purpose of obtaining the information
necessary to achieve such interoperability.

How do you know in determining whether the use made of a work is fair use? What are the
factors to be considered? Paulit-ulit lang yan. Please read...

(Con’t. Of 185.1)
Xxx

In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be
considered shall include:

a. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for
non-profit educational purposes;

b. The nature of the copyrighted work;

c. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;
and

d. The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Section 190 is new.

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 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)

Eto yong mga pirated movies. Do not say pirated DVDs (hehehe. Grabe katawa ni Ma’am. Sakto
man pud noh? Guilty as charged. hehe)

Aw okay. Let’s go to deposit.  This is entirely new. The entire provision was amended. Look at
the old 191, it’s longer.

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.

If you want to write a law book, so you have to deposit.. or where do you deposit it? in the
Supreme Court Library. If you want to write comics, and you want to copyright your comics, doon
ka sa National Library. Okay, take note, such registration and deposit is not a condition of copyright
protection. This emphasizes the fact that copyrighted works are protected on the moment of
creation.
SECTION 192. Notice of Copyright. — Each copy of a work published or offered for sale may contain
a notice bearing the name of the copyright owner, and the year of its first publication, and, in copies
produced after the creator's death, the year of such death.

SO that’s why if you buy books, nakalagay do’n noh: copyrighted this year; then, republished
this year; first publication, second publication, etcetera.

Moral Rights

ASIDE from economic rights, we also have moral rights. Under section 193...

SECTION 193. Scope of Moral Rights. — The author of a work shall, independently of the economic
rights in Section 177 or the grant of an assignment or license with respect to such right, have the right:

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

xxxx

He should be identified with the work if he wants. That’s a moral right. It has nothing to do
with reproduce, the right to authorize, the right to prevent, right to be recognized as the creator of
the work, etcetera. Of course, since he’s the creator, he’s the only one who can make alterations.

193.2. To make any alterations of his work prior to, or to withhold it from publication;

Don’t tell me the licensee or the assignee, NO!! it’s the AUTHOR. OR to withhold the publication,
kung ayaw nya i-publish. That is his right.

193.3. To object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in
relation to, his work which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation; and

193.4. To restrain the use of his name with respect to any work not of his own creation or in a
distorted version of his work. (Sec. 34, P.D. No. 49)

What if somebody makes a distorted form of his work? Nagpaalam sa kanya. Di nya feel. What
if the composer writes a very beautiful classical song tas ginawang hiphop? Di ba may mga songs na
ginawagang rap like “Every Breath You Take” by the Police, diba? You know that? Huh? What if the
Police or the writer, do you know Gordon Sumner? Huh? Si Sting!  what if he does not want the
hiphop version? ------ ------ That is his moral right.

SECTION 194. Breach of Contract. — An author cannot be compelled to perform his contract to
create a work or for the publication of his work already in existence. However, he may be held liable
for damages for breach of such contract.
 Kunwari, X commissions Y to write a novel... so, this and that, eto yon ha... okay, so may kontrata
na sila. Pero si Y, he just cannot come out of... Can he be forced to create something that he cannot?
NO. What can X do? Just sue him for breach of contract. He cannot be forced, an artist, to create
something if he does not like it.

What if the work is already created? Let’s say this composer already contracted with the
recording company – Star Records that his song will be performed or whatever, and he changed his
mind. Can he be forced? NO. but he can be sued for breach of contract.

Can moral rights be WAIVED? According to Section 195...

SECTION 195. Waiver of Moral Rights. — An author may waive his rights mentioned in Section 193
by a written instrument, xxx

So, the moral right exists. You do not have to register that anywhere. It is given. This is a moral
right of an author, etcetera. If he wants to waive, there must be a document.

Xxxx but no such waiver shall be valid where its effects is to permit another:

195.1. To use the name of the author, or the title of his work, or otherwise to make use of his
reputation with respect to any version or adaptation of his work which, because of alterations therein,
would substantially tend to injure the literary or artistic reputation of another author; or

195.2. To use the name of the author with respect to a work he did not create. (Sec. 36, P.D. No. 49)

What is the term of moral rights? How long? This is also amended. Under the old law, it is only
50 years after death. But the new law changed it to perpetuity. So, the works of Shakespeare, the
works of Jose Rizal, there’s no prescriptive period. So, if you see a “NOLI ME TANGERE” nandiyan
ang pangalan ni Jose Rizal. So, simple as that. So, that’s the first moral right.

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. Xxxx

What can be sold, assigned, or licensed? Only economic rights.

Xxxx 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.

SECTION 199. Enforcement Remedies. — Violation of any of the rights conferred by this Chapter
shall entitle those charged with their enforcement to the same rights and remedies available to a
copyright owner. In addition, damages which may be availed of under the Civil Code may also be
recovered. Any damage recovered after the creator's death shall be held in trust for and remitted to
his heirs, and in default of the heirs, shall belong to the government.

This is still very long but i just want you to see the definition of BROADCASTING.

202.7. "Broadcasting" means the transmission by wireless means for the public reception of
sounds or of images or of representations thereof; such transmission by satellite is also
"broadcasting" where the means for decrypting are provided to the public by the broadcasting
organization or with its consent;

So, who could broadcast? Broadcasting organization. Okay, you can take a five-minute break.
(finally! Humana.)

Note: classmates, tanan naka-underline, bold, or italic sa mga provisions kay gi-emphasize or gibasa gyud ni
Ma’am. Thank you everyone.

--end of first part--

TRANSCRIBED BY: SUZETTE TAN

"It is not what they take away from you that counts.
It's what you do with what you have left."
Hubert H. Humphrey