The Philippine Copyright Law is published and readable in open sources such asWikipedia. Other sites publish the entire Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines such as the Chan Robles law office.
It will be clear upon digesting the provisions of law for protection of intellectual property ownership that a large number of safeguards, safety nets are available for owners of intellectual property.
During conferences, conventions, seminars and small group meetings organized by thePhilippine Intellectual Property Office (IPOPHIL), the World Intellectual Property Office (WIPO) of the United Nations and many other organizations concerned with protecting the rights of owners to their proprietary intellectual products, brands, literature, music, among others, the common lament among the very officials and their staff involved with IPO in the majority of countries around the world, the worst kind of problem encountered is the lack of support by the judiciary and the prosecution system.
The law enforcement sector is considered to be part of the integrated prosecution system of any country, according to past and present paradigms.
In sum, there are hardly cases that are successfully prosecuted, litigated in Court. One of the IPO community’s concerns in recent past was imparting the knowledge about IPR to Judges of Philippine Courts and even going to the extent of forming Special IPR Courts for the Philippines.
Whether the efforts of the Philippine Intellectual Property Office (IPOPHIL) are succeeding, we can only surmise. The extent of piracy in the Philippines, the brand copying and the rampant engagement of local contractors of foreign brand owners in IPR infringement themselves, is so great that it is safe to say the revenues that had been lost to notorious violations of IPR laws and the Geneva Convention agreements from the 1980s alone to the present run to multi-trillions of Philippine Pesos.
If this staggering amount will not affect neither jolt the judiciary, the prosecution system and the whole gamut of government into action, then nothing can.
Meanwhile, the victims of infringement of rights of ownership of intellectual property, whether affluent or poor can just die waiting for the solutions to come or fight it out with the IP thieves until they are meted the applicable sanctions under law, if ever that will happen. Unlike the PDAF-DAP Scandal, in terms of relevance, the organizers of gimmick rallies and protests and media hype will not give due course to promoting or fostering collective action against the poisoning of our children because of chemical laced toys, burning of entire neighborhoods due to substandard christmas lights or electric wires, cables and factory defective mobile phone chargers and exploding cellular phones themselves, to name only a few of the dangers of uncontrolled piracy.
As a PR practitioner once said with contempt, “it just ain’t saleable to the public, that’s why.” What public?
Source: IPR Laws and Regulations – Synetic Industries
The Nation Forum. 1987. 