UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES204INTELLECTUALPROPERTYLAWSI.INTELLECTUALPROPERTYRIGHTSINGENERALA.INTELLECTUALPROPERTYRIGHTSQ: What are covered by intellectual propertyrights?A:1.CopyrightandRelatedRights2.Mark(trade,serviceandcollective)3.Geographicindications4.Industrialdesigns5.Patents6.Layout designs (Topographies) ofIntegratedCircuits7.Protection of Undisclosed Information.(Sec. 4.1, Intellectual Property Code[IPC])B.DIFFERENCESBETWEENCOPYRIGHTSTRADEMARKSANDPATENTQ: What are the distinctions among trademark,patentandcopyright?A:INTELLECTUALPROPERTIESDEFINITIONTrademarkAnyvisiblesigncapableofdistinguishingthegoods(trademark)orservices(servicemark)ofanenterpriseandshallincludeastampedormarkedcontainerofgoods.TradenameThenameordesignationidentifyingordistinguishinganenterprise.CopyrightLiteraryandartisticworkswhichareoriginalintellectualcreationsintheliteraryandartisticdomainprotectedfromthemomentoftheircreation.PatentableInventionsAnytechnicalsolutionofaprobleminanyfieldofhumanactivitywhichisnew,involvesaninventivestepandisindustriallyapplicable.(Khov.CA,G.R.No.115758,Mar.11,2002).Q:Whatisageographicindication?A: Its an indication which identifies a good asoriginatingintheterritory,whereagivenquality,reputation or other characteristic of the good isessentially attributable to its geographical origin.(Art. 22, TradeRelated Aspects of IntellectualPropertyRights)C.TECHNOLOGYTRANSFERARRANGEMENTSQ:Whatisatechnologytransferarrangement?A: Contracts or arrangements involving thetransfer of systematic knowledge for themanufacture of a product, the application of theprocess, or rendering a service includingmanagement contracts, and transfer, assignmentor licensing of all forms of intellectual propertyrights, including licensing of computer softwareexcept computer software developed for massmarket.(Sec.4.2,IPC)Q:Whatisundisclosedinformation?A:Itisaninformationwhich:1.Isasecretinthesensethatitisnot,asabody or in precise configuration andassembly of components, generallyknown among, or readily accessible topersonswithinthecirclesthatnormallydeal with the kind of information inquestion.2.Has commercial value because it is asecret3.Hasbeensubjectedtoreasonablestepsunderthecircumstances,bythepersonlawfullyincontroloftheinformation,tokeep it a secret. (Article 39, TRIPSAgreement)Q: What is the nature of undisclosedinformation/tradesecret?A: Those trade secrets are of a privileged nature.The protection of industrial property encouragesinvestments in new ideas and inventions andstimulates creative efforts for the satisfaction ofhumanneeds.Itspeedsuptransferoftechnologyand industrialization, and thereby bring aboutsocial and economic progress. Verily, theprotection of industrial secrets is inextricablylinked to the advancement of our economy andfosters healthy competition in trade. (AirPhilippinesCorporationv.Pennswell,Inc.,G.R.No.172835,Dec.13,2007)II.PATENTSQ:Whatisapatent?A:Astatutorygrantwhichconferstoaninventororhislegal successor,inreturnforthedisclosureof the invention to the public, the right for aINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ205limited period of time to exclude others frommaking, using, selling or importing the inventionwithintheterritoryofthecountrythatgrantsthepatent.A.PATENTABLEINVENTIONSQ:Whatarethepatentableinventions?A:Anytechnicalsolutionofaprobleminanyfieldof human activity which is new, involves aninventivestepandisindustriallyapplicable.Itmaybe, or may relate to, a product, or process, or animprovementofanyoftheforegoing.(Sec.21)Q:Whataretheconditionsforpatentability?A:NIA1.Novelty An invention shall not beconsidered new if it forms part of apriorart.(Sec.23,IPC)2.Involves an inventive step if, havingregardtopriorart,itisnotobvioustoaperson skilled in the art at the time ofthe filing date or priority date of theapplicationclaimingtheinvention.3.Industrially Applicable An inventionthat can be produced and used in anyindustry, shall be industrially applicable(Sec.27,IPC).Q:Whatispriorart?A:1.Everything which has been madeavailable to the public anywhere in theworld, before the filing date or thepriority date of the application claimingtheinvention2.The whole contents of a publishedapplication, filed or effective in thePhilippines, with a filing or priority datethat is earlier than the filing or prioritydate of the application. Provided, thatthe application which has validlyclaimed the filing date of an earlierapplicationunderSection31oftheIPC,there shall be a prior art with effect asof the filing date of such earlierapplication: Provided further, that theapplicant or the inventor identified inboth applications are not one and thesame.(Sec.24,IPC)Q: What is meant by made available to thepublicandwhatareitseffects?A:Tobemadeavailabletothepublicmeansatleast one member of the public has been able toaccess knowledge of the invention without anyrestriction on passing that knowledge on toothers.GR: When a work has already been madeavailable to the public, it shall be nonpatentableforabsenceofnovelty.XPN: Nonprejudicial disclosure thedisclosure of information contained in theapplicationduringthe12monthperiodbeforethe filing date or the priority date of theapplicationifsuchdisclosurewasmadeby:1.Theinventor;2.Apatentofficeandtheinformationwascontained:a.In another application filed by theinventorandshouldhavenothavebeendisclosedbytheoffice,orb.In an application filed without theknowledge or consent of theinventor by a third party whichobtained the information directlyorindirectlyfromtheinventor;3. A third party which obtained theinformation directly or indirectly from theinventor.(Sec.25,IPC)Q: Who has the burden of proving want ofnoveltyofaninvention?A: The burden of proving want of novelty is onhim who avers it and the burden is a heavy onewhich is met only by clear and satisfactory proofwhich overcomes every reasonable doubt.(Manzanov.CA,G.R.No.113388.Sept.5,1997)Q:Whatisinventivestep?A:GR:Aninventioninvolvesaninventivestepif,having regard to prior art, it is not obvious toa person skilled in the art at the time of thefiling date or priority date of the applicationclaimingtheinvention.(Sec.26,IPC)XPN:Inthecaseofdrugsandmedicines,thereis no inventive step if the invention resultsfromthemerediscoveryofanewformornewpropertyofaknownsubstancewhichdoesnotUST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES206result in the enhancement of the knownefficacy of that substance. (Sec. 26.2, asamendedbyR.A.9502)Q:Whatisthetestofnonobviousness?A:Ifanypersonpossessingordinaryskillintheartwas able to draw the inferences and heconstructsthatthesupposedinventordrewfrompriorart,thenthelatterdidnotreallyinvent.Q:Whoisconsideredapersonofordinaryskill?A:Apersonwhoispresumedto:1.Be an ordinary practitioner aware ofwhat was common general knowledgeintheartattherelevantdate.2.Have knowledge of all references thatare sufficiently related to one anotherand to the pertinent art and to haveknowledge of all arts reasonablypertinent to the particular problemswithwhichtheinventorwasinvolved.3.Have had at his disposal the normalmeans and capacity for routine workand experimentation. (Rules andRegulationsonInventions,Rule207)Q: What are other forms of patentableinventions?A:1.Industrial design Any composition oflinesorcolorsoranythreedimensionalform, whether or not associated withlines or colors. Provided that suchcomposition or form gives a specialappearancetoandcanserveaspatternfor an industrial product or handicraft.(Sec.112,IPC)Note: Generally speaking, an industrial design is theornamental or aesthetic aspect of a useful article.(Vicente Amador, Intellectual PropertyFundamentals,2007)2.IntegratedcircuitAproduct,initsfinalform,oranintermediateform,inwhichtheelements,atleastoneofwhichisanactive elements and some of all of theinterconnections are integrally formedin and or on a piece of material, and inwhich is intended to perform anelectronicfunction.3.Layout design/topography The threedimensional disposition, howeverexpressed,oftheelements,atleastoneof which is an active element, and ofsome or all of the interconnections ofan integrated circuit, or such a threedimensionaldispositionpreparedforanintegrated circuit intended formanufacture. Registration is valid for10yearswithoutrenewalcountedfromdateofcommencementofprotection.4.Utility model A name given toinventionsinthemechanicalfieldQ: When does an invention qualify as a utilitymodel?A:Ifitisnewandindustriallyapplicable.Amodelof implement or tools of any industrial producteven if not possessed of the quality of inventionbutwhichisofpracticalutility.(Sec.109.1,IPC)Q:Whatisthetermofautilitymodel?A: 7 years from date of filing of the application(Sec.109.3,IPC).B.NONPATENTABLEINVENTIONSQ:Whatarenotpatentableinventions?A:PADSCAD1.Discoveries, scientific theories andmathematicalmethods2.In the case of Drugs and medicines,mere discovery of a new form or newproperty of a known substance whichdoes not result in the enhancement oftheefficacyofthatsubstance3.Schemes, rules and methods ofperforming mental acts, playing gamesor doing business, and programs forcomputers4.MethodsfortreatmentofthehumanorAnimalbody5.Plant varieties or animal breeds oressentially biological process for theproduction of plants or animals. Thisprovision shall not apply to microorganisms and nonbiological andmicrobiologicalprocesses6.AestheticcreationsINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ2077.Anything which is Contrary to publicorder or morality. (Sec. 22, IPC asamendedbyR.A.9502)Q:Arecomputerprogramspatentable?A:GR: Computer programs are not patentablebutarecopyrightable.XPN: They can be patentable if they are partofaprocess(e.g.businessprocesswithastepinvolvingtheuseofacomputerprogram).C.OWNERSHIPOFAPATENTQ:Whoisentitledtoapatent?A:1.Inventor,hisheirs,orassigns.2.Joint invention Jointly by theinventors.(Sec.28,IPC)3.2 or more persons invented separatelyand independently of each other Tothepersonwhofiledanapplication;4.2 or more applications are filed theapplicant who has the earliest filingdate or, the earliest priority date. Firsttofilerule.(Sec.29,IPC)5.Inventions created pursuant to acommission Person who commissionsthe work, unless otherwise provided inthecontract.(Sec.30.1,IPC)6.Employee made the invention in thecourseofhisemploymentcontract:a.The employee, if the inventiveactivity is not a part of his regularduties even if the employee usesthetime,facilitiesandmaterialsoftheemployer.b.The employer, if the invention isthe result of the performance ofhis regularlyassigned duties,unlessthereis anagreement, express or implied, tothecontrary.(Sec.30.2,IPC)Q:Whatisthefirsttofilerule?A:1.If two (2) or more persons have madethe invention separately andindependently of each other, the righttothepatentshallbelongtothepersonwho filed an application for suchinvention,or2.Where two or more applications arefiled for the same invention, to theapplicant whi has the earliest filingdate.(Sec.29,IPC)Q: Cheche invented a device that can convertrainwater into automobile fuel. She askedMacon, a lawyer, to assist in getting herinvention patented. Macon suggested that theyform a corporation with other friends and havethecorporationapplyforthepatent,80%oftheshares of stock thereof to be subscribed byCheche and 5% by Macon. The corporation wasformed and the patent application was filed.However,Cheche died 3 months later of a heartattack. Franco, the estranged husband ofCheche, contested the application of thecorporationandfiledhisownpatentapplicationas the sole surviving heir of Cheche. Decide theissuewithreasons.A: The estranged husband of Cheche cannotsuccessfully contest the application. The rightover inventions accrue from the moment ofcreationandasarightitcanlawfullybeassigned.Once the title thereto is vested in the transferee,the latter has the right to apply for itsregistration.TheestrangedhusbandofCheche,ifnot disqualified to inherit, merely would succeedtotheinterestofCheche.(1990BarQuestion)Q:Whomayapplyforapatent?A: Any person who is a national or who isdomiciled or has a real and effective industrialestablishmentinacountrywhichisapartytoanyconvention, treaty or agreement relating tointellectual property rights or the repression ofunfair competition, to which the Philippines isalso a party, or extends reciprocal rights tonationalsofthePhilippinesbylaw.(Sec.3,IPC)Q: What are the steps in the registration of apatent?A: The procedure for the grant of patent may besummarizedasfollows:1.Filingoftheapplication2.Accordanceofthefilingdate3.Formalityexamination4.ClassificationandSearch5.Publicationofapplication6.Substantiveexamination7.GrantofPatent8.PublicationupongrantUST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES2089.Issuance of certificate (Salao, Essentialsof Intellectual Property Law: aGuidebook on Republic Act No. 8293andRelatedLaws.,2008)Q:Howisdisclosuremade?A:Theapplicationshalldisclosetheinventioninamannersufficientlyclearandcompleteforittobecarriedoutbyapersonskilledintheart.Q:Whatisaclaim?A: Defines the matter for which protection issought.Eachclaimshallbeclearandconcise,andshallbesupportedbythedescription.Q:Whatisanabstract?A: A concise summary of the disclosure of theinvention as contained in the description, claimsandmerelyservesastechnicalinformation.Q:Whatisunityofinvention?A: The application shall relate to one inventiononly or to a group of inventions forming a singlegeneral inventive concept. (Sec. 38.1) If severalindependent inventions which do not form asingle general inventive concept are claimed inoneapplication,theapplicationmustberestrictedtoasingleinvention.(Sec.38.2,IPC)Q: What is the concept of divisionalapplications?A: Divisional applications come into play whentwo or more inventions are claimed in a singleapplication but are of such a nature that a singlepatentmaynotbeissuedforthem.Theapplicant,is thus required to divide, that is, to limit theclaims to whichever invention he may elect,whereas those inventions not elected may bemade the subject of separate applications whichare called divisional applications. (SmithKlineBeckman Corp. v. CA, GR No. 126627, Aug.14,2003)Q:Whatisprioritydate?A: An application for patent filed by any personwho has previously applied for the sameinvention in another country which by treaty,convention, or law affords similar privileges toFilipino citizens, shall be considered as filed as ofthedateoffilingtheforeignapplication.(Sec.31,IPC)Q:Whataretheconditionsinavailingofprioritydate?A:1.The local application expressly claimspriority;2.It is filed within 12 months from thedatetheearliestforeignapplicationwasfiled;and3.A certified copy of the foreignapplication together with an Englishtranslationisfiledwithin6monthsfromthedateoffilinginthePhilippines.(Sec.31,IPC)Q: Leonard and Marvin applied for LettersPatent claiming the right of priority granted toforeign applicants. Receipt of petitionersapplication was acknowledged by respondentDirectoron March 6, 1954. Their Application forLetters Patent in the US for the same inventionindicatedthattheapplicationintheUSwasfiledon March 16, 1953. They were advised that the"Specification" they had submitted was"incomplete" and that responsive action shouldbe filed with them four months from date ofmailing, which was August 5, 1959. On July 3,1962, petitioners submitted two completecopies of the Specification. Director of patentsheld that petitioners' application may not betreatedasfiled.Isthedirectorcorrect?A: Yes, it is imperative that the application becomplete in order that it may be accepted. It isessentialtothevalidityofLettersPatentthatthespecifications be full, definite, and specific. Thepurpose of requiring a definite and accuratedescriptionoftheprocessistoapprisethepublicof what the patentee claims as his invention, toinformtheCourtsastowhattheyarecalleduponto construe, and to convey to competingmanufacturersanddealersinformationofexactlywhat they are bound to avoid. To be entitled tothe filing date of the patent application, aninvention disclosed in a previously filedapplication must be described within the instantapplication in such a manner as to enable oneskilled in the art to use the same for a legallyadequate utility. (Boothe v. Director of Patents,G.R.No.L24919,Jan.28,1980)Q: What are the rights conferred by a patentapplicationafterthefirstpublication?A: The applicant shall have all the rights of apatentee against any person who, without hisINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ209authorization, exercised any of the rightsconferred under Section 71 in relation to theinvention claimed in the published patentapplication, as if a patent had been granted forthatinvention,providedthatthesaidpersonhad:1.Actual knowledge that the inventionthat he was using was the subjectmatterofapublishedapplication;or2.Received written notice that theinvention was the subject matter of apublishedapplicationbeingidentifiedinthesaidnoticebyitsserialnumberNote:Thattheactionmaynotbefileduntilafterthegrant of a patent on the published application andwithinfour(4)yearsfromthecommissionoftheactscomplainedof(Sec.46,IPC).Q:Whenshallthepatenttakeeffect?A: A patent shall take effect on the date of thepublication of the grant of the patent in the IPOGazette.(Sec.50.3,IPC)Q:Whatisthedurationofapatent,utilitymodelandindustrialdesign?A:1.Patent 20 years from date of filing ofapplication without renewal. (Sec. 54,IPC)2.Utility Model 7 years from the filingdate of the application withoutrenewal.(Sec.109.3,IPC)3.Industrial Design 5 years from thefilingdateoftheapplication,renewablefor not more than two (2) consecutiveperiods of five (5) years each. (Sec.118.2,IPC)D.GROUNDSFORCANCELATIONOFAPATENTQ: What are the grounds for the cancellation ofpatents?A:NDCI1.TheinventionisNotneworpatentable;2.The patent does not Disclose theinvention in a manner sufficiently clearandcompleteforittobecarriedoutbyanypersonskilledintheart;or3.Contrary to public order ormorality.(Sec.61.1,IPC)4.Patent is found Invalid in an action forinfringement(Sec.82,IPC)Q:Whatiftheground/sforcancellationrelatetosomeoftheclaimsorpartsoftheclaimonly?A: Cancellation may be effected to such extentonly.(Sec.61.2,IPC)Q: What are the grounds for cancellation of autilitymodel?A:1.The invention does not qualify forregistrationasautilitymodel2.That the description and the claims donot comply with the prescribedrequirements3.Any drawing which is necessary for theunderstanding of the invention has notbeenfurnished4.That the owner of the utility modelregistration is not the inventor or hissuccessorintitle.(Sec.109.4,IPC)Q: What are the grounds for cancellation of anindustrialdesign?A:1.The subject matter of the industrialdesignisnotregistrable;2.Thesubjectmatterisnotnew;or3.The subject matter of the industrialdesign extends beyond the content ofthe application as originally filed (Sec.120IPC).E.REMEDYOFTHETRUEANDACTUALOWNERQ:Whataretheremediesofpersonsnothavingtherighttoapatent?A:Ifapersonotherthantheapplicantisdeclaredbyfinalcourtorderordecisionashavingtherightto a patent, he may within 3 months after suchdecisionhasbecomefinal:1.Prosecutetheapplicationashisown2.Fileanewpatentapplication3.Request the application to be refused;or4.Seekcancellationofthepatent.Q:Whatistheremedyofatrueinventor?A:Hemayonlyaskthecourttosubstitutehimasa patentee or to cancel the patent and ask fordamages when the application of the falseinventor is granted. He may not the IPO ofprocessingthefalseapplication.UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES210F.RIGHTSCONFEREDBYAPATENTQ:Whataretherightsconferredbyapatent?A:1.Subject matter is a product Right torestrain, prohibit and prevent anyunauthorized person or entity frommaking, using, offering for sale, sellingorimportingtheproduct.2.Subject matter is a process Right torestrain prohibit and prevent anyunauthorized person or entity frommanufacturing, dealing in, using,offering for sale, selling or importingany product obtained directly orindirectly from such process (Sec. 71,IPC).3.Right to assign the patent, to transferbysuccession,andtoconcludelicensingcontracts.(Sec.71.2,IPC)G.LIMITATIONOFPATENTRIGHTSQ: What are the exceptions to the rightsconferredbyapatent?A:1.Ingenerala.GR: If put on the market in thePhilippines by the owner of theproduct, or with his expressconsent.XPN: Drugs and medicines introduced in the Philippines oranywhere else in the world by thepatent owner, or by any partyauthorized to use the invention(Sec. 72.1, as amended by R.A.9502)b.Where the act is done privatelyand on a noncommercial scale orfor a noncommercial purpose.(Sec.72.2,IPC)c.Exclusively for experimental use ofthe invention for scientificpurposes or educational purposes(experimental use provision). (Sec.72.3,IPC)d.Bolar Provision In the case ofdrugs and medicines, where theact includes testing, using, makingor selling the invention includinganydatarelatedthereto,solelyforpurposesreasonablyrelatedtothedevelopment and submission ofinformation and issuance ofapprovals by governmentregulatoryagenciesrequiredunderany law of the Philippines or ofanother country that regulates themanufacture, construction, use orsaleofanyproduct.(Sec.72.4,IPC)e.Where the act consists of thepreparation for individual cases, ina pharmacy or by a medicalprofessional, of a medicine inaccordance with a medicalprescription.(Sec.72.5,IPC)f.Wheretheinventionisusedinanyship, vessel, aircraft, or landvehicle of any other countryentering the territory of thePhilippines temporarily oraccidentally.(Sec.72.5,IPC)2.Prior user Person other than theapplicant, who in good faith, startedusingtheinventioninthePhilippines,orundertaken serious preparations to usethe same, before the filing date orpriority date of the application shallhave the right to continue the usethereof, but this right shall only betransferred or assigned further with hisenterpriseorbusiness.(Sec.73,IPC).3.Use by Government A governmentagency or third person authorized bythe government may exploit inventioneven without agreement of a patentownerwhere:a.Public interest, as determined bythe appropriate agency of thegovernment,sorequires;orb.A judicial or administrative bodyhasdeterminedthatthemannerofexploitation by owner of patent isanticompetitive.(Sec.74,IPC)4.ReversereciprocityofforeignlawAnycondition, restriction, limitation,diminution,requirement,penaltyoranysimilar burden imposed by the law of aforeigncountryonaPhilippinenationalseeking protection of intellectualINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ211property rights in that country, shallreciprocally be enforceable uponnationals of said country, withinPhilippinejurisdiction.(Sec.231,IPC)Q:Whoisaparallelimporter?A: One which imports, distributes, and sellsgenuineproductsinthemarket,independentlyofan exclusive distributorship or agency agreementwiththemanufacturer.Note: Such acts of underground sales andmarketing of genuine goods, undermines thepropertyrightsandgoodwilloftherightfulexclusivedistributor. Such goodwill is protected by the lawon unfair competition. (Solid Triangle v. Sheriff, G.R.No.144309,Nov.23,2001)Q:Whatisthedoctrineofexhaustion?A: Also known as the doctrine of first sale, itprovidesthatthepatentholderhascontrolofthefirst sale of his invention. He has the opportunityto receive the full consideration for his inventionfromhissale.Hence,heexhaustshisrightsinthefuturecontrolofhisinvention.It espouses that the patentee who has alreadysoldhisinventionandhasreceivedalltheroyaltyandconsiderationforthesamewillbedeemedtohave released the invention from his monopoly.The invention thus becomes open to the use ofthepurchaserwithoutfurtherrestriction.(Adamsv.Burke,84U.S.17,1873)Q:HowdoestheDoctrineExhaustionofapplyinPhilippinejurisdiction?A:GR:PatentrightsareExhaustedbyfirstsaleinthePhilippines(Domesticexhaustion).XPN:Excepthoweverondrugsandmedicines:first sale in any jurisdiction exhausts(Internationalexhaustion)(R.A.9502).Q:Whatarethedifferentkindsofexhaustion?A:1.International exhaustion allows anyparty to import into the nationalterritory a patented product from anyothercountryinwhichtheproductwasplaced on the market by the patentholderoranyauthorizedparty.2.Regional exhaustion allows thepossibilityofimportingintothenationalterritory a patented product originatingfrom any other member state of aregionaltradeagreement.3.National exhaustion limits thecirculation of products covered bypatentinonecountrytoonlythoseputon the market by the patent owner orits authorized agents in that samecountry. In this case, there can be noparallelimportation.4.Modified exhaustion all respectidenticaltotheInternationalexhaustionexcept for the allowance of therestriction of the extent of exhaustionthrough explicit contractual terms.(Carlos Correa,. Internationalization ofthe Patent System and NewTechnologies. International LawJournal,Vol.20.No.3,2002)H.PATENTINFRINGEMENTQ:Whatconstitutesinfringementofpatent?A:1.Making, using, offering for sale, sellingor importing a patented product or aproduct obtained directly or indirectlyfromapatentedprocess;or2.Use of a patented process withoutauthorization of the owner of thepatent(Sec.76,IPC)Q:Whatarethetestsinpatentinfringement?A:1.Literal infringement Test Resort mustbehad,inthefirstinstance,towordsoftheclaim.Iftheaccusedmatterclearlyfalls within the claim, infringement iscommitted.Minor modifications are sufficient toput the item beyond literalinfringement.(Godinesv.CA,G.R.No.L97343,Sept.13,1993)2.Doctrine of Equivalents There isinfringement where a deviceappropriates a prior invention byincorporating its innovative conceptand, although with some modificationand change, performs substantially thesamefunctioninsubstantiallythesameUST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES212way to achieve substantially the sameresult.(Ibid.)3.Economic interest test when theprocessdiscoverers economic interestarecompromised,i.e.,whenotherscanimport the products that result fromthe process, such an act is said to beprohibited.Q:Doestheuseofapatentedprocessbyathirdperson constitute an infringement when theallegedinfringerhassubstituted,inlieuofsomeunessentialpartofthepatentedprocess,awellknownmechanicalequivalent."A: Yes, under the doctrine of mechanicalequivalents, the patentee is protected fromcolorable invasions of his patent under the guiseof substitution of some part of his invention bysome well known mechanical equivalent. It is aninfringement of the patent, if the substituteperforms the same function and was well knownat the date of the patent as a proper substitutefor the omitted ingredient. (Gsell v. YapJue, G.R.No.L4720,Jan.19,1909)Q:Whatismeantbyequivalentdevice?A: It is such as a mechanic of ordinary skill inconstruction of similar machinery, having theforms, specifications and machine before him,could substitute in the place of the mechanismdescribed without the exercise of the inventivefaculty.Q: What is the doctrine of file wrapperestoppel?A: This doctrine balances the doctrine ofequivalents. Patentee is precluded from claimingaspartofpatentedproductthatwhichhehadtoexcise or modify in order to avoid patent officerejection, and he may omit any additions that hewas compelled to add by patent officeregulations.Q: What is the doctrine of contributoryinfringement?A:Asidefromtheinfringer,anyonewhoactivelyinduces the infringement of a patent or providesthe infringer with a component of a patentedproduct or of a product produced because of apatented process knowing it to be especiallyadaptedforinfringingthepatentedinventionandnot suitable for substantial noninfringing use isliable jointly and severally with the infringer as acontributoryinfringer.Itmustbeproventhattheproduct can only be used for infringementpurposes. If it can be used for legitimatepurposes,theactionshallnotprosper.Q: What are the remedies of the owner of thepatentagainstinfringers?A:1.Civil action for infringement Theowner may bring a civil action with theappropriate Regional Trial Court torecover from infringer the damagessustainedbytheformer,plusattorneysfees and other litigation expenses, andto secure an injunction for theprotectionofhisrights.2.CriminalactionforinfringementIftheinfringement is repeated, the infringershall be criminally liable and uponconviction,shallsufferimprisonmentofnot less than six (6) months but notmorethanthree(3)yearsand/orafinenotlessthanP100,000.00butnotmorethanP300,000.003.Administrative remedy Where theamount of damages claimed is not lessthan P200,000.00, the patentee maychoose to file an administrative actionagainsttheinfringerwiththeBureauofLegal Affairs (BLA). The BLA can issueinjunctions, direct infringer to paypatentee damages, but unlike regularcourts, the BLA may not issue searchand seizure warrants or warrants ofarrest.Q: What are the limitations to the civil/criminalaction?A:1.No damages can be recovered for actsof infringement committed more thanfour (4) years before the filing of theactionforinfringement.(Sec.79,IPC)2.The criminal action prescribes in three(3) years from the commission of thecrime.(Sec.84,IPC)Q:Whocanfileanactionforinfringement?A:1.The patentee or his successorsininterest may file an action forinfringement.(CreserPrecisionSystems,INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ213Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 118708, Feb. 2,1998)2.Any foreign national or juridical entitywho meets the requirements of Sec. 3and not engaged in business in thePhilippines, to which a patent has beengrantedorassigned,whetherornotitislicensed to do business in thePhilippines.(Sec.77,IPC)Q: What are the defenses in an action forinfringement?A:1.Invalidityofthepatent;(Sec.81,IPC);2.Any of the grounds for cancellation ofpatents:a.That what is claimed as theinventionisnotneworpatentableb.That the patent does not disclosethe invention in a mannersufficiently clear and complete forit to be carried out by any personskilledintheart;orc.That the patent is contrary topublic order or morality. (Sec. 61,IPC)I.LICENSINGQ: What are the modes of obtaining license toexploitpatentrights?A:1.Voluntarylicensing(Sec.85,IPC)and2.Compulsorylicensing(Sec.93,IPC)Q:Whatisvoluntarylicensing?A: The grant by the patent owner to a thirdperson of the right to exploit a patentedinvention.Q: What are the rights of a licensor in voluntarylicensing?A:Intheabsenceofanyprovisiontothecontraryinthetechnologytransferarrangement,thegrantof a license shall not prevent the licensor fromgrantingfurtherlicensestothirdpersonnorfromexploiting the subject matter of the technologytransferarrangementhimself(Sec.89,IPC).Q:Whocangrantacompulsorylicense?A:1.TheDirectorofLegalAffairsmaygrantalicense to exploit a patented invention,even without the agreement of thepatent owner, in favor of any personwho has shown his capability to exploittheinvention(Sec.93,IPC).2.R.A. 9502 (Universally AccessibleCheaper and Quality Medicines Act of2008)howeveramendedSec.93sothatitistheDirectorGeneraloftheIPOwhomay grant a license to exploit patentedinvention under the groundsenumeratedtherein.Note: Clarification either by legislation ofjudicial interpretation as to who hasjurisdiction should be made to avoidconfusion. (Salao, Essential of IntellectualProperty Law: a Guidebook on RepublicActNo.8293andRelatedLaws,2008)Q: What are the grounds for compulsorylicensingandtheperiodforfilingapetition?A:1.Nationalemergency2.Where the public interest, at any timeafterthegrantofthepatent3.Where a judicial or administrative bodyhas determined that the manner ofexploitationbytheownerofthepatentorhislicenseeisanticompetitiveatanytimeafterthegrantofthepatent4.Incaseofpublicnoncommercialuseofthe patent by the patentee, withoutsatisfactoryreasonatanytimeafterthegrantofthepatent5.If the patented invention is not beingworked in the Philippines on acommercial scale, although capable ofbeing worked, without satisfactoryreason after the expiration of 4 yearsfromthedateoffilingoftheapplicationor 3 years from the date of the patentwhicheverislater.(Sec.93inrelationtoSec.94)6.Where the demand for patented drugsand medicines is not being met to anadequate extent and on reasonableterms, as determined by the Secretaryof the Department of Health (Sec. 10,R.A.9502)UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES214Q: Grounds for cancellation of the compulsorylicense?A:1.Groundforthegrantofthecompulsorylicense no longer exists and is unlikelytorecur;2.Licensee has neither begun to supplythe domestic market nor made seriouspreparationtherefore;3.Licensee has not complied with theprescribedtermsofthelicense.Q: Cezar works in a car manufacturing companyowned by Joab. Cezar is quite innovative andloves to tinker with things. With the materialsandpartsofthecar,hewasabletoinventagassaving device that will enable cars to consumeless gas. Francis, a coworker, saw how Cezarcreatedthedeviceandlikewise,cameupwithasimilar gadget, also using scrap materials andspare parts of the company. Thereafter, Francisfiled an application for registration of his devicewith the Bureau of Patents. Eighteen monthslater, Cezar filed his application for theregistration of his device with the Bureau ofPatents.Q:Isthegassavingdevicepatentable?Explain.A: Yes because it is new, it involves an inventivestepanditisindustriallyapplicable.Q:Assumingthatitispatentable,whoisentitledtothepatent?What,ifany,istheremedyofthelosingparty?A: Francis is entitled to the patent, because hehadtheearlierfilingdate.TheremedyofCezaristo file a petition in court for the cancellation ofthepatentofFrancisonthegroundthatheisthetrue and actual inventor, and ask for hissubstitutionaspatentee.(2005BarQuestion)Q: Supposing Albert Einstein were alive todayandhefiledwiththeIntellectualPropertyOffice(IPO) an application for patent for his theory ofrelativity expressed in the formula E=mc2. TheIPO disapproved Einstein's application on theground that his theory of relativity is notpatentable.IstheIPO'sactioncorrect?A: Yes, the IPOs action is correct. Section 22 oftheIntellectualPropertyLawexpresslystatesthatdiscoveries, scientific theories and mathematicalmethods are among those matters which are notpatentable.(2006BarQuestion)J.ASSIGNMENTANDTRANSMISSIONOFRIGHTSQ:Whataretheformsofassignment?A:1.Total assignment of entire right, titleorinterestinandtothepatentandtheinventioncoveredthereby.2.Partiala.Separate rights assignment of aspecificright(ex:righttosell)b.b.Pro Indiviso assignment of analiquot part which results in coownershipQ:Howisthetransferofrightseffected?A:1.Byinheritanceorbequest2.LicensecontractQ: What is the effect of an assignment of apatent?A:Theassignmentworksasanestoppelsbydeed,preventingtheassignorfromdenyingthenoveltyandutilityofthepatentedinventionwhensuedytheassigneeforinfringement.QWhatshouldbetheformofanassignment?A:1.Inwriting2.Acknowledged and certified before anotarypublicorotherofficerauthorizedtoperformnotarialacts3.RecordedintheIPOQ: What is the effect if the assignment was notrecordedintheIPO?A: A deed of assignment affecting title shall bevoid as against any subsequent purchaser ormortgagee for valuable consideration andwithout notice unless, it is so recorded in theOffice, within three (3) months from the date ofsaid instrument, or prior to the subsequentpurchaseormortgage.Evenwithoutrecordal,theinstrumentsarebindingupontheparties.Q: May a licensee maintain a suit forinfringement?A:GR: Only the patentees, his heirs, assignee,grantee or personal representatives may bringanactionforinfringement.INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ215XPN: If the licensing agreement provides thatthe licensee may bring an action forinfringement or if he was authorized to do soby the patentee through a special power ofattorney.III.TRADEMARKSA.DEFINITIONOFMARKS,COLLECTIVEMARKS,TRADENAMESQ: What is a trademark and how does it differfromatradename?A: Any visible sign capable of distinguishing thegoods(trademark)orservices(servicemark)ofanenterprise.Atradenameisanameordesignationidentifyingordistinguishinganenterprise.TRADEMARK TRADENAMEGoodsorservicesofferedbyaproprietororenterprisearedesignatedbytrademark(goods)orservicemarks(services).Anaturalorartificialpersonwhodoesbusinessandproducesorperformsthegoodsorservicesdesignatedbytrademarkorservicemark.Referstothegoods.Referstobusiness anditsgoodwill.Acquiredonly byregistration.Neednotberegistered.Q:Whatisacollectivemark?A:A"collectivemark"orcollectivetradename"isa mark or tradename used by the members of acooperative, an association or other collectivegroupororganization.(Sec.40,R.A.166)Q:Whatarethefunctionsoftrademark?A:1.To point out distinctly the origin orownership of the articles to which it isaffixed.2.To secure to him who has beeninstrumental in bringing into market asuperiorarticleormerchandisethefruitofhisindustryandskill3.To prevent fraud and imposition.(Etepha v. Director of Patents, G.R. No.L20635,Mar.31,1966)Q: S Development Corporation sued ShangrilaCorporation for using the "S" logo and thetradename"Shangrila".Theformerclaimsthatitwas the first to register the logo and thetradename in the Philippines and that it hadbeen using the same in its restaurant business.Shangrila Corporation counters that it is anaffiliate of an international organization whichhas been using such logo and tradename"Shangrila" for over 20 years. However,Shangrila Corporation registered the tradenameand logo in the Philippines only after the suitwasfiled.Whichofthetwocorporationshasabetterrighttousethelogoandthetradename?Explain.A: S Development Corporation has a better rightto use the logo and tradename, since it was thefirsttoregisterthelogoandtradename.AlternativeAnswer:S Development Corporation has a better right touse the logo and tradename, because itscertificate of registration upon which theinfringement case is based remains valid andsubsistingforaslongasithasnotbeencancelled.(ShangrilaInternationalHotelManagementv.CA,G.R. No. 111580, June 21, 2001) (2005 BarQuestion)Q: How does the international affiliation ofShangrila Corporation affect the outcome of thedispute?Explain.A:SinceShangrilaCorporationisnottheownerofthe logo and tradenamebut ismerely an affiliateof the international organization which has beenusingthemitisnottheowneranddoesnothavetherightsofanowner.(Sec.147,IPC)AlternativeAnswer:The international affiliation of ShangrilaCorporation shall have no effect on the outcomeof the dispute. Section 8 of the Paris Conventionprovides that "there is no automatic protectionaffordedanentitywhosetradenameisallegedtobe infringed through the use of that name as atrademark by a local entity." (Kabushi KaishaIsetan v. IAC, G.R. No. 75420, Nov. 15, 1991)(2005BarQuestion)Q: What are the salient features of the Parisconventionoftrademarks?A:1.National Treatment Principle foreignnationals are to be given the sametreatment in each of the membercountries as that country makesavailableinitsowncitizens.UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES2162.Right of Priority any person who hasduly filed registration for trademarkshall enjoy a right of priority of 6months(Rule203,TrademarkRules)3.ProtectionagainstUnfairCompetition4.Protection of Tradenames protectedin all countries without obligation offilingorregistration.5.ProtectionofWellKnownMarksB.ACQUISITIONOFOWNERSHIPOFMARKQ:Howaremarksacquired?A:Marksareacquiredsolelythroughregistration.(Sec.122,IPC)Q:Whatmarksmayberegistered?A: Any word, name, symbol, emblem, device,figure, sign, phrase, or any combination thereofexceptthoseenumeratedunderSection123,IPC.Q: What are the requirements for a mark to beregistered?A:1.A visible sign (not sounds or scents);and2.Capable of distinguishing ones goodsandservicesfromanother.Q:Whatisthedoctrineofsecondarymeaning?A: This doctrine is to the effect that a word orphrase originally incapable of exclusiveappropriation with reference to an article on themarket, because it is geographical or otherwisedescriptive,mayneverthelessbeusedexclusivelyby one producer with reference to his article solong as in that trade and to that branch of thepurchasing public, the word or phrase has cometo mean that the article was his product. (G. andC.MerriamCo. v.Saalfield,198F.369,373,citedin Ang v. Teodoro, G.R. No. L48226, Dec. 14,1942)Q: Is there an infringement of trademark whentwo similar goods use the same words, PALEPILSEN?A: No, because pale pilsen are generic wordsdescriptive of the color (pale) and of a type ofbeer(pilsen),whichisalightbohemianbeerwithstrong hops flavor that originated in the City ofPilsen in Czechoslovakia. Pilsen is a primarilygeographically descriptive word, hence, nonregistrable and not appropriable by any beermanufacturer (Asia Brewery, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.103543,July5,1993).Q: Who may file an opposition to trademarkregistrationandonwhatground?A: Any person who believes that he would bedamagedbytheregistrationofamarkmay,uponpaymentoftherequiredfeeandwithinthirty(30)days after the publication referred to inSubsection 133.2, file with the Office anoppositiontotheapplication.(Sec.134,IPC)Q: Laberge, Inc., manufactures and marketsaftershave lotion, shaving cream, deodorant,talcum powder and toilet soap, using thetrademark PRUT, which is registered with thePhil. Patent Office. Laberge does notmanufacture briefs and underwear and theseitems are not specified in the certificate ofregistration. JG who manufactures briefs andunderwear, wants to know whether, under ourlaws, he can use and register the trademarkPRUTE for his merchandise. What is youradvice?A: Yes, he can use and register the trademarkPRUTE for his merchandise. The trademarkregisteredinthenameofLabergeInc.coversonlyaftershave lotion, shaving cream, deodorant,talcum powder and toilet soap. It does not coverbriefsandunderwear.ThelimitofthetrademarkisstatedinthecertificateissuedtoLabergeInc.Itdoes not include briefs and underwear which aredifferent products protected by Labergestrademark. JG can register the trademarkPRUTE to cover its briefs and underwear(FabergeInc.v.IAC,G.R.No.71189,Nov.4,1992)(1994BarQuestion)C.ACQUISITIONANDOWNERSHIPOFTRADENAMEQ:Howaretradenamesacquired?A: Trade names or business names are acquiredthrough adoption and use. Registration is notrequired.(Sec.165,IPC)INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ217D.NONREGISTRABLEMARKSQ:Whatmarksmaynotberegistered?A:1.Consists of immoral, deceptive orscandalous matter or falsely suggest aconnection with persons, institutions,beliefs,ornationalsymbols2.Consists of the flag or coat of arms orother insignia of the Philippines or anyof its political subdivisions, or of anyforeignnation3.Consistsofaname,portraitorsignatureidentifying a particular living individualexcept by his written consent, or thename, signature, or portrait of adeceased President of the Philippines,during the life of his widow except bywrittenconsentofthewidow4.Identical with a registered markbelonging to a different proprietor or amark with an earlier filing or prioritydate,inrespectof:1.Thesamegoodsorservices,or2.Closely related goods or services,or3.If it nearly resembles such a markas to be likely to deceive or causeconfusion;5.Is identical with an internationally wellknown mark, whether or not it isregistered here, used for identical orsimilargoodsorservices6.Is identical with an internationally wellknown mark which is registered in thePhilippines with respect to nonsimilargoods or services. Provided, that theinterestsoftheowneroftheregisteredmark are likely to be damaged by suchuse7.Is likely to mislead the public as to thenature, quality, characteristics orgeographical origin of the goods orservices8.Consists exclusively of signs that aregeneric for the goods or services thattheyseektoidentify9.Consists exclusively of signs that havebecome customary or usual todesignate the goods or services ineveryday language and establishedtradepractice10.Consists exclusively that may serve intrade to designate the kind, quality,quantity, intended purpose, value,geographical origin, time or productionof the goods or rendering of theservices, or other characteristics of thegoodsorservices11.Consists of shapes that may benecessitated by technical factors or bythe nature of the goods themselves orfactorsthataffecttheirintrinsicvalue12.Consists of color alone, unless definedbyagivenform;or13.Is contrary to public order or morality.(Sec.123)E.PRIORUSEOFMARKASAREQUIREMENTQ:Istheprioruseofthemarkstillarequirementforregistration?A: No. Actual prior use in commerce in thePhilippines has been abolished as a condition fortheregistrationofatrademark.(RA8293)Q:Whenisnonuseexcused?A:1.If caused by circumstances arisingindependently of the will of the owner.Lackoffundsisnotanexcuse.2.Ausewhichdoesnotalteritsdistinctivecharacter though the use is differentfromtheforminwhichitisregistered.3.Use of mark in connection with one ormore of the goods/services belongingto the class in which the mark isregistered.4.Theuseofamarkbyacompanyrelatedtotheapplicant/registrant.5.The use of a mark by a personcontrolled by the registrant. (Section152,IPC)UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES218F.TESTTODETERMINECONFUSINGSIMILARITYBETWEENMARKSQ: What are the tests in determining whetherthereisatrademarkinfringement?A:1.Dominancy test Focuses on thesimilarity of the prevalent features ofthe competing marks. If the competingtrademark contains the main oressential or dominant features ofanother, and confusion is likely toresult, infringement takes place. (AsiaBrewery v. CA, G.R. No. 103543, 5 July1993)2.Totality or holistic test Confusingsimilarity is to be determined on thebasis of visual, aural, connotativecomparisons and overallimpressionsengendered by the marks incontroversy as they are encountered inthemarketplace.Note: The dominancy test only relies on visualcomparisons between two trademarks whereas thetotality or holistic test relies not only on the visualbut also on the aural and connotative comparisonsand overall impressions between the twotrademarks. (Societe Des Produits Nestl, S.A. v. CA,G.R.No.112012,Apr.4,2001)Q: N Corporation manufactures rubber shoesunder the trademark Jordann which hit thePhilippine market in 1985, and registered itstrademark with the Bureau of Patents,Trademarks and Technology in 1990. PKCompany also manufactures rubber shoes withthe trademark Javorski which it registeredwithBPTTTin1978.In1992,PKCoadoptedandcopied the design of N Corporations Jordannrubber shoes, both as to shape and color, butretained the trademark Javorski on itsproducts. May PK Company be held liable to NCo?Explain.A: PK Co may be liable for unfairly competingagainst N Co. By copying the design, shape andcolor of N Corporations Jordann rubber shoesand using the same in its rubber shoestrademarked Javorski, PK is obviously trying topass off its shoes for those of N. It is of nomoment that the trademark Javorski wasregistered ahead of the trademark Jordann.Priorityinregistrationisnotmaterialinanactionfor unfair competition as distinguished from anactionforinfringementoftrademark.Thebasisofan action for unfair competition is confusing andmisleading similarity in general appearance, notsimilarity of trademarks. (Converse Rubber Co. v.Jacinto Rubber & Plastics Co., G.R. Nos. 27425,30505,Apr.28,1980)(1996BarQuestion)Q: What is the socalled related goodsprinciple?A:Goodsarerelatedwhenthey;1)belongtothesame class or have the same descriptiveproperties; 2) when they possess the samephysical attributes or essential characteristicswithreferencetotheirform,composition,textureorquality.Q:Whatistheruleofidemsonans?A: Two names are said to be "idem sonantes" ifthe attentive ear finds difficulty in distinguishingthem when pronounced. (Martin v. State, 541S.W.2d605)Note:Similarityofsoundissufficienttorulethatthetwo marks are confusingly similar when applied tomerchandise of the same descriptive properties.(Marvex Commercial v. Director of Patent, G.R. No.L19297,Dec.22,1966)Q: What are the types of confusion that arisefrom the use of similar or colorable imitationmarks?A:1.Confusionofgoods(productconfusion);and2.Confusion of business (source or originconfusion). (McDonalds Corporation v.L.C.BigMakBurger,Inc.,etal.,G.R.No.143993,Aug.18,2004)Note: While there is confusion of goods when theproductsarecompeting,confusionofbusinessexistswhen the products are noncompeting but relatedenoughtoproduceconfusionofaffiliation.Q:Whatiscolorableimitation?A: Such a close or ingenious imitation as to becalculated to deceive ordinary persons, or such aresemblance to the original as to deceive anordinary purchaser giving such attention as apurchaser usually gives, as to cause him topurchase the one supposing it to be the other.(Societe des Produits Nestl, S.A. v. CA, G.R. No.112012,Apr.4,2001)INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ219G.WELLKNOWNMARKSQ: What constitutes an internationally wellknownmark?A:1.Considered by the competent authorityof the Philippines to be wellknowninternational and in the Philippines asthe mark of a person other than theapplicantorregistrant2.Need not be used or registered in thePhilippines3.Need not be known by the public atlarge but only by relevant sector of thepublic.Q: What does the law provide as regardsinternationallywellknownmarks?A:GR: Prohibition on subsequent registrationdoes not include services and goods ofdifferentnatureorkind.XPN:1.Iftheinternationallywellknownmarkisnot registered in the Philippines, theapplication for registration of asubsequent or similar mark can berejected only if the goods or servicesspecified in the application are similarto those of the internationally wellknownmark2.If the internationally wellknown markis registered in the Philippines, theapplication for registration of asubsequent or similar mark can berefused even if the goods or servicesspecified in the application are notidentical or similar to those of theinternationallywellknownmarkH.RIGHTSCONFERREDBYREGISTRATIONQ: What is the duration of a certificate oftrademarkregistration?A:10years,renewableforaperiodofanother10years. Each request for renewal must be madewithin 6 months before or after the expiration oftheregistration.Q: What are the rights of a registered markowner?A:1.Protection against reproduction, orimitation or unauthorized use of themark(infringementofmark)2.To stop entry of imported merchandiseinto the country containing a markidentical or similar to the registeredmark3.Totransferorlicenseoutthemark.I.USEBYTHIRDPARTIESOFNAMES,ETC.SIMILARTOREGISTEREDMARKQ: What is the effect of use of Indications bythird parties for purposes other than those forwhichthemarkisused?A:Registrationofthemarkshallnotconferontheregistered owner the right to preclude thirdparties from using bona fide their names,addresses, pseudonyms, a geographical name, orexact indications concerning the kind, quality,quantity, destination, value, place of origin, ortimeofproductionorofsupply,oftheirgoodsorservices.J.INFRINGEMENTANDREMEDIESQ:Whatistrademarkinfringement?A: The use without consent of the trademarkowner of any a) reproduction, b) counterfeit, c)copy or d) colorable imitation of any registeredmark or tradename in connection with the sale,offering for sale, or advertising of any goods,business or services on or in connection withwhich such use is likely to cause confusion ormistake or to deceive purchasers or others as tothe source or origin of such goods or services, oridentity of such business; or reproduce,counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate any suchmark or tradename and apply such reproduction,counterfeit,copyorcolorablelimitationtolabels,signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles oradvertisements intended to be used upon or inconnection with such goods, business or services(Esso Standard Eastern v. CA, G.R. No. L29971,Aug.31,1982)UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES220Q: What are the elements to be established intrademarkinfringement?A:1.Thevalidityofthemark2.Theplaintiffsownershipofthemark3.The use of the mark or its colorableimitationbytheallegedinfringerresultsin likelihood of confusion.(McDonaldsCorporationv.L.C.BigMakBurger, Inc., G.R. No. 143993, Aug 18,2004)Q:Whatismeantbynoncompetinggoods?A: Those which, though they are not in actualcompetition, are so related to each other that itmight reasonably be assumed that they originatefromonemanufacturer.Noncompetinggoods may also be those which,being entirely unrelated, couldnotreasonably beassumedtohaveacommonsource.Inthecaseofrelated goods, confusion of business could ariseout of the use of similar marks; in the latter caseof nonrelated goods, it could not.The vastmajority of courts today follow the moderntheory or concept of "related goods"which thecourt has likewise adopted and uniformlyrecognized and applied. (Esso Standard Eastern,Inc.v.CA,G.R.No.L29971,Aug.31,1982)Q: Is there infringement even if the goods arenoncompeting?A:GR:No.XPN:Ifitpreventsthenaturalexpansionofhisbusiness and, second, by having his businessreputation confused with and put at themercy of the second user. (Ang v. Teodoro,G.R.No.L48226,Dec.14,1942)Q: What are the remedies of the owner of thetrademarkagainstinfringers?A:1.Civil both civil and criminal actionsmay be filed with the Regional TrialCourts. The owner of the registeredmark may ask the court to issue apreliminary injunction to quicklyprevent infringer from causing damageto his business. Furthermore, the courtwillrequireinfringertopaydamagestothe owner of the mark provideddefendant is shown to have had noticeoftheregistrationofthemark(whichispresumed if a letter R within a circle isappended) and stop him permanentlyfromusingthemark.2.Criminaltheownerofthetrademarkmay ask the court to issue a searchwarrant and in appropriate cases,remediesavailableshallalsoincludetheseizure, forfeiture and destruction ofthe infringing goods and of anymaterials and implements thepredominant use of which has been inthecommissionoftheoffense.3.Administrative This remedy is thesameasinpatentinfringementcases.Ifthe amount of damages claimed is notless than P200,000.00, the registrantmay choose to seek redress against theinfringer by filing an administrativeaction against the infringer with theBureauofLegalAffairs.Q: How is the amount of damages in a civilactionforinfringementascertained?A: The owner of a trademark which has beeninfringedisentitledtoactualdamages:1.The reasonable profit which thecomplaining party would have made,hadthedefendantnotinfringedhissaidrights;or2.Theprofitwhichthedefendantactuallymadeoutofinfringement;or3.The court may award as damages areasonable percentage based upon theamount of gross sales of the defendantof the value of the services inconnection with which the mark ortradenamewasissued.Q: What courthas jurisdictionover violationsofintellectualpropertyrights?A: It is properly lodged with the Regional TrialCourt even if the penalty therefore isimprisonment of less than six years, or from 2 to5 years and a fine ranging from P50,000 toP200,000.Note: R.A. 8293 and R.A. 166 are special lawsconferring jurisdiction over violations of intellectualproperty rights to the Regional Trial Court. TheyshouldthereforeprevailoverR.A.No.7691,whichisa general law. (Samson v. Daway, G.R. No. 16005455,July21,2004)INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ221Q: What are the limitations on the actions forinfringement?A:1.Right of prior user registered markshall be without affect against anyperson who, in good faith, before filingor priority date, was using the mark forpurposes of his business. (Sec 159.1,IPC)2.Relief against publisher injunctionagainst future printing against aninnocentinfringerwhoisengagedsolelyin the business of printing the mark.(Sec.159.2,IPC)3.Relief against newspaper injunctionagainst the presentation of advertisingmatter in future issues of thenewspaper, magazine or in electroniccommunications in case theinfringement complained of iscontained in or is part of paidadvertisement in such materials. (Sec.159.3,IPC)K.UNFAIRCOMPETITIONQ: What distinguishes infringement oftrademarkfromunfaircompetition?A:INFRINGEMENTOFTRADEMARKUNFAIRCOMPETITIONUnauthorizeduseofatrademark.Thepassingoffofonesgoodsasthoseofanother.Fraudulentintentisunnecessary.Fraudulentintentisessential.Priorregistrationofthetrademarkisaprerequisitetotheaction.Registrationisnotnecessary.(DelMonteCorp.v.CA,G.R.No.78325,Jan.23,1990)Q: What is the right protected under unfaircompetition?A:Apersonwhohasidentifiedinthemindofthepublic the goods he manufactures or deals in, hisbusiness or services from those of others,whetherornotaregisteredmarkisemployed,hasapropertyrightinthegoodwillofthesaidgoods,business or services so identified, which will beprotected in the same manner as other propertyrights.(Sec.168.1,IPC)Q:Whoareguiltyofunfaircompetition?A:1.Anyperson,whoissellinghisgoodsandgives them the general appearance ofgoods of another manufacturer ordealer, either as to the goodsthemselves or in the wrapping of thepackages in which they are contained,or the devices or words thereon, or inany other feature of their appearance,which would be likely to influencepurchasers to believe that the goodsoffered are those of a manufacturer ordealer, other than the actualmanufacturer or dealer, or whootherwise clothes the goods with suchappearance as shall deceive the publicand defraud another of his legitimatetrade, or any subsequent vendor ofsuch goods or any agent of any vendorengagedinsellingsuchgoodswithalikepurpose;2.Any person who by any artifice, ordevice, or who employs any othermeans calculated to induce the falsebelief that such person is offering theservices of another who has identifiedsuch services in the mind of the public;or3.Any person who shall make any falsestatementinthecourseoftradeorwhoshall commit any other act contrary togood faith of a nature calculated todiscreditthegoods,businessorservicesofanother.(Sec.168.3)Q:Isthelawonunfaircompetitionbroaderthanthelawontrademark?A: Yes. For the latter (trademark infringement) ismore limited but it recognizes a more exclusiveright derived from the trademark adoption andregistration by the person whose goods orbusiness is first associated with it. Hence, even ifone fails to establish his exclusive property rightto a trademark, he may still obtain relief on theground of his competitors unfairness or fraud.Conduct constitutes unfair competition if theeffectistopassoffonthepublicthegoodsofoneman as the goods of another. (MightyCorporation v. E. & J. Gallo Winery, G.R. No.154342,July14,2004)UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES222Q:Whataretheelementsofanactionforunfaircompetition?A:1.Confusing similarity in the generalappearanceofthegoods;andNote:Theconfusingsimilaritymayormaynotresultfromsimilarityinthemarks,butmay result from other external factors inthe packaging or presentation of thegoods.2.Intenttodeceivethepublicanddefraudacompetitor.Note: The intent to deceive and defraudmay be inferred from the similarity inappearance of the goods as offered forsaletothepublic.Actualfraudulentintentneed not be shown. (McDonaldsCorporationv.L.C.BigMakBurger,Inc.,etal.,G.R.No.143993,Aug.18,2004)Q: The NBI found that SG Inc. is engaged in thereproduction and distribution of counterfeit"playstation games" and thus applied with theManila RTC warrants to search respondent'spremises in Cavite. RTC granted such warrantsandthus,theNBIservedthesearchwarrantsonthe subject premises. SG Inc. questioned thevalidity of the warrants due to wrong venuesince the RTC of Manila had no jurisdiction toissue a search warrant enforceable in Cavite. IsthecontentionofSGInc.correct?A: No, unfair competition is a transitory orcontinuingoffenseunderSection168ofRepublicActNo.8293.Assuch,petitionermayapplyforasearchwarrantinanycourtwhereanyelementoftheallegedoffensewascommitted,includinganyof the courts within Metro Manila and may bevalidly enforced in Cavite. (Sony ComputerEntertainment Inc. v. Supergreen Inc. G.R. No.161823,Mar.22,2007)L.TRADENAMESORBUSSINESSNAMESQ:Whatisatradenameorbusinessname?A: Any individual name or surname, firm name,device nor word used by manufacturers,industrialists, merchants, and others to identifytheir businesses, vocations or occupants(Converse rubber Corp. vs. Universal RubberProducts, GR No. L27425, L30505, April 28,1980).Q: What are the limitations on use of tradenameorbusinessname?A:Apersonmaynot:1.Use any name or designation contrarytopublicorderormorals2.Use a name if it is liable to deceivetrade circles or the public as to thenature of the enterprise identified bythatname.(Sec.165.1,IPC)3.Subsequentlyuseatradenamelikelytomisleadthepublicasathirdparty.(Sec.165.2,b,IPC)4.Copy or simulate the name of anydomestic product (for importedproducts).5.Copy or simulate a mark registered inaccordance with the provisions of IPC(forimportedproducts).6.Use mark or trade name calculated toinduce the public to believe that thearticle is manufactured in thePhilippines,orthatitismanufacturedinany foreign country or locality otherthan the country or locality where it isinfactmanufactured.Note: Items 4, 5 and 6 only applies toimported products and those importedarticles shall not be admitted to entry atany customhouse of the Philippines (Sec.166,IPC).Q:Howisthechangeintheownershipofatradenamemade?A: It shall be made with the transfer of theenterprise or part thereof identified by thatname.(Sec.165.4,IPC)M.COLLECTIVEMARKSQ:Whatisacollectivemark?A: A "collective mark" or collective tradename"isamarkortradenameusedbythemembersofa cooperative, an association or other collectivegroupororganization.(Sec.40,R.A.166)INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ223Q:Whatshouldanapplicationforregistrationofacollectivemarkcontain?A:1.Theapplicationshalldesignatethemarkasacollectivemark2.Accompanied by a copy of theagreement, if any, governing the use ofthecollectivemark(Sec.167.2,IPC)Q: What are the grounds for the cancellation ofcollectivemarks?A:1.The Court shall cancel the registrationof a collective mark if the personrequesting the cancellation proves thatonly the registered owner uses themark,2.Or that he uses or permits its use incontravention of the agreementsreferredtoinSubsection166.2,3.Or that he uses or permits its use in amannerliabletodeceivetradecirclesorthe public as to the origin or any othercommoncharacteristicsofthegoodsorservicesconcerned(Sec167.3).Note: The registration of a collective mark, or anapplication therefor shall not be the subject of alicensecontract.N.CRIMINALPENALTIESQ: What are the criminal penalties for unfaircompetition, infringement, false designation oforiginandfalserepresentations?A: A penalty of imprisonment from 2 years to5and a fine ranging from P50,000 to P200,000(Sec.170,IPC.)Q:Cantrademarkregistrationbecancelled?A:Yes,byanypersonwhobelievesthathewillbedamagedbytheregistrationofthemark:1.Within 5 years, from the date of theregistrationofthemark;or2.Atanytime;a.Iftheregisteredmarkbecomesthegeneric name for the goods orservices, or a portion thereof, forwhichitisregistered;b.Ifthemarkhasbeenabandoned;c.If its registration was obtainedfraudulently or contrary to theprovisionsoftheIPC;d.Iftheregisteredmarkisbeingusedby, or with the permission of, theregistrant so as to misrepresentthesourceofthegoodsorservicesonorinconnectionwithwhichthemarkisused;e.Nonuse of the mark within thePhilippines, without legitimatereason, for an uninterruptedperiodof3years.IV.COPYRIGHTSQ:Whatiscopyright?A: A right over literary and artistic works whichare original intellectual creations in the literaryand artistic domain protected from the momentofcreation.(Sec.171.1,IPC)A.BASICPRINCIPLESQ:Whataretheelementsofcopyrightability?A:1.OriginalityMusthavebeencreatedbythe authors own skill, labor, andjudgment without directly copying orevasivelyimitatingtheworkofanother.(Ching Kian Chuan v. CA, G.R. No.130360,Aug.15,2001)2.Expression Must be embodied in amedium sufficiently permanent orstable to permit it to be perceived,reproduced or communicated for aperiodmorethanatransitoryduration.Q:Whataretheelementsoforiginality?A:1.It is independently created by theauthor,and2.It possesses some minimal degree ofcreativityQ:Whendoescopyrightvest?A: Works are protected from the time of theircreation, irrespective of their mode or form ofexpression,aswellasoftheircontent,qualityandpurpose.UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES224B.COPYRIGHTABLEWORKSQ:Whatarecopyrightableworks?A:1.LiteraryandArtisticWorks BOLDMANGASPAPCOa.Books, pamphlets, articles andotherwritingsb.Lectures, sermons, addresses,dissertations prepared for Oraldelivery, whether or not reducedinwritingorothermaterialformc.Lettersd.Dramatic,choreographicworkse.Musicalcompositionsf.WorksofArtg.PeriodicalsandNewspapersh.Works relative to Geography,topography, architecture orsciencei.WorksofAppliedartj.Works of a Scientific or technicalcharacterk.Photographicworksl.Audiovisual works andcinematographicworksm.Pictorial illustrations andadvertisementsn.Computerprograms;ando.Other literary, scholarly, scientificandartisticworks.(Sec.172.1,IPC)2.DerivativeWorksa.Dramatizations, translations,adaptations, abridgements,arrangements, and otheralterations of literary or artisticworks;b.Collections of literary, scholarly, orartistic works and compilations ofdataandothermaterialswhichareoriginal by reason of the selectionor coordination or arrangement oftheircontents.(Sec.173)Note:DerivativeWorksshallbeprotectedas new works, provided that such newwork shall not affect the force of anysubsisting copyright upon the originalworksemployedoranypartthereof,orbeconstruedtoimplyanyrighttosuchuseofthe original works, or to secure or extendcopyright in such original works. (Sec.173.2,IPC)Q:P&Dwasgrantedacopyrightonthetechnicaldrawings of light boxes as "advertising displayunits". SMI, however, manufactured similar oridentical to the light box illustrated in thetechnical drawings copyrighted by P&D forleasingouttodifferentadvertisers.Wasthisaninfringement of P&Ds copyright over thetechnicaldrawings?A: No, P&Ds copyright protection extended onlytothetechnicaldrawingsandnottothelightboxitself. The light box was not a literary or artisticpiece which could be copyrighted under thecopyright law. If SMI reprinted P&Ds technicaldrawings for sale to the public without licensefrom P&D, then no doubt they would have beenguilty of copyright infringement. Only theexpression of an idea is protected by copyright,not the idea itself. If what P&D sought wasexclusivity over the light boxes, it should haveinstead procured a patent over the light boxesitself. (Pearl and Dean Inc. v. Shoe Mart Inc., GRNo.148222,Aug.15,2003)Q: What is the difference between collection ofworkandcollectivework?A:COLLECTIONOFWORK COLLECTIVEWORKItisnotnecessarythatthereisanagreement.Individualcontributioniscapableofcopyrightprotection.Thereisanagreementwherebytheauthorsboundthemselvesnottobeidentifiedwiththework.Q: Juan Xavier wrote and published a storysimilar to an unpublished copyrighted story ofManolingSantiago.Itwas,however,conclusivelyproven that Juan Xavier was not aware that thestory of Manoling Santiago was protected bycopyright. Manoling Santiago sued Juan Xavierfor infringement of copyright. Is Juan Xavierliable?A: Yes. Juan Xavier is liable for infringement ofcopyright. It is not necessary that Juan Xavier isaware that the story of Manoling Santiago wasprotected by copyright. The work of ManolingSantiago is protected from the time of itscreation.(1998BarQuestion)Note: There will still be originality sufficient towarrantcopyrightprotectioniftheauthor,throughhisskillandeffort,hascontributedadistinguishablevariation from the older works. In such a case, ofcourse, only those parts which are new areprotected by the new copyright. Hence, in such acase,thereisnocaseofinfringement.JuanXavierisINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ225no less an author because others have precededhim.C.NONCOPYRIGHTABLEWORKSQ:Whatarethesubjectsnotprotected?A:1.Idea, procedure, system, method oroperation, concept, principle, discoveryormeredataassuch2.News of the day and other items ofpressinformation3.Any official text of a legislative,administrativeorlegalnature,aswellasanyofficialtranslationthereof4.Pleadings5.Decisions of courts and tribunals thisrefers to original decisions and not toannotated decisions such as the SCRAor SCAD as these already fall under theclassification of derivative works, hencecopyrightable6.Any work of the Government of thePhilippinesGR: Conditions imposed prior theapproval of the government agency oroffice wherein the work is created shallbe necessary for exploitation of suchwork for profit. Such agency or office,may, among other things, impose asconditionthepaymentofroyalties.XPN: No prior approval or conditionsshall be required for the use of anypurpose of statutes, rules andregulations, and speeches, lectures,sermons, addresses, and dissertations,pronounced,read,orrenderedincourtsof justice, before administrationagencies,indeliberativeassembliesandinmeetingsofpubliccharacter.(Section176,IPC)7.TV programs, format of TV programs(Joaquinv.Drilon,G.R.No.108946,Jan.28,1999)8.Systemsofbookkeeping;and9.Statutes.Q: BJ Productions, Inc. (BJPI) is theholder/grantee of a copyright of Rhoda andMe, a dating game show aired from 1970 to1977. Subsequently, however, RPN aired thegameshowItsaDate,whichwasproducedbyIXL Productions, Inc. (IXL). As such, aninformationforcopyrightinfringementwasfiledagainst RPN. The DOJ Secretary directed theprosecutor to dismiss the case for lack ofprobable cause. Was the decision of the DOJSecretarycorrect?A:Yes,theformatofashowisnotcopyrightable.Thecopyrightlawenumeratestheclassesofworkentitled to copyright protection.The format ormechanics of a television show is not included inthe list of protected works. For this reason, theprotection afforded by the law cannot beextended to cover them. Copyright, in the strictsense of the term, is purely a statutory right. Itisa new or independent right granted by thestatute, and not simply a preexisting rightregulatedbythestatute.Beingastatutorygrant,the rights are only such as the statute confers,and may be obtained and enjoyed only withrespect to the subjects and by the persons, andon terms and conditions specified in the statute.The copyright does not extend to the generalconcept or format of its dating game show.(Joaquinv.Drilon,G.R.No.108946,Jan.28,1999)Q: Rural is a certified public utility providingtelephone service to several communities inManila. It obtains data for the directory fromsubscribers, who must provide their names andaddresses to obtain telephone service. FeistPublications, Inc., is a publishing company thatspecializes in areawide telephone directoriescovering a much larger geographic range thandirectories such as Rural's. Feist extracted thelistingsitneededfromRuralssdirectorywithoutitsconsent.Aredirectoriescopyrightable?A: No, directories are not copyrightable andtherefore the use of them does not constituteinfringement. The Intellectual Property Codemandates originality as a prerequisite forcopyright protection. This requirementnecessitates independent creation plus amodicum of creativity. Since facts do not owetheir origin to an act of authorship, they are notoriginal, and thus are not copyrightable. Acompilation is not copyrightable per se, but iscopyrightableonlyifitsfactshavebeen"selected,coordinated, or arranged in such a way that theresulting work as a whole constitutes an originalwork of authorship." Thus, the statute envisionsthat some ways of selecting, coordinating, andarranging data are not sufficiently original totrigger copyright protection. Even a compilationthat is copyrightable receives only limitedprotection, for the copyright does not extend tofacts contained in the compilation. (FeistPublications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co.,499U.S.340)UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES226D.RIGHTSOFACOPYRIGHTOWNERQ:Whatisthepresumptionofauthorship?A:Thenaturalpersonwhosenameisindicatedonaworkintheusualmannerastheauthorshall,inthe absence of proof to the contrary, presumedto be the author of the work. This is applicableeven if the name is a pseudonym, where thepseudonym leaves no doubt as to identity of theauthor.(Sec.219.1,IPC)The person or body corporate, whose nameappears on the audiovisual work in the usualmanner shall, in the absence of proof to thecontrary, be presumed to be the maker of saidwork.(Sec.219.2,IPC)Q:Whataretherightsofanauthor?A:1.EconomicrightsTherighttocarryout,authorizeorpreventthefollowingacts:a.Reproduction of the work orsubstantialportionthereofb.Carryout derivative work(dramatization, translation,adaptation, abridgement,arrangement or othertransformationofthework)c.First distribution of the originaland each copy of the work by saleor other forms of transfer ofownershipd.Rentalrighte.Publicdisplayf.Publicperformanceg.Other communications to thepublic.2.Moral rights For reasons ofprofessionalism and propriety, theauthorhastheright:a.To require that the authorship ofthe works be attributed to him(attributionright)b.To make any alterations of hiswork prior to, or to withhold itfrompublicationc.Righttopreserveintegrityofwork,objecttoanydistortion,mutilationorothermodificationwhichwouldbe prejudicial to his honor orreputation;andd.To restrain the use of his namewithrespecttoanyworknotofhisown creation or in a distortedversionofhiswork.(Sec.193,IPC)3.Droit de suite (Right to proceeds insubsequent transfers or follow uprights) This is an inalienable right oftheauthororhisheirstoreceivetotheextent of 5% of the gross proceeds ofthesaleorleaseofaworkofpaintingorsculpture or of the original manuscriptof a writer or composer, subsequent toitsfirstdispositionbytheauthor.Thefollowingworksarenotcovered:a.Printsb.Etchingsc.Engravingsd.Worksofappliedarte.Similar works wherein the authorprimarily derives gain from theproceeds of reproductions. (Sec.201,IPC)Q: ABC is the owner of certain musicalcompositions among which are the songsentitled: "Dahil Sa Iyo", "Sapagkat Ikaw AyAkin,""SapagkatKamiAyTaoLamang"and"TheNearness Of You. Soda Fountain Restauranthired a combo with professional singers to playand sing musical compositions to entertain andamuse customers. They performed the abovementioned compositions without any license orpermission from ABC to play or sing the same.Accordingly,ABCdemandedfromSodaFountainpayment of the necessary license fee for theplaying and singing of aforesaid compositionsbut the demand was ignored. ABC filed aninfringement case against Soda Fountain. Doesthe playing and singing of musical compositionsinside an establishment constitute publicperformanceforprofit?A:Yes.ThepatronsoftheSodaFountainpayonlyfor the food and drinks and apparently not forlistening to the music, but the music provided isfor the purpose of entertaining and amusing thecustomers in order to make the establishmentmoreattractiveanddesirable.Fortheplayingandsinging the musical compositions involved, thecombo was paid as independent contractors bySoda Fountain. It is therefore obvious that theexpenses entailed thereby are added to theoverhead of the restaurant which are eithereventually charged in the price of the food anddrinksortotheoveralltotalofadditionalincomeproducedbythebiggervolumeofbusinesswhichthe entertainment was programmed to attract.Consequently, it is beyond question that theINTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ227playing and singing of the combo in defendantappellee'srestaurantconstitutedperformanceforprofit. (FILSCAP v. Tan, G.R., No. L36402, Mar.16,1987)Q:MalangSantosdesignedforAmbassadorNerifor his personal christmas greetings for the year1959 a christmas card depicting a Philippinerural Christmas time scene. The following yearMcCullough Printing Company, without theknowledge and authority of Santos, displayedthe very design in its album of Christmas cardsandoffereditforsale.Santosfiledforcopyrightinfringement contending that the publication ofhisdesignwaslimitedasitwasintendedonlyforAmbassador Neris use, hence, it could not beused for public consumption. Is there copyrightinfringement?A:No.Iftherewereaconditionthatthecardsareto be limitedly published, then Ambassador Neriwould be the aggrieved party, and not Santos.And even if there was such a limited publicationor prohibition, the same was not shown on thefaceofthedesign.Whenthepurposeisalimitedpublication, but the effect is general publication,irrevocable rights thereupon become vested inthepublic,inconsequenceofwhichenforcementof the rights under a copyright becomesimpossible. (Malang v. McCullough PrintingCompany,G.R.No.L19439,Oct.31,1964)Q: May an author be compelled to perform hiscontract?A:Anauthorcannotbecompelledtoperformhiscontracttocreateaworkorforthepublicationofhis work already in existence. However, he maybe held liable for damages for breach of suchcontract.(Sec.195,IPC)Q:Whatisthenatureofmoralrights?A: These are personal rights independent fromtheeconomicrights.Beingapersonalright,itcanonly be given to a natural person. Hence, even ifhe has licensed or assigned his economic rights,he continues to enjoy the abovementionedmoral rights. (Amador, Intellectual PropertyFundamentals,2007)Q:Whatisthetermofmoralrights?A: It shall last during the lifetime of the authorand for fifty (50) years after his death and shallnot be assignable or subject to license. (Sec. 198,IPC)Note: The person/s to be charged with theposthumous enforcement of moral rights shall benamed in writing to be filed with the NationalLibrary. In default of such person or persons, suchenforcement shall devolve upon either the author'sheirs,andindefaultoftheheirs,theDirectoroftheNationalLibrary.(ibid.)Q:Whataretheexceptionstomoralrights?A:a.Absent any special contract at the timecreator licenses/permits another to usehis work, the following are deemed notto contravene creators moral rights,provided they are done in accordancewithreasonablecustomarystandardsorrequisitesofthemedium:a.Editingb.Arrangingc.Adaptationd.Dramatizatione.Mechanical and electricreproductionb.Complete destruction of workunconditionally transferred by creators.(Sec.197,IPC)Q:Canmoralrightsbewaived?A:GR: Moral rights can be waived in writing,expresslysostatingsuchwaiver.XPN:Eveninwriting,waiverisnotvalidif:1.Use the name of the author, title of hiswork, or his reputation with respect toany version/adaptation of his work,which because of alterations,substantially tend to injureliterary/artistic reputation of anotherauthor2.Use name of author in a work that hedidnotcreateQ:Whataretheneighboringrights?A: These are the rights of performers, producersof sound recording and broadcastingorganizations.UST GOLDEN NOTES 2011 MERCANTILELAWTEAM:ADVISER:ATTY.AMADOE.TAYAG;SUBJECTHEAD:EARLM.LOUIEMASACAYAN;ASST.SUBJECTHEADS:KIMVERLYA.ONG&JOANNAMAYD.G.PEADA;MEMBERS:MA.ELISAJONALYNA.BARQUEZ,ANGELIR.CARPIO,ANTONETTET.COMIA,ALBANROBERTLORENZOF.DEALBAN,JOEBENT.DEJESUS,CHRISJARKACEM.MAO,ANNAMARIEP.OBIETA,RUBYANNEB.PASCUA,FLORANGELAT.SABAUPAN,GIANFRANCESNICOLEC.VILCHES228Q:Whatisthescopeofaperformersrights?A: Performers shall enjoy the following exclusiverights:1.Asregardstheirperformances,therightofauthorizing:a.The broadcasting and othercommunication to the public oftheirperformance;andb.The fixation of their unfixedperformance.2.The right of authorizing the direct orindirect reproduction of theirperformancesfixedinsoundrecordings,inanymannerorform;3.The right of authorizing the first publicdistributionoftheoriginalandcopiesoftheir performance fixed in the soundrecording through sale or rental orotherformsoftransferofownership;4.The right of authorizing the commercialrental to the public of the original andcopies of their performances fixed insound recordings, even afterdistribution of them by, or pursuant totheauthorizationbytheperformer;and5.The right of authorizing the makingavailable to the public of theirperformancesfixedinsoundrecordings,bywireorwirelessmeans,insuchawaythat members of the public may accessthemfromaplaceandtimeindividuallychosenbythem.(Sec.203,IPC)Q:Whatarethemoralrightsofperformers?A: The performer, shall, as regards his live auralperformances or performances fixed in soundrecordings,havetherighttoclaimtobeidentifiedas the performer of his performances, exceptwhere the omission is dictated by the manner oftheuseoftheperformance,andtoobjecttoanydistortion,mutilationorothermodificationofhisperformances that would be prejudicial to hisreputation.Q:Whenareperformersrightslost?A:Onceaperformerhasauthorizedbroadcastingorfixationofhisperformance.(Sec205,IPC)Note: Fair use and limitations to copyrights shallapplymutatismutandistoperformers.(Ibid.)Q: When are performers entitled to additionalremunerationontheirperformance?A: The performer shall be entitled to anadditionalremunerationequivalenttoatleast5%of the original compensation he received for thefirst communication or broadcast in everycommunication to the public or broadcast of aperformance subsequent to the firstcommunication or broadcast, unless otherwiseprovidedinthecontract.(Sec.206,IPC)Q:Whatisthescopeoftherightsofproducersonsoundrecordings?A: Producers of sound recordings shall enjoy thefollowingexclusiverights:1.The right to authorize the direct orindirect reproduction of their soundrecordings, in any manner or form; theplacing of these reproductions in themarketandtherightofrentalorlending2.The right to authorize the first publicdistributionoftheoriginalandcopiesoftheir sound recordings through sale orrental or other forms of transferringownership;and3.The right to authorize the commercialrental to the public of the original andcopies of their sound recordings, evenafter distribution by them by orpursuant to authorization by theproducer.(Sec.208,IPC)Note: Fair use and limitations to copyrights shallapply mutatis mutandis to performers. (Sec. 210,IPC)Q: What is the scope of the rights ofbroadcastingorganizations?A: Broadcasting organizations shall enjoy theexclusive right to carry out, authorize or preventanyofthefollowingacts:1.Therebroadcastingoftheirbroadcasts2.The recording in any manner, includingthe making of films or the use of videotape, of their broadcasts for thepurposeofcommunicationtothepublicoftelevisionbroadcastsofthesame3.The use of such records for freshtransmissions or for fresh recording.(Sec.211,IPC)INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW UNIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMASFac ul t a d de De r e c h o Ci v i l ACADEMICSCHAIR:LESTERJAYALANE.FLORESIIVICECHAIRSFORACADEMICS:KARENJOYG.SABUGO&JOHNHENRYC.MENDOZAVICECHAIRFORADMINISTRATIONANDFINANCE:JEANELLEC.LEEVICECHAIRSFORLAYOUTANDDESIGN:EARLLOUIEM.MASACAYAN&THEENAC.MARTINEZ229Q:Whenareneighboringrightsnotapplicable?A:1.Exclusive use of a natural person forownpersonalpurposes2.Short excerpts for reporting currentevents3.Sole use for the purpose of teaching orforscientificresearch4.FairuseofthebroadcastQ: What are the term of protection given toperformers, producers and broadcastingorganizations?A:1.For performances not incorporated inrecordings,50yearsfromtheendoftheyear in which the performance tookplace;and2.For sound or image and soundrecordings and for performancesincorporatedtherein,50yearsfromtheend of the year in which the recordingtookplace.3.In case of broadcasts, the term shall be20 years from the date the broadcasttook place. The extended term sh