When asked by the above question,
I can’t help but muse if our copyright law really needs changing. Is it really something that an ordinary
person would care? Sure, many people will care for some of their rights- --the
right to vote, the right to own a property, or even the right to claim Sabah. But I don’t think a layman would be eager in
clicking a yahoo headline which read “Philippine
copyright law up for reform!” I even took a quick social weather survey and
ask people in my household and neighborhood if they know or care about
copyright law reforms. Surely, I didn’t
get excited glees of yes, I do. The
replies I received were; “I’m sorry, what’s that?”, “Really, we have copyright
laws!”, and “That’s like when you Xeroxed stuff, right?” The last answer may be
a little encouraging, but all in all, I can generally conclude that not many
people know or even care about our copyright laws. Interesting enough is that
the people I interviewed have college degrees and a couple of them even have
post graduate degrees. This just goes to show that copyright law even with learned
individuals, is not everybody’s cup of tea.
And for some people, copyright law
is just a means to stop certain liberties such as downloading music and movie
files, photocopying documents and sharing files online. They think that this law will make it more
costly and more tasking for them to listen to their MP3s, to watch their AVI’s
and to read their PDF’s. Some feel that
if they can the download the materials freely in torrents and direct download
platforms then the author/artist must have already waived their copyrights. And for some transferring and sharing
materials are more economical than buying them in records stores and
bookstores. These hold true to some Pinoy’s mantra “Why pay if you can get it
for free?”
And even if some people know
perfectly well the provisions of the law, not many of them will be afraid to
violate them. Give the lax implementation and seemingly obvious and rampant
violations of these provisions; many will be encouraged to disregard the law. It’s just way too easy to buy pirated dvd’s, fake
artworks and unlicensed computer software. Even with students of prestigious
institutions of higher learning, some rampant violations can be observed such
as the reproduction of multiple copies of an entire published work via the
method called “book-alike”. This method although against Section 187 of RA8293
has become an acceptable practice even of students of the law. To sum it all
up, copyright law to some is boring, a hindrance, and unsupervised.
But as a law student, I feel that
I should know better. I should know the purpose of the copyright law. And that
is to help protect the right of the artist/author on the work that he
diligently toiled. His artistry should
be protected as well as so as not to deprive him of the economic benefits as
well as the proper recognition of his work.
In this way, the craft and even the industry will be protected. It will
also serve as an inspiration to the younger generations to pursue and develop
such kind of artistic/literary craft. Another
important reason why copyright needs to be protected is that it will give great
minds chance to showcase their talents and not be afraid of copycats infringing
them. Copyright law also protects the
author from having his worked misused and/or abused by others. The author has the moral right on how his
work can be displayed or used and this also guarantees that his reputation is
protected. Even long after the author has gone, his copyrights are still
protected.
For us to be on the same page and
rowing the same boat, allow me first to cite the following definitions lifted
from RA 8293 under Part IV or the Law on Copyright:
Author
- is the natural person who has created the work;
Collective
work - is a work which has been created by two (2) or more natural persons at
the initiative and under the direction of another with the understanding that
it will be disclosed by the latter under his own name and that contributing
natural persons will not be identified;
Communication
to the public - the making of a work available to the public by wire or
wireless means in such a way that members of the public may access these works
from a place and time individually chosen by them;
Computer
- is an electronic or similar device having information-processing
capabilities;
Computer
program - is a set of instructions expressed in words, codes, schemes or in any
other form, which is capable when incorporated in a medium that the computer
can read, of causing the computer to perform or achieve a particular task or
result;
Public
lending - is the transfer of possession of the original or a copy of a work or
sound recording for a limited period, for non-prof it purposes, by an
institution the services of which are available to the public, such as public
library or archive;
Public
performance - in the case of a work other than an audiovisual work, is the
recitation, playing, dancing, acting or otherwise performing the work, either
directly or by means of any device or process; in the case of an audiovisual
work, the showing of its images in sequence and the making of the sounds
accompanying it audible; and, in the case of a sound recording, making the
recorded sounds audible at a place or at places where persons outside the
normal circle of a family and that family's closest social acquaintances are or
can be present, irrespective of whether they are or can be present at the same
place and at the same time, or at different places and/or at different times,
and where the performance can be perceived without the need for communication within
the meaning of Subsection 171.3;
Published
works - means works, which, with the consent of the authors, are made available
to the public by wire or wireless means in such a way that members of the
public may access these works from a place and time individually chosen by
them: Provided, That availability of such copies has been such, as to satisfy
the reasonable requirements of the public, having regard to the nature of the
work;
Rental
- is the transfer of the possession of the original or a copy of a work or a
sound recording for a limited period of time, for prof it-making purposes;
Reproduction
- is the making of one (1) or more copies of a work or a sound recording in any
manner or form (Sec. 41 (E), P.D. No. 49 a);
Work
of applied art- is an artistic creation with utilitarian functions or
incorporated in a useful article, whether made by hand or produced on an
industrial scale;
Work
of the Government of the Philippines - is a work created by an officer or
employee of the Philippine Government or any of its subdivisions and
instrumentalities, including government-owned or controlled corporations as a
part of his regularly prescribed official duties.
According to the law, literary
and artistic works and some derivative works are original intellectual
creations in the literary and artistic domain protected from their moment of
creation. Copyrights or economic rights
shall consist the exclusive right to carry out, authorize or prevent the
following acts: reproduction of the work, adaptations and abridgements, rental
of the original copy, public display/performance, and other communications to
the public. There are also acts that shall not constitute infringement of
copyright. Some of which are:
a)
Works
made acceptable to the public if done privately and free of charge;
b)
Quotations
from a published work if they are compatible with fair use;
c)
Reproduction
of current political, social, economic et al, if delivered in public;
d)
Communication
to the public or reproduction as part of reports of current events or for
teaching purposes;
e)
The
use is under the direction or control of the Government, National Library or by
educational, scientific, or professional institutions where such use is in the
public interest;
f)
For
the purpose of judicial proceedings or the giving of professional advice of a
legal practitioner.
The Copyright Law (RA 8293) was
passed last June 6, 1997 and understandably the technology at that time was
simpler as compared with what we have now. Nowadays, file sharing, music and
video downloading are easier than ever.
Some of the internet advances such as Facebook, Youtube, Cloud Servers
came out way after the law was passed. And as such, certain provisions of the laws
may no longer be applicable. I have
cited below certain sections in the law that I believe needs revising to meet the
challenges of today’s technology as well as to be abreast with the development
not yet apparent whence the law was drafted.
Section 187 states that only a
single copy will be made for the reproduction of a published work and exclusive
for research and private study. Given
the advances in technology where a single file can be electronically stored in
several virtual drives such as google drive and dropbox. This current section has no specific
provisions to confirm if indeed it is acceptable to store one file in several
locations. Also, some virtual folder can
be shared with other users electronically.
Will this constitute an infringement of the rights of the author based
on Section 187?
Section 188 states that any library or archive whose activities
are not for profit may, without the authorization of the author of copyright
owner, make a single copy of the work by reprographic reproduction. This section again does not specify if the
allowable copy of the work can be stored electronically in multiple virtual
folders. Also, it does not have a
provision for e-library that have been the trend of many public and private
institutions. It is as well not clear if
a certain library chooses to employ more than one type of archiving software or
technology. Two or more archives may be chosen so as to mitigate and prepare
for virus attacks. Again, will this be
considered a breach of this specific section?
Section 189 of the law states that
, the reproduction in one (1) back-up
copy or adaptation of a computer program shall be permitted, without the authorization
of the author of , or other owner of copyright in, a computer program, by the lawful
owner of that computer program: Provided, That the copy or adaptation is
necessary for:
(a) The use of the
computer program in conjunction with a computer f or the purpose, and to the
extent, for which the computer program has been obtained; and
(b) Archival
purposes, and, f or the replacement of the lawfully owned copy of the computer
program in the event that the lawfully obtained copy of the computer program is
lost, destroyed or rendered unusable.
Again, this section has no
provisions to deal with the advances in technology such as the virtual folders,
cloud computing, file sharing and archiving software.
As such, I am of the same opinion
that reforms to the copyright laws should be made as soon as possible. Thus, the direction on the reforms for the
copyright law should consider the following:
a)
Philippines
is home to many wonderful and creative writers/artists and inventors/innovators
-
The
artistic prowess of the Filipinos is renowned worldwide. Top of mind names are Lea Salonga, Apl.De.Ap,
Charice Pempengco, and Jessica Sanchez. We also have very talented painters and
architects in the names of Juan Nakpil, Fernando Amorsolo, Juan Luna and Juan
Arellano. The list goes on and on and
this only goes to show that on top of our very rich natural resources is a very
talented pool of world class artists. Thus reforms to the copyright law should
center on the protection of these talents. Also, the reforms should consider
the protection of the next generation of artists.
b)
Philippines
has a very strong foundation in IT and is home to many exceptional programmers
and techies
-
With
the many advances in IT, the Filipinos were very quick to adapt. Many of world’s biggest IT companies are in
the Philippines. A greater bulk of our
service sector is in the IT industry. We as well have very famous and infamous
IT programmers like that guy that created the love bug virus. Indeed, our IT personnel are as equally
important as our artists and also deserve the utmost protection when it comes
to copyright laws.
c)
Advances
in technology are in a very rapid pace
-
As
I have indicated above, certain advances in technology have posed some
questions in certain provisions of the law.
I hope that the new laws will be able address them and if possible
prepare for future developments in technology.
d)
Reforms
should be more flexible with the needs of Filipinos
-
The
new copyright laws should also be friendlier to the common Filipino. It should be able to address our insatiable
need for information, our increasing propensity for new media, and our innate acumen
to save on things. Let’s face it, not everyone can afford a new published Bob
Ong book. I’m not saying that we give
the publishing houses a run for their money. What I’m saying is that literature
and other art works should be made more accessible to the common ‘tao’ without
sacrificing the moral and economic rights of the artist.
Lastly, I hope our lawmakers are
able to contemplate on the needs of the artist/programmers as well as the needs
of the common tao when revising our copyright law. I hope it will be dynamic and will last for a
longer period of time. I also hope that
it will pinpoint the perceived weaknesses of the current law. Lastly, I hope that the reforms in the
copyright laws will be a win-win for the stakeholders.
No comments:
Post a Comment