Originally Posted by
13thProphet
First of all, this is not a civil nor a criminal case we are having but a forum discussion. So I don't see why you're using burden of proof as a defense. However, if you really want it that way then I'm game. This will be more interesting. What quantum of proof do you need? Substantial evidence (as required in quasi-judicial agencies), preponderance of evidence (as required in civil cases), or proof beyond reasonable doubt (as required in criminal cases)?
The constitutional provision you have quoted is misplaced. It is true that Intellectual Property rights are a legislative grant, and that it is in order to promote progress, and that they are for a limited time. HOWEVER, you must know that Intellectual Property is a very general term and includes tradenames, trademarks, copyright, patents, and many others. The provision that you cited is clearly referring to specific concepts like COPYRIGHT and PATENTS which deal with literary works and inventions/discoveries respectively. Your case however falls within TRADENAMES which is the name used to distinguish your services from others. Hence, although your "important point #1" is still correct, the other points (#2 and #3) are not applicable in your situation. "Important point #2" is clearly referring to INVENTIONS by the use of the term "inventors". For "important point #3" the limited characteristic of the different types of intellectual properties are distinct from each other. In case of tradenames, it is limited only in a sense that after a period of time, one has to renew his license to operate under such name. Unlike copyrights which after a period of time, the design/inventions become property of the State which shall now be for the benefit of the public.
Philippine constitution? I never cited any of its provisions. What I cited was the Intellectual Property Code and its Implementing Rules and Regulations. Also, I am not limiting OUR arguments to Philippine laws. In fact, I highly encourage that we go beyond it. What I am doing is merely sharing my knowledge of what I have learned from studying Philippine laws. You may cite US provisions and that is very welcome as it may broaden our perspective on this topic. Since you live in the US and you are more familiar with your own laws then I expect that you cite your laws so that we can compare it with our laws here and have a much broader conversation. And here's a tip, although the Consitution is the supreme law of the land, it (US constitution) was adopted September 17, 1787. It is advisable that you refer to more recent laws regarding the topic.
Who said practice of law in different countries are the same? That notion is just absurd. And believe me I KNOW that it is VERY different. Practice of law is NOT the same when I say "harmonizing of laws". If you're not familiar of what international treaties are then please do the necessary research. That way you will be able to understand what I mean when I say the laws in the Philippines regarding Intellectual Property is very similar to that of the USA.
Lastly, you do not have to discuss how local ordinances work. That is just a VERY different matter. Intellectual property is BEYOND that level.
Re: YouTubecebu
Posting Permissions
