(p.34) What contractual stipulations are required in all technology transfer was protected by copyright.

opyright. Manoling Santiago sued Juan Xavier for

agreements? (2%) infringement of copyright. Is Juan Xavier liable? (2%)
The following stipulations are required in all technology transfer agreements: Yes. Juan Xavier is liable for infringement of copyright. It is not necessary that
Juan Xavier is aware that the story of Manoling Santiago was protected by
(1) The laws of the Philippines shall govern its interpretation and in the event
copyright. The work of Manoling Santiago is protected at the time of its
of litigation, the venue shall be the proper court in the place where the licensee
creation.
has its principal office;

(2) Continued access to improvements in techniques and processes related to (p. 281) While vacationing in Boracay, Valentino surreptitiously took
photographs of his girlfriend Monaliza in her skimpy bikini. Two weeks
the technology shall be made available during the period of the technology
later, her photographs appeared in the Internet and in a national celebrity
transfer arrangement;
magazine.
(3) In case it shall provide for arbitration, the Procedure of Arbitration of the
Monaliza found out that Valentino had sold the photographs to the
Arbitration Law of the Philippines or the Arbitration Rules of the United
magazine, adding insult to injury, uploaded them to his personal blog on the
Nations Commission on International Trade Law or the Rules of Arbitration of
Internet.
the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) shall apply and the venue of
arbitration shall be the Philippines or any neutral country; (A) Monaliza filed a complaint against Valentino damages based on, among
other grounds, violation of her intellectual property rights. Does she have
(4) The Philippine taxes on all payments relating to the technology transfer any cause of action? Explain. (2%)
agreement shall be borne by the licensor (Sec. 88, Intellectual Property Code).
Monaliza cannot sue Valentino for violation of her intellectual property rights,
(p.34) Enumerate three stipulations that are prohibited in technology because she was not the one who took the pictures (Subsection 178.1 of the
transfer agreements. (3%) Intellectual Property Code). She may sue Valentino instead for violation of her
The following stipulations are prohibited in technology transfer agreements: right to privacy. He surreptitiously took photographs of her and then sold the
(1) Those that contain restrictions regarding the volume and structure of photographs to a magazine and uploaded them to his personal blog in the
production; Internet (Tolentino, Commentaries and Jurisprudence on the Civil Code of the
Philippines, Vol. I, 1987 ed., p. 169).
(2) Those that prohibit the use of competitive technologies in a non-exclusive
agreement; and (B) Valentino’s friend Francesco stole the photographs and duplicated them
and sold them to a magazine publication. Valentino sued Francisco for
(3) Those that establish a full or partial purchase option in favor of the licensor infringement and damages. Does Valentino have any cause of action?
(Subsections 87.3, 87.4 and 87.5 of the Intellectual Property Code). Explain. (2%)
(p. 281) Juan Xavier wrote and published a story similar to an unpublished Valentino cannot sue Francesco for infringement, because he has already sold
copyrighted story of Manoling Santiago. It was, however, conclusively the photographs to a magazine (Angeles vs. Premier Productions, Inc., 6 CAR
proven that Juan Xavier was not aware that the story of Manoling Santiago (2s) 159).
Yes, as the author of the photographs, Valentino has exclusive economic rights allows them to see one another’s typing on their own screen as each letter
thereto, which include the rights to reproduce, to distribute, to perform, to key is pressed. When Greg, the controller of the service facility, found out
display, and to prepare derivative works based upon the copyrighted work. their identities, he kept a copy of all the messages Diana and Piolo sent each
He sold only the photographs to the magazine; however, he still retained some other and published them. Is Greg liable for copyright infringement?
economic rights thereto. Thus, he has a cause of action against infringement Reason briefly. (5%)
against Francesco. Yes, Greg is liable for copyright infringement. Letter are among the works
(C) Does Monaliza have any cause of action against Francesco? Explain. (2%) which are protected from the moment of their creation (Section 172, intellectual
Monaliza can also sue Francesco for violation of her right to privacy. Property Code; Columbia Pictures, Inc. v Court of Appeals, 261 SCRA 144
[1996]). The publication of the letters without the consent of their writers
(pp. 281-282) Ruby is a fine arts student in a university. He stays in a constitutes infringement of copyright.
boarding house with Bernie as his roommate. During his free time, Rudy
would paint and leave his finished works lying around the boarding house. No, Greg is not liable for copyright infringement. There is no copyright
One day, Rudy saw one of his works – an abstract painting entitled Manila protecting electronic documents. What are involved here are text messages, not
Traffic Jam – on display at the university cafeteria. The cafeteria operator letter in their ordinary sense. Hence, the protection under the copyright law
said he purchased the painting from Bernie who represented himself as its does not extend to text messages (Section 172, Intellectual Property Code).
painter and owner.
The messages that Diana and Piolo exchanged through the use of messaging
Rudy and the cafeteria operator immediately confronted Bernie. While service do not constitute literary and artistic works under Section 172 of the
admitting that he did not do the painting,. Bernie claimed ownership of its Intellectual Property Code. They are not letter under Section 172(d).
copyright since he had already registered it in his name with the National
For copyright to subsist in a “message”, it must qualify as a “work” (Section
Library as provided in the Intellectual Property Code.
172 Intellectual Property Code). Whether the messages are entitled or not to
Who owns the copyright to the painting? Explain (8%). copyright protection would have to be resolved in the light of the provision of
the Intellectual Property Code.
Rudy owns the copyright to the painting because he was the one who actually
created it. (Section 178.1 of the Intellectual Property Code) His rights existed (pp. 283-284) 1989
from the moment of its creation (Section 172 of the Intellectual Property Code;
Unilever Philippines (PRC) v. Court of Appeals, 498 SCRA 334, 2006). The
registration of the painting by Bernie with the National Library did not confer
(p. 286) 1989
copyright upon him. The registration is merely for the purpose of completing
the records of the National Library. (Section 191 of the Intellectual Property
Code).
(p. 291) Solid Investment House (SOLID) commissioned Mon Blanco and his
(p. 282) Diana and Piolo are famous personalities in showbusiness who kept son Steve, both noted artists, to paint a mural for the Main Lobby of the new
their love affair secret. They use a special instant messaging service which building of SOLID for a contract price of P2 Million.
a) Who owns the mural? Explain. (B) Assume that New Media Enterprises plans to publish Eloise’s columns
in its own anthology entitled, ―The Best of Diario de Manila‖ Eloise wants
SOLID owns the mural. Solid was the one who commissioned the artists to do
to prevent the publication of her columns in that anthology since she was
the work and paid for the work in the sum of P2M.
never paid by the newspaper. Name one irrefutable legal argument Eloise
b) Who owns the copyright of the mural? Explain. could cite to enjoin New Media Enterprises from including her columns in
its anthology. (2%)
Unless there is a stipulation to the contrary in the contract, the copyright shall
belong in joint ownership to SOLID and Mon and Steve. Under the IPC, the copyright or economic rights to the columns she authored
pertains only to Eloise. She can invoke the right to either “authorize or prevent”
(pp. 293-294) Eloise, an accomplished writer, was hired by Petong to write a reproduction of the work, including the public distribution of the original and
bimonthly newspaper column for Diario de Manila, a newly-established each copy of the work “by sale or other forms of transfer of ownership,” Since
newspaper of which Petong was the editor-in-chief. Eloise was to be paid this would be the effect of including her column in the anthology.
P1,000 for each column that was published. In the course of two months,
Eloise submitted three columns which, after some slight editing, were (p. 297) In a written legal opinion for a client on the difference between
printed in the newspaper. However, Diario de Manila proved unprofitable apprenticeship and learnership, Liza quoted without permission a labor law
and closed only after two months. Due to the minimal amounts involved, expert’s comment appearing in his book entitled “Annotations on the Labor
Eloise chose not to pursue any claim for payment from the newspaper, which Code.”
was owned by New Media Enterprises.
Can the labor law expert hold Liza liable for infringement of copyright for
Three years later, Eloise was planning to publish an anthology of her works, quoting a portion of his book without his permission? (5%)
and wanted to include the three columns that appeared in the Diario de
Liza cannot be held liable for infringement of copyright since under the
Manila in her anthology She asks for you legal advice:
Intellectual Property Code, one of the limitations on the copyright is the
(A) Does Eloise have to secure authorization from New Media Enterprises to making of quotations from a published work for purpose of any judicial
be able to publish her Diario de Manila columns in her own anthology? proceedings or for giving of professional advise by legal practitioner, provided
Explain fully. (4%) that the source, and name of the author are identified (Sec. 181.4[k] of the
Intellectual Property Code).
Eloise may publish the columns without securing authorization from New
Media Enterprises. Under Sec. 172 of the Intellectual Property Code, original (p. 315) May a person have photocopies of some pages of the book of
intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain are protected from the Professor Rosario made without violating the copyright law?
moment of their creation and shall include those in periodicals and
newspapers. Under Sec. 178, copyright ownership shall belong to the author. Yes. The private reproduction of a published work in a single copy, where the
In case of commissioned work, the person who so commissioned work shall reproduction is made by a natural person exclusively for research and private
have ownership of work, but copyright shall remain with creator, unless there study, is permitted without the authorization of the owner of the owner of the
is a written stipulation to the contrary. copyright in the work.

(p. 323) 2014