BENGZON

NEGRE
UNTALAN
Intellectual Property Attorneys

COPYRIGHT LAW

FERDINAND NEGRE June 1, 2019

http://adage.com/article/advertising/philippines-tourism-bureau-drops-mccann-demands-apology/309416/
What about this?
Outline

 Extent of protection: Originality + Creativity in Works

 Economic Rights
 Moral Rights

 Exceptions:

 Public Domain;
◼Section 175 - Unprotected Subject Matter
◼Expired Term
 Limitations:

 Fair Use as a matter right

◼Section 184 and Section 185
 Plagiarism
Extent of Protection: Original Works

 Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. - 172.1.

Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to
as "works", are original intellectual creations in the
literary and artistic domain protected from the
moment of their creation…
Extent of Protection: Original Works

 Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. - 172.1.

Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to
as "works," are original intellectual creations in the
literary and artistic domain protected from the
moment of their creation…
Extent of Protection: Original Works

 Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. - 172.1.

Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to
as "works," are original intellectual creations in the
literary and artistic domain protected from the
moment of their creation…
 Subject Matter of Copyright: “Work”

Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. …shall include:

(a) Books, pamphlets, articles and other writings;
(b) Periodicals and newspapers;
(c) Lectures, sermons, addresses, dissertations prepared for
oral delivery, whether or not reduced in writing or other
material form;
(d) Letters;
(e) Dramatic or dramatico-musical compositions;
choreographic works or entertainment in dumb shows;
(f) Musical compositions, with or without words;
(g) Works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture,
engraving, lithography or other works of art; models or
designs for works of art;
(h) Original ornamental designs or models for articles of
manufacture, whether or not registrable as an industrial
design, and other works of applied art;
 Subject Matter of Copyright: “Work”

Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. –

(i) Illustrations, maps, plans, sketches, charts and three-
dimensional works relative to geography, topography,
architecture or science;
(j) Drawings or plastic works of a scientific or technical character;
(k) Photographic works including works produced by a process
analogous to photography; lantern slides;
(l) Audiovisual works and cinematographic works and works
produced by a process analogous to cinematography or any
process for making audio-visual recordings;
(m) Pictorial illustrations and advertisements;
(n) Computer programs; and
(o) Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works.
 Audiovisual & cinematographic
works

Musical compositions

Books, articles &

other writings

Dramatic or dramatico-
musical compositions
Computer
programs
Letters

Works of drawing, painting,

architecture, sculpture and other
works of art
Extent of Protection: Original Works

 Section 172. Literary and Artistic Works. - 172.1.

Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to
as "works," are original intellectual creations in the
literary and artistic domain protected from the
moment of their creation…
Review: Acquisition of Copyright

▪ No formalities required (Automatic Protection), but

it must be original and it must be an artistic or
literary work:
a. Original
– personal involvement or creativity:
authorship
– “a modicum level of creativity”
b. Artistic or Literary Work = Expression
– Vs. Functional or Technical Work
Review: Acquisition of Copyright

▪ Automatic Protection: “From Moment of Creation”

a. Registration?
b. Deposit?
c. ©?
d. Fixed or Expressed?

Proof of Ownership?
Sec. 218 – Affidavit Evidence
 Ownership of Copyright

SECTION 178. Rules on Copyright Ownership. -

Copyright ownership shall be governed by the following
rules:
178.1 …copyright shall belong to the author of the work;
Q: Who is an author?
178.2. In the case of works of joint authorship, the co-
authors shall be the original owners of the copyright and
in the absence of agreement, their rights shall be
governed by the rules on co-ownership. If, however, a
work of joint authorship consists of parts that can be
used separately and the author of each part can be
identified, the author of each part shall be the original
owner of the copyright in the part that he has created;
Ownership of Copyright

Work Under Employment

 178.3. In the case of work created by an author

during and in the course of his employment, the
copyright shall belong to:
(a) The employee, if the creation of the object of
copyright is not a part of his regular duties even if
the employee uses the time, facilities and materials
of the employer.
(b) The employer, if the work is the result of the
performance of his regularly-assigned duties, unless
there is an agreement, express or implied, to the
contrary.
Ownership of Copyright

Commissioned Work

178.4. In the case of a work commissioned by a

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

178.5. In the case of audiovisual work, the copyright

shall belong to the producer, the author of the
scenario, the composer of the music, the film director,
and the author of the work so adapted. However, …the
producer shall exercise the copyright to an extent
required for the exhibition of the work in any manner,
except for the right to collect performing license fees
for the performance of musical compositions, with or
without words, which are incorporated into the work;
Ownership of Copyright

Sec. 178.6. In respect of letters, the copyright shall

belong to the writer subject to the provisions of
Article 723 of the Civil Code.

Sec. 179. Anonymous and Pseudonymous Works. -

For purposes of this Act, the publishers shall be
deemed to represent the authors of articles and
other writings published without the names of the
authors or under pseudonyms, unless the contrary
appears, or the pseudonyms or adopted name
leaves no doubt as to the author's identity, or if the
author of the anonymous works discloses his
identity.
Extent of Protection: Derivative Works

Section 173. Derivative Works. - 173.1. The following

derivative works shall also be protected by copyright:

(a) Dramatizations, translations, adaptations,

abridgments, arrangements, and other alterations of
literary or artistic works; and

(b) Collections of literary, scholarly or artistic

works, and compilations of data and other materials
which are original by reason of the selection or
coordination or arrangement of their contents.
DERIVATIVE WORKS

 Dramatizations,
translations,
arrangements
and other
alterations of
literary or
artistic works
DERIVATIVE WORKS

 Collections of
literary, scholarly or
artistic works, and
compilations of data
which are original by
reason of selection
or coordination or
arrangement of their
contents
Extent of Protection: Derivative Works

173.2. The works referred to in paragraphs (a) and (b) of

Subsection 173.1 shall be protected as new works:
Provided however, That such new work shall not affect
the force of any subsisting copyright upon the original
works employed or any part thereof, or be construed to
imply any right to such use of the original works, or to
secure or extend copyright in such original works.
Extent of Protection: Economic Rights

1. Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the

work;
2. Dramatization, translation, adaptation, abridgment,
arrangement;
3. The first public distribution of the original and each
copy of the work;
4. Rental of an audiovisual or cinematographic work, a
work embodied in a sound recording, a computer
program, a compilation of data and other materials or
a musical work in graphic form,;
5. Public display of the original or a copy of the work;
6. Public performance of the work; and
7. Other communication to the public of the work. (Sec.
177, IPC)
 DURATION OF ECONOMIC RIGHTS

WORK TERM OF PROTECTION

Literary and Artistic Works Life of the author + 50 years after his
Derivative Works death

Joint Authorship Life of the last surviving author + 50

years after his death
Anonymous or Pseudonymous Works 50 years from date it is first lawfully
published
If before expiration of period, identity is
revealed or no longer in doubt, the rule
on Literary and Joint Authorship applies
Work of Applied Art 25 years from date of making
Photographic works If published – 50 years from publication
Audiovisual works Unpublished – 50 years from making
Performances not incorporated in 50 years from end of the year in which
recordings performance took place
Sound recordings and performances 50 years from end of the year in which
DURATION OF ECONOMIC RIGHTS

 For the term of protection subsequent to

death of author, when do you start count?
DURATION OF ECONOMIC RIGHTS

 From date of
death or
publication
 BUT... Term
begins from
January 1 of the
year following
the event that
gave rise to them
Lyman Frank Baum
(May 15, 1856 – May 6, 1919)
DURATION OF ECONOMIC RIGHTS

(August 25, 1939) (February 14, 2013)

MORAL RIGHTS

Allows the author to take certain

actions to preserve the personal
link between himself and the work.
MORAL RIGHTS

1. Right of Attribution [Paternity Right]

2. Alteration and Non-Publication Right
3. Right to Preservation of Integrity
4. Right against False Attribution
DURATION OF MORAL RIGHTS

 “During the lifetime of the author and in

perpetuity after his death” - Paternity
Right/Right of Attribution

 Coterminous with Economic Rights -

Alteration and Non-Publication Right; Right
to Preservation of Integrity; and Right
against False Attribution
EXPIRATION OF COPYRIGHT

 Transfers to the PUBLIC DOMAIN

 Examples:
Copyright Infringement

Elements:

 Ownership of a valid copyright

◼Proof of Ownership: Sec. 218 – Affidavit Evidence
 Exercise of any of the exclusive economic rights in
Section 177
 without the consent of the copyright owner
◼UNLESS: FAIR USE
Copyright Infringement

1. Is there an unauthorized use of a valid

copyright? If yes…
2. Is the use fair? If not…

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.
 Copyright Infringement

1. Is there an unauthorized use of a valid copyright? If

yes…
2. Is the use fair? If not…

COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT.

Meaning,…

NOT ALL ACTS OF COPYING IS INFRINGEMENT!

 Copyright and Public Domain [Exceptions]

Works not Protected:

a. Duration of Copyright – Expired?
b. Unprotected Subject Matter
o Ideas, procedure, system, method of operation,
concept, principle, discovery and mere data (Sec. 175)
o News of the day & mere items of press information
(Sec. 175)
o …even if they are expressed, explained, illustrated
or embodied in a work
o Official text (and official translations thereof) of a
legislative, administrative or legal nature (Sec. 175)
o Works of the Government (Sec. 176)
Copyright Infringement and Fair Use
[Limitations]

Limitations
▪ The Fair Use Exception – fair use for criticism,
comment, news reporting, teaching [C-C-N-T]
including limited [multiple] number of copies for
classroom use, scholarship, research and similar
purposes [CSR] . (Sec. 185)
Copyright Infringement and Fair Use

Factors to be considered in determining fair use (Sec.

185)
1. Purpose & character of the use
2. Nature of the copyrighted work
3. Amount & substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; &
4. Effect of the use upon the potential market for or
value of the copyrighted work.
Copyright Infringement

 Who is liable for infringement?

 Directly commits an infringement;
 Benefits from the infringing activity of another
person who commits an infringement if the
person benefiting has been given notice of the
infringing activity and has the right and ability
to control the activities of the other person;
 With knowledge of infringing activity, induces,
causes or materially contributes to the
infringing conduct of another

Q: is hacking a copyright infringement?

Copyright Infringement

Section 216. Remedies for Infringement. - 216.1. Any person

infringing a right protected under this law shall be liable:

(a) To an injunction restraining such infringement. The court

may also order the defendant to desist from an infringement,
among others, to prevent the entry into the channels of commerce
of imported goods that involve an infringement, immediately after
customs clearance of such goods.

(b) Pay to the copyright proprietor or his assigns or heirs such

actual damages, including legal costs and other expenses, as he
may have incurred due to the infringement as well as the profits
the infringer may have made due to such infringement, and in
proving profits the plaintiff shall be required to prove sales only
and the defendant shall be required to prove every element of cost
which he claims, or, in lieu of actual damages and profits, such
damages which to the court shall appear to be just and shall not be
regarded as penalty.
 Copyright Infringement

Section 216. Remedies for Infringement. - 216.1. Any person infringing

a right protected under this law shall be liable:
(c) Deliver under oath, for impounding during the pendency of the
action, upon such terms and conditions as the court may prescribe,
sales invoices and other documents evidencing sales, all articles and
their packaging alleged to infringe a copyright...
(d) Deliver under oath for destruction without any compensation
all infringing copies or devices, as well as all plates, molds, or other
means for making such infringing copies as the court may order.
(e) Such other terms and conditions, including the payment of
moral and exemplary damages,… and the destruction of infringing
copies of the work even in the event of acquittal in a criminal case.
216.2. In an infringement action, the court shall also have the power
to order the seizure and impounding of any article which may serve as
evidence in the court proceedings.
Application: Case Law

ABS-CBN v. Gozon
G.R. No. 195956, March 11, 2015
J. Leonen
BENGZON
NEGRE
UNTALAN
Intellectual Property Attorneys

ABS-CBN v. Gozon
 First Issue

Is the video footage subject of copyright protection? Is a

fact copyrightable?

“Section 175. Unprotected Subject Matter. -

Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 172 and
173, no protection shall extend, under this law, to any
idea, procedure, system, method or operation, concept,
principle, discovery or mere data as such, even if they
are expressed, explained, illustrated or embodied in a
work; news of the day and other miscellaneous facts
having the character of mere items of press information;
or any official text of a legislative, administrative or
legal nature, as well as any official translation thereof.”
Is a fact copyrightable?

Television news footage is an expression of the news

“News or the event itself is not copyrightable.

However, an event can be captured and presented
in a specific medium. As recognized by this court
in Joaquin, television "involves a whole spectrum of
visuals and effects, video and audio." News
coverage in television involves framing shots, using
images, graphics, and sound effects. It involves
creative process and originality. Television news
footage is an expression of the news.” [ABS-CBN v.
Gozon]
“The idea/expression dichotomy is a complex matter if
one is trying to determine whether a certain material is
a copy of another. This dichotomy would be more
relevant in determining, for instance, whether a stage
play was an infringement of an author's book involving
the same characters and setting. In this case, however,
respondents admitted that the material under review —
which is the subject of the controversy — is an exact
copy of the original. Respondents did not subject ABS-
CBN's footage to any editing of their own. The news
footage did not undergo any transformation where there
is a need to track elements of the original.”
The Second Issue

 Is good faith (lack of knowledge of, OR intent to

commit infringement), available as defense in
copyright infringement cases?
 Volition vs. Criminal Intent
 5 seconds of 2 minutes and 40 seconds?
lack of knowledge as a defense

SC:

“Habana and Columbia Pictures did not require

knowledge of the infringement to constitute a
violation of the copyright. One does not need to
know that he or she is copying a work without
consent to violate copyright law.”
Volition vs. Criminal Intent

“Volition, or intent to commit the act, is different

from criminal intent. Volition or voluntariness refers
to knowledge of the act being done. On the other
hand, criminal intent — which is different from
motive, or the moving power for the commission of
the crime — refers to the state of mind beyond
voluntariness. It is this intent that is being
punished by crimes mala in se.”
SC:

“The Intellectual Property Code requires strict

liability for copyright infringement whether for a
civil action or a criminal prosecution; it does not
require mens rea or culpa: xxx “
Nature of Fair Use

“GMA-7's rebroadcast of ABS-CBN's news footage

without the latter's consent is not an issue. The mere
act of rebroadcasting without authority from the
owner of the broadcast gives rise to the probability
that a crime was committed under the Intellectual
Property Code.”

 DidSC create a presumption here?

 What exactly is the nature of fair use as a defense?
Revisiting Fair Use in the PH

SECTION 184. Limitations on Copyright. - 184.1.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter V, the
following acts shall not constitute infringement of
copyright:
 (a) The recitation or performance of a work, once it
has been lawfully made accessible to the public, if
done privately and free of charge or if made strictly
for a charitable or religious institution or society;
 x x x
 (k) Any use made of a work for the purpose of any
judicial proceedings or for the giving of professional
advice by a legal practitioner.
Revisiting Fair Use in the PH

 Section 185 of the IP Code

185.1. The fair use of a copyrighted work for

criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching
including multiple copies for classroom use,
scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not
an infringement of copyright…
A note on the TRIPs Agreement

SECTION 5: CRIMINAL PROCEDURES

Article 61
Members shall provide for criminal procedures and
penalties to be applied at least in cases of wilful
trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a
commercial scale. Remedies available shall include
imprisonment and/or monetary fines sufficient to
provide a deterrent, consistently with the level of
penalties applied for crimes of a corresponding gravity...
Members may provide for criminal procedures and
penalties to be applied in other cases of infringement of
intellectual property rights, in particular where they are
committed wilfully and on a commercial scale.
TRIPs Agreement

SECTION 5: CRIMINAL PROCEDURES

Article 61
Members shall provide for criminal procedures and
penalties to be applied at least in cases of wilful
trademark counterfeiting or copyright piracy on a
commercial scale. Remedies available shall include
imprisonment and/or monetary fines sufficient to
provide a deterrent, consistently with the level of
penalties applied for crimes of a corresponding gravity...
Members may provide for criminal procedures and
penalties to be applied in other cases of infringement of
intellectual property rights, in particular where they are
committed wilfully and on a commercial scale.
Last Issue: May Corporate Directors/Officers as such be
held Liable for Copyright Infringement?

Republic Gas v. Petron Corporation (GR 194062, June 11, 2013)

“Petitioners, being corporate officers and/or directors, through whose

act, default or omission the corporation commits a crime, may
themselves be individually held answerable for the crime. Veritably,
the CA appropriately pointed out that petitioners, being in direct
control and supervision in the management and conduct of the affairs
of the corporation, must have known or are aware that the
corporation is engaged in the act of refilling LPG cylinders bearing
the marks of the respondents without authority or consent from the
latter which, under the circumstances, could probably constitute the
crimes of trademark infringement and unfair competition. The
existence of the corporate entity does not shield from prosecution the
corporate agent who knowingly and intentionally caused the
corporation to commit a crime.”
- ABS-CBN v. Gozon:

Corporate directors are liable for copyright

infringement only if they actively participated in its
commission
- SC:

“Mere membership in the Board or being President

per se does not mean knowledge, approval, and
participation in the act alleged as criminal. There
must be a showing of active participation, not
simply a constructive one.”
 Difference in the treatment of Corporate directors in
the ABS-CBN and Republic Gas cases:

 Natureof the corporate directors’ roles in the

business operations
◼Direct Control and Supervision = Must Have
Known (Constructive Knowledge)
II. In re Justice Del Castillo

On April 28, 2010, the SC issued a decision which

dismissed a petition filed by the Malaya Lolas
Organization in the case of Vinuya vs Romulo. Atty.
Herminio Harry Roque Jr., counsel for Vinuya et al,
questioned the said decision. He raised, among others,
that the ponente in said case, Justice Mariano del
Castillo, plagiarized three books when the honorable
Justice “twisted the true intents” of these books to
support the assailed decision. As such, Justice del
Castillo is guilty of plagiarism, misconduct, and at
least inexcusable negligence.
In re Del Castillo

 No Plagiarism
 According to Black’s Law Dictionary: Plagiarism
is the “deliberate and knowing presentation of
another person’s original ideas or creative
expressions as one’s own.”
 This cannot be the case here because as proved by
evidence, in the original drafts of the assailed
decision, there was attribution to the three
authors but due to errors made by Justice del
Castillo’s researcher, the attributions were
inadvertently deleted. There is therefore no intent
by Justice del Castillo to take these foreign works
as his own.
In re Del Castillo: the relevant issues

 Is plagiarism the same as copyright infringement?

 May plagiarism be copyright infringement at the

same time?
 Can there be plagiarism without copyright
infringement?

 May copyright infringement and plagiarism be

committed at the same time?
 Can there be copyright infringement without
plagiarism?
CASE LAW UPDATES
 U.E. v. Masangkay
Rentmeester v. Nike [2018]
G.R. No. 226727

Later, Nike commissioned

a similarly-posed photo,
Rentmeester is a but used Chicago’s skyline
professional as background, because
photographer. He took Jordan was then playing
several photos of MJ for for the NBA’s Chicago
a sports magazine. Bulls.

Rentmeester sued Nike

for copyright Nike used that photo to
infringement for market “Air Jordan”
allegedly sneakers, and to
misappropriating a photo eventually create the
he took of Michael Jumpman logo.
Jordan in 1984.
 ISSUE 1:

Is Rentmeester’s photograph of a grand-jete

basketball pose copyright-protected? Or is it a
mere idea?
 ISSUE 2:
Assuming it is, did Nike infringe on
Rentmeester’s copyright of the photograph?
Copyright Infringement?
 U.E. v. Masangkay
Rentmeester v. Nike
G.R. No. 226727
 U.E. v. Masangkay
Rentmeester v. Nike
G.R. No. 226727

Court considered
these:
• Grassy knoll v. Chicago
RULING: skyline
• Right knee is bent,
forward jump v.
The Court ruled straight knees, upward
that Rentmeester movement
can copyright the • Right arm is bent v.
right arm is straight
specific pose but and pointed downward
not any pose.
 Naruto, et. al. v. Slater
No. 16-15469 (9th Cir. 2018)

Facts:
▪ Naruto was a 7 y.o. Crested Macaque that lived in
Sulawesi, Indonesia
▪ In 2011 wildlife photographer, Slater, looked for a
suitable area in the jungle, arranged his camera and
left it unattended; Naruto took several photograph of
himself (Monkey Selfies)
 Naruto, et. al. v. Slater
No. 16-15469 (9th Cir. 2018)

Facts:
▪ Slater and Wildlife Personalities, Ltd. published the
Monkey Selfies through Blurb, Inc. website in 2014.
▪ The book identifies Slater and Wildlife as the copyright
owners of the Monkey Selfies
▪ In 2015, PETA filed a complaint for copyright
infringement and assignment against Slater, et.al.
▪ Federal circuit court dismissed the complaint; PETA
appealed. Meantime, parties reached settlement.

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Naruto, et. al. v. Slater
No. 16-15469 (9th Cir. 2018)

Issues:

Whether an animal can own copyright?

Whether Naruto has Statutory Standing under the

Copyright Act?

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Naruto, et. al. v. Slater
No. 16-15469 (9th Cir. 2018)

Ruling:

▪ “If Congress and the President intended to take the

extraordinary step of authorizing animals as well as
people and legal entities to sue, they could, and should,
have said so plainly.”
▪ The Copyright Act does not expressly authorize
animals to file copyright infringement suits under the
statute.
▪ Naruto lacks statutory standing to sue under the
Copyright Act
BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN
Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

Facts:
▪ Varsity Brands, Inc.:
o Designs and manufactures clothing and accessories
for use in various athletic activities, including
cheerleading.
o Received copyright registration for the 2D artwork of
the designs which were very similar to the ones that
Star Athletica were advertising
o Sued Star Athletica

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

Facts:
▪ Star Athletica:
o The designs were not copyrightable
o “Useful articles” cannot be copyrighted
o Designs cannot be separated from the uniforms thus
cannot be copyrighted
▪ Varsity Brands:
o Designs were separable and non-functional thus
copyrightable.

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

Issue:

Whether the designs are copyrightable?

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

Ruling:

▪ A feature of a useful article is copyrightable if:

1. It can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional
artwork that is separable from the useful article;
and
2. It would be a protectable pictorial, graphical, or
sculptural work on its own.

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
 Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc.
580 U. S. ____ (2017)

Ruling:
▪ The decoration designs of the cheerleading uniforms
satisfy both requirements.
▪ The fact that the designs on their own still retained
the outline of the cheerleading uniforms did not
prevent them from being copyrightable
▪ Artwork designed to fit a particular space or object
does not replicate that space or object when applied to
a different medium

BENGZON NEGRE UNTALAN

Intellectual Property Attorneys
Recap

 Extent of protection: Original + Creative Works

 Economic Rights
 Moral Rights

 Exceptions:

 Public Domain;
◼Section 175 – Unprotected Subject Matters
◼Expired Term
 Limitations:

 Fair Use as a matter right

◼Section 184 and Section 185
 Plagiarism is an ethical issue
BENGZON

END OF SESSION 4
NEGRE
UNTALAN
Intellectual Property Attorneys

THANK YOU !☺

FERDINAND M. NEGRE