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