17 April 2008, Makati City – The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IP Philippines) today said that major issues raised in the comments of the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) to the Special 301 evaluation of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) are unfounded.

“We are receptive to feedback from foreign IP associations for they are constituents of a valued ally and trading partner of the country, but they must be based on facts,” Atty. Adrian S. Cristobal, Jr., IP Philippines Director General, said.

“The primary duty of member agencies of the National Committee on IPR (NCIPR) is to protect and promote the creativity and innovation of Filipinos by using intellectual property as a tool for national development,” Cristobal continued. “It is in our common interest that the IP system protects and promotes creativity; but the IPAA should also look beyond their own economic self-interest if IPR is to spur social and economic development in the Philippines,” he added. 

IIPA members include the Association of American Publishers (AAP), Business Software Alliance (BSA), Entertainment Software Association (ESA), Independent Film and Television Alliance (IFTA), Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), National Music Publishers' Association (NMPA), and Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).
 
One of IIPA's assertions in its Special 301 recommendation is that copyright piracy in the country has gotten worse in 2007 is inaccurate, said Cristobal, who is also the NCIPR chairman. The Optical Media Board (OMB) hauled in P1.12 billion worth of pirated optical discs and related items, which are copyright products. OMB was a close second to the Bureau of Customs (BoC) which seized a total of P1.15 billion worth of fake goods last year.

“In 2007, the NCIPR enforcement agencies such as the OMB, the BoC, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and the Philippine National Police (PNP) continued to strengthen the intellectual property regime of the country through effective enforcement. Last year's operations resulted in the confiscation of fake items valued at almost P3 billion, exceeding the combined confiscated value of goods seized in 2005 and 2006 by half a million,” Cristobal said.    

Another baseless statement in the IIPA recommendation is the 'less helpful' Philippine IP Policy Strategy (PIPPS) that IP Philippines spearheaded with the participation of private and public organizations. PIPPS recognizes the contribution of copyright-based industries to the country's gross domestic product at 4.82 percent, hence the inclusion of copyright and other creative industries as one of the eight sectors representing the country's IP assets.     

One of the specific, strategic actions for the copyright sector is the formulation and implementation of policies for the recognition and accreditation of copyright collection management organizations. The Filipinas Copyright Licensing Society (Filcols), for instance, the first collection society for book authors in the country, was formally launched with the help of IP Philippines. Collection societies will manage arrangements for copyright licensing, marketing, and distribution of the members’ works, and enforce their IPR.

“The community of writers would benefit economically from the establishment of Filcols.  Filcols will be the muscle to collect what is due them every time their pieces are used,”  National Artist for Literature Virgilio S. Almario, who is also Filcols chairman, said during the induction of the society's officers.

Ralph Oman, counsel of Dechert Law Firm in Washington, DC and former Register of Copyrights of the US from 1985 to 1993, during a courtesy visit to IP Philippines lauded the office's efforts in supporting the creative sector specially in helping the latter form collection societies. Oman also offered to provide linkages with the international institutes on copyright for technical assistance in research, education and capacity-building.