Is Downloading Illegal?
By Mikaelo Jaime Reyes
I.
Piracy in
the Philippines
The
Philipines was on the “priority watch list” of the International Intellectual
Property Alliance, an industry lobby group from the US. On 2006, the
Philippines was dropped from the list. Although
dropped, movie pirates still have a surprising influence (International Intellectual
Property Alliance 2005).
The
piracy market for DVDs, software, movie, and music is a boon to a number of
varying groups of people. One group consists of producers, traders, and
distributors of bootlegged media that earn a reasonable income. One estimate is
that more than 1,000 people in the Philippines earn a living by being part of
the supply chain for pirated media (The Culture of Piracy in the Philippines).
II.
Anti-Counterfeiting Trade
Agreement (ACTA)
ACTA
is a multinational treaty for the
purpose of establishing international standards for intellectual
property rights enforcement. The agreement aims to establish
an international legal framework for targeting counterfeit
goods, generic
medicines and copyright infringement on the Internet,
and would create a new governing
body outside existing forums.
The
final contents of the treaty was published on 15 April 2011.
RIGHTS OF HOLDERS:
Section 2: Civil Enforcement
- to issue an order against a party to desist from an infringement
-
require in
civil procedure pirated copyright goods and counterfeit trademark goods to be
destroyed
-
may ask
(alleged) infringers to provide information on the goods it "controls
Article 23: Criminal Offences
-
wilful
trademark counterfeiting or copyright or related rights piracy on a commercial
scale" should be punishable under criminal law.
III.
Opposition
to ACTA
An
open letter signed by many organizations, states that "the current draft
of ACTA would profoundly restrict the fundamental rights and freedoms of
European citizens, most notably the freedom of expression and communication
privacy (Free Knowledge Institute, 2012).
The glaring error on the law is that it will punish even those persons
who would be found watching a alleged infringed material on youtube although
the person is not aware that the material is infringed. The 1987 Constitution Section
4 states that “No law shall be passed
abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right
of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of
grievances”
IV.
Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)
The
law establishes a two-step process for intellectual property-rights holders to
seek relief if they have been harmed by a site dedicated to infringement. The
rights holder must first notify, in writing, related payment facilitators and
ad networks of the identity of the website, who, in turn, must then forward
that notification and suspend services to that identified website, unless that
site provides a counter notification explaining how it is not in violation (Stop
Online Piracy Act, 2011).
Proponents of the legislation
state it will protect the intellectual-property market and corresponding
industry, jobs and revenue, and is necessary to bolster enforcement of copyright
laws, especially against foreign-owned and operated websites.
Claiming flaws in present laws that do not cover foreign-owned and operated
websites, and citing examples of "active promotion of rogue websites"
by U.S. search engines, proponents assert stronger enforcement tools are needed
(Gruenwald, 2011).
V.
Three Stike
Law
On receipt of a
complaint from a copyright holder or representative, HADOPI may initiate a 'three-strike'
procedure:
(1) An email message is sent to the
offending internet access subscriber, derived from the IP address
involved in the claim. The email specifies the time
of the claim but neither the object of the claim nor the identity of the claimant.
The ISP is then required to
monitor the subject internet connection. In addition, the internet access subscriber is
invited to install a filter on his internet connection.
If, in the 6
months following the first step, a repeat offense is suspected by the copyright
holder, his representative, the ISP or HADOPI, the second step of the procedure
is invoked.
(2) A certified
letter is sent to the offending internet access subscriber with similar content to the
originating email message.
In the event
that the offender fails to comply during the year following the reception of the certified
letter, and upon accusation of repeated offenses by the copyright
holder, a representative, the ISP or HADOPI, the third step of the procedure
is invoked.
(3) The ISP is
required to suspend internet access for the offending internet connection, that which is the subject of the claim,
for a specified period of from
two months to one year.
The internet
access subscriber is blacklisted and other ISPs are prohibited from providing
an internet connection to the blacklisted subscriber. The service suspension
does not, however, interrupt billing,
and the offending subscriber is liable
to meet any charges or costs resulting from the service termination.
VI.
Philippine
Bill on Online Piracy – Anti Online Piracy Act of 2012
Under
Section to oh HB 6187, the following acts are prohibited:
a.
To make in
any manner not authorized by the copyright owner, copies of music recordings or
films, in complete or substantially complete form, by any means, including but
not limited to uploading, downloading or streaming.
b.
To offer
goods or services, or provide access in a manner not authorized by the
copyright owner, copies of music recordings or films, in complete or
substantially complete form, by any means, including but not limited to
uploading, downloading or streaming.
REFERENCES:
Retrieved last September 14, 2012, The Culture of Piracy in the
Philippines, http://www.asian-edition.org/piracyinthephilippines.pdf
Intellectual Property Alliance. 2005
Special Report. PHILIPPINES. New York. 2005.
Retrieved last September 14,
2012. Free Knowledge Institute. http://freeknowledge.eu/acta-a-global-threat-to-freedoms-open-letter
H.R.3261 –
Stop Online Piracy Act; House Judiciary Committee; October 26, 2011
Juliana
Gruenwald (2011-12-08). "Critics
of Online-Piracy Bills Release Their Own Draft Legislation".
NationalJournal.