Kuro't Palaisipán

DEVELOPMENT &
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
STUDY GROUP
4 November 2009

What Is There To Celebrate About Intellectual Property ?

The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPhil) celebrated Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Week this last week of October, ostensibly as a mandate of Presidential Proclamation 79 (1992), which, as pointed out by IPOPhil Director General Cristobal, is an expression of the fundamental policy that “recognition and adequate protection of the rights of inventors, authors and trademarks owners would enhance the economic environment needed to attract foreign investments.”

First off, is there evidence worldwide that increasing recognition and protection of the rights of inventors, authors and trademark owners would attract foreign investments?

The answer is not as straightforward as it seems. Ha-Joon Chang of Cambridge University asserts there is little evidence that protection of IPRs plays any role in foreign direct investment (FDI) decisions. Indeed, according to him, Switzerland’s experience suggests the opposite: the absence of patent laws made the country attractive to foreign investors. Much the same has been shown for historical flows of FDI to Canada and Italy and he even cites some analysts like Vaitsos who also noted that patents are often a substitute (and not a prerequisite) for FDI.
Read the rest of this entry »

Questioning the Connection Between Intellectual Creation, Commercialization and Commodification : A Challenge to the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines

By the Development and Intellectual Property Study Group ¹

The National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy (NIPPS) is an initiative by the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IP Philippines) that seeks to institutionalize the inter-agency coordination on the enforcement of intellectual property rights as well as increase the awareness of the Filipino public about intellectual property. The NIPPS document has since been submitted to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo during the first National Innovation Summit last November 26, 2007 and is currently being implemented by IP Philippines as the “Philippine Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy.”

The IP Value Chain: towards a unified IP Strategy

As expressed in NIPPS, the country’s National IP policy is founded on what IP Philippines calls the “IP Value Chain.” According to NIPPS, there are three steps in the “IP Value Chain” – first. is intellectual capital or intellectual assets; second is the acquisition of intellectual property rights; and third is commercialization and value creation.

The third step in the “IP Value Chain” focuses on the creation and exploitation of the economic value of knowledge products. This third step is also considered in NIPPS as the “trigger” in the “IP Value Chain” because it supposedly starts the whole chain once more: “commercialization spurs competition, competition spurs innovation, and innovation spurs creation.”

In the effort to establish a unified IP strategy, it is not surprising that NIPPS places all the different laws under the term “intellectual property” (Copyright Law, The Law on Patents, The Law on Trademarks, Utility Models, Industrial Designs) within the single context of “commercialization.” Thus, cultural production is no longer any different from production for markets or production in general: Folklore is just as subject to commercialization as are industrial designs.

Through the mechanism of the “IP value Chain”, NIPPS asserts the idea that creative and innovative acts are uniformly economic acts and that there exists a correlation between economic incentive on the one hand and innovation and creativity on the other. NIPPS also assumes an unproven economic motivation for all creative acts, and equates the motivations and interests of individual authors and inventors with those of vendors and markets.

Read the rest of this entry »

Dear friends,

As a follow-up  from the last NIPPS (National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy) National Forum held June 17 organized by The Third World Network, there will be a Kuro-Kuro (small-group discussion) to those who are interested, on the Digital Workplace, 23 September, 2pm, at TWN/Tebtebba office, Rm 333, Eagle Court Condominium, 26 Matalino Street, Quezon City.

I will introduce the issues and initiate discussion on copyright and its effects on our use of digital technologies, and hope that people can also share their experiences and concerns on “the digital workplace.”

In that meeting, we will also be discussing the Statement on NIPPS, the draft is now available at the “Kuro’t Palaisipan” website  – I have also archived there the past Kuro meetings (in Manila, GenSan and Davao).

I would also be more than happy to discuss any work-related or personal issues regarding the ethics of technology use (whether for advocacy, personal purpose, business, etc).. If we can all throw in issues we’d like to take up in advance, all the better so I can prepare – just let me know.

Hopefully, we may also be able to discuss “An alternative primer on national and international copyright law in the global South: eighteen questions and answers” by Alan Story. Alan is chairperson of the CopySouth Research Group and Network and he has written an excellent Primer on Copyright Law, unmasking the dangers (economic and social) of the copyright regime as a one-size-fits-all formula for development in the global south.

Please email Elpidio Peria if you are coming, so snacks can be reserved.

Best wishes,
Fatima Lasay

The National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy (NIPPS) is an initiative by the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IP Philippines) that seeks to institutionalize the inter-agency coordination on the enforcement of intellectual property rights as well as increase the awareness of the Filipino public about intellectual property. The NIPPS document has since been submitted to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo during the first National Innovation Summit last November 26, 2007 and is currently being implemented by IP Philippines as the “Philippine Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy.”

The IP Value Chain: towards a unified IP Strategy

As expressed in NIPPS, the country’s National IP policy is founded on what IP Philippines calls the “IP Value Chain.” According to NIPPS, there are three steps in the “IP Value Chain” – first. is intellectual capital or intellectual assets; second is the acquisition of intellectual property rights; and third is commercialization and value creation. Read the rest of this entry »

A Rose by any other name would taste just as awful …

What’s in a Name?

If one is planning the establishment of a “think tank” (or any other, similar, study group) involved in exploring the problems and potential solutions concerning any specific subject -then it might be essential to first think very carefully about how to define (and name) that subject before starting the “practical” work.

This is because the name given and the concepts associated with that name are very likely to have a powerful effect on the way both oneself and others will approach the problem: In most cases, the way the problem is defined will act as a powerful “funnel” channeling the creative process in specific directions -which may be difficult to deviate from -simply because deviations are likely to involve issues which were originally seen as being “outside” the (original) definition of the problem, and therefore considered as irrelevant to its solution. Read the rest of this entry »

All Property is theft -and Intellectual Property is Intellectual Theft!

As expressed in NIPPS, the country’s National IP policy is founded on what IP Philippines calls the “IP Value Chain.” According to NIPPS, there are three steps in the “IP Value Chain” – first. is intellectual capital or intellectual assets; second is the acquisition of intellectual property rights; and third is commercialization and value creation.

The third step in the “IP Value Chain” focuses on the creation and exploitation of the economic value of knowledge products. This third step is also considered in NIPPS as the “trigger” in the “IP Value Chain” because it supposedly starts the whole chain once more: “commercialization spurs competition, competition spurs innovation, and innovation spurs creation.”

Through the mechanism of the “IP value Chain”, NIPPS asserts the idea that creative and innovative acts are uniformly economic acts and that there exists a correlation between economic incentive on the one hand and innovation and creativity on the other. NIPPS also assumes an unproven economic motivation for all creative acts, and equates the motivations and interests of individual authors and inventors with those of vendors and markets.

- Fatima Lasay, ‘The National Intellectual Property Policy and Strategy’ – personal communication, August 2009.

The NIPPS doctrine raises many questions -but perhaps a fundamental approach requires us to ask if the employment of the “economic incentive” to encourage the commercial exploitation of “assets” is both morally legitimate and practically efficient in a social context.

In addition, external to the question of the validity of any specific economic principle -we need to ask if the global imposition of any socio-economic system can ever be consistent with the concept of local democracy and social and cultural self-determination. Read the rest of this entry »

Interrogating Art Competitions
Coordinated by De la Salle – College of St. Benilde
(c/o Elvert de la Cruz Bañares)

23 March 2007, 3:30-7:00 pm,
De La Salle – College of St. Benilde, Manila
Download Transcript of the Kuro (PDF)

HIGHLIGHTS

The final Kuro Forum was held in conjunction with the Awarding Ceremonies of the WebSining 2007 Digital Arts Competition. Held in partnership with the DLS College of St. Benilde, which houses one of the top Multimedia Arts programs in the country, the Forum sought to interrogate the very concept of art competitions (one of which the WebSining Project has also been sponsoring). It sought to look at the ultimate relevance of such competitions in promoting art-making, and also tried to surface the various issues and problems such competitions, engender. Read the rest of this entry »

Intellectual Property Rights: Issues and concerns
Organized by Kalimudan Culture and Arts Center
(c/o Alma Celesthia Dumalag-Aguja) – General Santos City

24 February 2007, 1:35 – 5:10 pm
Conference Room, Leah’s Pension House, Champaca St., General Santos City
Download the Kuro Transcript (PDF)

HIGHLIGHTS

There were 27 participants who attended the second round of Kuro in General Santos City. The participants, who represented various fields of art, included a novelist and a poet, writers, visual artists, theater practitioners, composers, music recording artists, dance group members, and multimedia/digital artists. Also present were teachers, issue advocacy workers, youth and event organizers, among others. Read the rest of this entry »

Art, Technology, Advocacy and Society
Coordinated by Tutok Karapatan
(c/o Karen Ocampo Flores) – Manila

15 February 2007, 2:30 – 5:00 pm
MKP Multipurpose Hall, Bulwagang Juan Luna, 4/F,
Cultural Center of the Philippines
Download NCR1_Transcript (PDF)

HIGHLIGHTS

Orientation to Kuro and WebSining
By Alan G. Alegre, Foundation for Media Alternatives and
Geejay Arriola, Project Co-Director, WebSining 2007

Al introduced himself, the Foundation for Media Alternatives (FMA) and its involvement in the WebSining Project, one of the flagship projects of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) for the last three years.

FMA, he explained, is an non-government organization focused on information and communications technologies (ICTs), particularly communication rights. It has been active in advocacies on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) vis-à-vis the right to knowledge, culture and resources; and free and open source software (FOSS), among others. Albeit communication rights also include artistic expressions, FMA has yet to further dialogue with the artistic and cultural communities. Read the rest of this entry »

Multimedia Production and Intellectual Property Rights
A Kuro Panel Discussion
Coordinated by DabaweGNU
(c/o Holden Hao) – Davao City

2 December 2006, 1:00 – 5:00 pm
DabaweGNU, Inc., Davao City
Download Davao_Transcript (PDF)

HIGHLIGHTS

Mr. Holden Hao gave a presentation on Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). He first defined IPR as legal entitlements attached to certain types of information, ideas and other intangibles in their expressed forms. He then proceeded with the different types of IPR. Among these types are copyrights, patents, and trademarks. To distinguish the three, a trademark is a distinctive sign used to protect a brand or a logo. A patent, on the other hand, is used to protect an idea while a copyright is a legal right of the expression of that idea. Read the rest of this entry »