THE EFFORT to safeguard copyrights, trademarks, patents and other similar assets has moved forward with the Supreme Court issuing guidelines on how to handle cases involving intellectual property rights (IPR) violations.
The high court, in a resolution promulgated October 18 and published in newspapers yesterday, approved the Rules of Procedure for Intellectual Property Rights Cases that were drafted by the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) and a court-appointed special committee.
The rules will apply to special commercial courts — to be designated by the SC among the country’s regional trial courts — that will hear civil and criminal cases involving violations of rights provided under Republic Act 8293 or the Intellectual Property Code.
Among others, courts in Quezon City, Manila, Makati and Pasig were given the authority to issue search and seizure writs that are enforceable nationwide. The special courts in other judicial regions can also do so but the writs will apply only in their jurisdictions.
The rules, which will take effect early next month, are applicable to all pending IPR cases, the Supreme Court said.
Publication coincided with the start of the First Philippine Anti-Counterfeiting and Piracy Summit, where IPOPHL officials said they expected greater efficiency in the crackdown against dealers and producers of fake goods.
“The rules of procedure will certainly help our courts more effectively and expeditiously enforce IPR by ensuring that legal cases will not be delayed and warrants can be secured conveniently,” IPOPHL deputy director-general Andrew Michael S. Ong said.
“The guidelines have been modeled after the rules of procedures of commercial cases, which are handled very quickly by courts. We want IP cases to be settled in a similar way by setting new timelines on how they should be handled,” he added.
Mr. Ong noted that violations would be dealt with more strictly and the legal process expedited. For example, certain pleadings can no longer be made and confiscated goods can now be destroyed immediately.
“The new guidelines now provide for the disposal of counterfeit goods even while the case is still pending as a short-term legal remedy … this also helps to get rid of storage fees and other problems with inventory management,” he said.
The proliferation of fake goods, said fellow IPOPhil deputy director-general Allan B. Gepty, could lead to legitimate businesses losing market share and laying off workers, pointing to the Philippine shoe industry as having been a victim.
The creation of the special courts, pushed by the private sector, forms part of the government’s plan to strengthen IPR protection and enforcement. The state aims to encourage local businesses to register their intellectual assets and wants Filipino consumers to buy only licensed or genuine products.
In a presentation at yesterday’s summit, Mr. Ong said: “We need to demystify the concept behind intellectual property since these rights are supposed to protect and benefit people at the end of the day. IP is not just for businesses but also for consumers, and an effective IP system can be used as a tool for national development.”
==============================================================================
Source: Business World, October 24, 2011
To view the original article, click here.
Comment here