Share, Create, Express

            Time runs so fast and it is the end of the first semester for our school year 2013-2014. I still remember the first time I wrote a blog for this subject and I was lost because I was a newbie (for blog writing).  Now, I am writing the third and last blog for my subject Technology and the law. For our final blog, we are asked to write about our reaction and thoughts regarding the Conferencia de Lawrence Lessig Lecture and the Intellectual Property Code and its amendments in the Philippines.

            The 49-minute lecture/academic talk of the Legal Professor Lawrence Lessig talked about copyright issues over the internet and how people communicate on the web. The famed lecturer showed several videos of Psy’s “Gentleman”, Carly Rae Jepsen’s Call me maybe and the Breakfast Club music video and then showed excerpts of the amateur versions of those video to make his point that the internet has given young people or generation a modern way to participate in a tradition of so-called “call and response” communication. He also emphasized that different people have different kind of culture and they communicate and express by a certain kind of technology. Because of the internet, there is a change of form on how we express and that is good. There is greater diversity and is wildly better.

            In the early years like the 1960’s, professor Lessig called it dark ages of channel wherein there is still no internet and people communicate thru ordinary mail. Today, we have greater and diversed technology that can help us communicate faster, and better and technology helped us to express ourselves and be creative. Why stop technology? Technology encourages creativity of both professional and amateurs.

            Professor Lessig also mentioned in the lecture the Doctrine of Fair use of copyright law. The copyright owner is accorded the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies. This right however, has certain limitations and one of this is the doctrine of fair use.

            The US copyright law contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair, to wit:

  1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes
  2. The nature of the copyrighted work
  3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole
  4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

First Factor (purpose and character of the use): In analyzing the first factor, the copying party used the quotations in a for-profit newspaper (and therefore the use was for commercial gain). Generally, this would mean that the first factor weighs in favor of finding no fair use. However, the fact that the purpose of the use was to review or criticize the work is a fact favorable to a finding of fair use. While it is not clear from examining the statute, the later fact is probably more important than the first, meaning that the first factor set forth in the Copyright Act should weigh toward a finding of fair use.


Second Factor (nature of the copyrighted work): In analyzing the second factor in our example, a novel is one of the premier examples of a work which should be protected by copyright law. As a result, the second factor weighs toward a finding of no fair use. If the novel had not yet been published, this would be even more important. It can be difficult to prove fair use in the quotation of an unpublished work. However, it is not impossible, since the unpublished status of a work is only one element in the fair use analysis.


Third Factor (amount and substantiality taken): As for the third factor, only short passages from the novel were included in the review. This generally means that the third factor is analyzed in favor of a finding of fair use. However, the “quality” of the portion taken is analyzed under this factor as well as the “quantity.” It is possible that these short passages are the most important part of the novel. If this were the case, this third factor might lead to a conclusion of no fair use.


Fourth Factor (effect on potential market for protected work): Finally, the fourth factor should be considered in our example. Courts have stated that this is the most important factor in the fair use analysis. In this case, the negative review would clearly impact the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. However, courts have stated that this factor is to look only at the portion taken to analyze the effect on the potential market, and not at any negative comments contained in a review. Thus, the question is whether the inclusion of the short passages in the newspaper would affect the market for the novel. When only short passages are involved, courts have generally held that there is no market effect, and this factor should be analyzed in favor of a finding of fair use.1


The distinction between what is fair use and what is infringement in a particular case will not always be clear or easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission. The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”2


Fair use doctrine provides a set of guidelines pursuant to which researchers, educators, scholars, and others may use copyrighted works without seeking permission or paying royalties. Fair use doctrine does not provide a right to use somebody else’s work, but presents a defense against accusations of copyright violation for people who reasonably believed that their use of a copyrighted work was fair use. That means that if your use is challenged, you will have the burden of proving that your use qualified as “fair use”.3


            Technology promotes creativity and sharing of creativity. Lessig says, “We live in the age of remix.” We have the right to remix. According to the lecture, we should:

  1. Practice to remix
  2. Defense remix
  3. Embarrass those who desist.

“Mix is the idea of taking ideas, expressions, putting them together and making something,” said Lessig. “Remix is the practice by which others take that [mix] and re-express it. Culture is remix. Knowledge is remix. Politics is remix. Everyone in the life of producing and creating engages in this practice of remix.4

            Different places have different culture and rights. We may be different, but one thing we share in common is we all have the freedom and right to use technology to share and create. The law must protect this freedom and right by protecting us to share and create legally. We need real change in real law in order for us to be protected. When creating and sharing, respect for the author or creator of the things you are sharing is important. It is a must that there should be an attribution to the author to show that the work is not your own creation. Say for example, when we post a quote or photo in our Facebook page. It is necessary that the creator or author of such quote will be mentioned or the owner of the photo, as a sign of respect to the creators.


            The problem now is that some people or even organization is using the copyright law to abuse the system and to shut down one’s own form of expression. They abuse the law in order to silence people from exercising their power to express, to share and to create. Professor Lessig, in his lecture, emphasized that the people’s freedom to create, to share and to express needs to be defended. We should defend it against those who see creativity as something to control. We have to defend it as a citizen and as an internet user. We are in a free society where freedon of speech and expression is a right protected and guaranteed by the Constitution. We are free to learn through the internet. We are free to create, share and to show our forms of expression.


            I agree with Professor Lessig. I believe we need a real law, a real solution, that will protect us and that will guarantee us the exercise of out right to create, to share and to express. As a citizen, we should be familiar and aware of our rights and defend it against those who used our laws to abuse our system and to stop us from creating using technology. We are not in dark ages. It is the modern times. We should exercise our given right provided we do not forget to attribute to the creator his work. As a law student, we can be like Lessig. He is very much aware of his rights involving copyright. By studying law, particularly the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, we can be aware of our rights and limitations as we share, create and express using Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other media and technology.


            The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines as amended governs copyright issues. The State recognizes the need to a vital and industrial property system for the development of domestic and creative activity, technology and market access. It is the State’s policy to streamline procedures of patents, trademarks and copyright.5 Intellectual property rights involves Copyright and Related Rights; Trademarks and Service Marks; Geographic Indications; Industrial Designs; Patents; Layout-Designs (Topographies) of Integrated Circuits; and Protection of Undisclosed Information.


            Under Section 21, Patentable inventions are any technical solution of a problem in any field of human activity which is new, involves an inventive step and is industrially applicable. It may be, or may relate to, a product, or process, or an improvement of any of the foregoing. It is important that the three requisites are always present, to wit: novelty (new), 6 inventive step and is industrially applicable. Absent the inventive step, it is no longer patentable but considered a utility. Absent inventive step and industrially applicable, it becomes an industrial design. Section 22 of said code enumerates non-patentable inventions or those excluded from patent protection.7 The right to a patent belongs to the inventor, his heirs or assigns. However, when there are two or more persons have jointly made an invention, the right of a patent shall belong to them jointly. This is expressed in section 28 of the Intellectual Property Code. The patent owner shall be conferred with rights where the subject matter is a product or a process. The law prohibits and prevent any unauthorized person or entity from making, using, offering for sale,selling or importing such product or process. 8 Patent owners shall also have the right to assign, or transfer by succession the patent.


            The Law also protects trademarks, service marks and trade names. Mark is defined in section 121.1 as any visible sign capable of distinguishing the goods (trademark) or services (service mark) of an enterprise and shall include a stamped or marked container of goods. On the other hand, Collective mark is any visible sign designated as such in the application for registration and capable of distinguishing the origin or any other common characteristic, including the quality of goods or services of different enterprises which use the sign under the control of the registered owner of the collective mark and a Trade name is the name or designation identifying or distinguishing an enterprise. These are all provided in section 121 of the said code. It is important to know that not all marks can be registered. A mark cannot be registered if is those items enumerated in section 123.1. 9 Upon registration of said mark and trademarks, such product or process becomes protected under the IPL. No registration, No protection. When registered, the person or entity has the sole right to use such trademark. Any person without the consent of the owner of the registered mark cannot make use, reproduce, counterfeit, copy, imitate, distribute, sell, offer for sale, or to use such mark to defraud or mislead any person. It is also forbidden to apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used in commerce. This is clear on section 155 of the said code. 10 The owners of registered marks are not left without any defense. They can recover damages from any person guilty of infringement of the owner’s rights.


            The essential element of infringement under R.A. No. 8293 is that the infringing mark is likely to cause confusion. In determining similarity and likelihood of confusion, jurisprudence has developed tests – the Dominancy Test and the Holistic or Totality Test. The Dominancy Test focuses on the similarity of the prevalent or dominant features of the competing trademarks that might cause confusion, mistake, and deception in the mind of the purchasing public. Duplication or imitation is not necessary; neither is it required that the mark sought to be registered suggests an effort to imitate. Given more consideration are the aural and visual impressions created by the marks on the buyers of goods, giving little weight to factors like prices, quality, sales outlets, and market segments.11


            In the case of Skechers, USA vs Inter Pacific Industrial Trading, 12 it was stated that Modern law recognizes that the protection to which the owner of a trademark is entitled is not limited to guarding his goods or business from actual market competition with identical or similar products of the parties, but extends to all cases in which the use by a junior appropriator of a trade-mark or trade-name is likely to lead to a confusion of source, as where prospective purchasers would be misled into thinking that the complaining party has extended his business into the field or is in any way connected with the activities of the infringer; or when it forestalls the normal potential expansion of his business.  The protection of trademarks as intellectual property is intended not only to preserve the goodwill and reputation of the business established on the goods bearing the mark through actual use over a period of time, but also to safeguard the public as consumers against confusion on these goods.


            It appears that literary and artistic works are protected from the moment of their creation. Such works are enumerated in Article 172.1. These Works are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of their mode or form of expression, as well as of their content, quality and purpose.13

Such protection also covers derivative works such as: Dramatizations, translations, adaptations, abridgments, arrangements, and other alterations of literary or artistic works; and Collections of literary, scholarly or artistic works, and compilations of data and other materials which are original by reason of the selection or coordination or arrangement of their contents. These shall be protected as new works, provided however, that such new work shall not affect the force of any subsisting copyright upon the original works employed or any part thereof, or be construed to imply any right to such use of the original works, or to secure or extend copyright in such original works.


            The following are not protected in copyright law. To wit: any idea, procedure, system method or operation, concept, principle, discovery or mere data as such, even if they are expressed, explained, illustrated or embodied in a work; news of the day and other miscellaneous facts having the character of mere items of press information; or any official text of a legislative, administrative or legal nature, as well as any official translation thereof. Works of the Government contemplated under Article 176 are also not included. 14


            Copyright ownership shall belong to the author. It is just right because he is the creator of the work thereby he should be protected from any person. In cases of joint authorship, the co-authors shall be the original owners of the copyright and in the absence of agreement; their rights shall be governed by the rules on co-ownership. In case of work created by an author where he is an employee, copyright shall belong to him when said work was created in the course of employment but the work is not a part of his regular duties even if he uses the materials and facilities of the employer. However, when such work is created as a result of performance of his regular assigned duties, the employer owns the copyright unless there is an agreement to the contrary. Section 184 of such code provides for the limitations on copyright or acts that does not constitute infringement of copyright law. 15


            The Intellectual Property Code has also provisions regarding the Fair use. It is almost similar to the Fair use discussed earlier in the Lessig Lecture. Sec. 185 provides Fair Use of a Copyrighted Work. –

 The fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including multiple copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright. Decompilation, which is understood here to be the reproduction of the code and translation of the forms of the computer program to achieve the inter-operability of an independently created computer program with other programs may also constitute fair use. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:

(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit education purposes;

(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;

(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.


            The author of a work shall have the right to require that the authorship of the works be attributed to him, to make any alterations of his work prior to, or to withhold it from publication, to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, his work which would be prejudicial to his honor or reputation; and to restrain the use of his name with respect to any work not of his own creation or in a distorted version of his work. An author may waive the rights above by a written instrument, but no such waiver shall be valid where their effect is to permit another: To use the name of the author, or the title of his work, or otherwise to make use of his reputation with respect to any version or adaptation of his work which, because of alterations therein, would substantially tend to injure the literary or artistic reputation of another author; or To use the name of the author with respect to a work he did not create.


            I believe we have a clear and convincing law on copyright protection geared up for our modern needs and rights. Law is not the problem. Knowledge and awareness is. If we know our rights, then we can defend it. The Netizens (Citizen using the internet) must be aware of the law and to be knowledgeable what right is protected and what is not. The generation of today cannot be stopped from expressing, creating, and sharing. The technology cannot be stopped either. It will develop more as the time pass by. It is necessary that as the technology develops, laws will also follow to develop in order to cope up with the fast changing technology. Since there is a constant change in technology and people’s way to express, it is just right that the law will cater these changes.











3- by Aaron Larson


5-      Sec. 2. Declaration of State Policy. – The State recognizes that an effective intellectual and industrial property system is vital to the development of domestic and creative activity, facilitates transfer of technology, attracts foreign investments, and ensures market access for our products. It shall protect and secure the exclusive rights of scientists, inventors, artists and other gifted citizens to their intellectual property and creations, particularly when beneficial to the people, for such periods as provided in this Act.

The use of intellectual property bears a social function. To this end, the State shall promote the diffusion of knowledge and information for the promotion of national development and progress and the common good.

It is also the policy of the State to streamline administrative procedures of registering patents, trademarks and copyright, to liberalize the registration on the transfer of technology, and to enhance the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the Philippines.

6-      section 23 of IPL

7-      Non-Patentable Inventions. – The following shall be excluded from patent protection:

22.1. Discoveries, scientific theories and mathematical methods;

22.2. Schemes, rules and methods of performing mental acts, playing games or doing business, and programs for computers;

22.3 Methods for treatment of the human or animal body by surgery or therapy and diagnostic methods practiced on the human or animal body. This provision shall not apply to products and composition for use in any of these methods;

22.4. Plant varieties or animal breeds or essentially biological process for the production of plants or animals. This provision shall not apply to micro-organisms and non-biological and microbiological processes.

Provisions under this subsection shall not preclude Congress to consider the enactment of a law providing sui generis protection of plant varieties and animal breeds and a system of community intellectual rights protection:

22.5. Aesthetic creations; and

22.6. Anything which is contrary to public order or morality.

8-  Sec. 71. Rights Conferred by Patent. –

71.1. A patent shall confer on its owner the following exclusive rights:

(a) Where the subject matter of a patent is a product, to restrain, prohibit and prevent any unauthorized person or entity from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing that product;

(b) Where the subject matter of a patent is a process, to restrain, prevent or prohibit any unauthorized person or entity from using the process, and from manufacturing, dealing in, using, selling or offering for sale, or importing any product obtained directly or indirectly from such process.

      9- 123.1. A mark cannot be registered if it:

(a) Consists of immoral, deceptive or scandalous matter, or matter which may disparage or falsely suggest a connection with persons, living or dead, institutions, beliefs, or national symbols, or bring them into contempt or disrepute;

(b) Consists of the flag or coat of arms or other insignia of the Philippines or any of its political subdivisions, or of any foreign nation, or any simulation thereof;

(c) Consists of a name, portrait or signature identifying a particular living individual except by his written consent, or the name, signature, or portrait of a deceased President of the Philippines, during the life of his widow, if any, except by written consent of the widow;

(d) Is identical with a registered mark belonging to a different proprietor or a mark with an earlier filing or priority date, in respect of:

(i) The same goods or services, or

(ii) Closely related goods or services, or

(iii) If it nearly resembles such a mark as to be likely to deceive or cause confusion;

(e) Is identical with, or confusingly similar to, or constitutes a translation of a mark which is considered by the competent authority of the Philippines to be well-known internationally and in the Philippines, whether or not it is registered here, as being already the mark of a person other than the applicant for registration, and used for identical or similar goods or services:Provided, That in determining whether a mark is well-known, account shall be taken of the knowledge of the relevant sector of the public, rather than of the public at large, including knowledge in the Philippines which has been obtained as a result of the promotion of the mark;

(f) Is identical with, or confusingly similar to, or constitutes a translation of a mark considered well-known in accordance with the preceding paragraph, which is registered in the Philippines with respect to goods or services which are not similar to those with respect to which registration is applied for:Provided, That use of the mark in relation to those goods or services would indicate a connection between those goods or services, and the owner of the registered mark: Provided further, That the interests of the owner of the registered mark are likely to be damaged by such use;

(g) Is likely to mislead the public, particularly as to the nature, quality, characteristics or geographical origin of the goods or services;

(h) Consists exclusively of signs that are generic for the goods or services that they seek to identify;

(i) Consists exclusively of signs or of indications that have become customary or usual to designate the goods or services in everyday language or in bona fide and established trade practice;

(j) Consists exclusively of signs or of indications that may serve in trade to designate the kind, quality, quantity, intended purpose, value, geographical origin, time or production of the goods or rendering of the services, or other characteristics of the goods or services;

(k) Consists of shapes that may be necessitated by technical factors or by the nature of the goods themselves or factors that affect their intrinsic value;

(l) Consists of color alone, unless defined by a given form; or

(m) Is contrary to public order or morality.

10-  Sec. 155. Remedies; Infringement. – Any person who shall, without the consent of the owner of the registered mark:

155.1. Use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark or the same container or a dominant feature thereof in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, advertising of any goods or services including other preparatory steps necessary to carry out the sale of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; or

155.2. Reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate a registered mark or a dominant feature thereof and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used in commerce upon or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive, shall be liable in a civil action for infringement by the registrant for the remedies hereinafter set forth: Provided, That the infringement takes place at the moment any of the acts stated in Subsection

155.1 or this subsection are committed regardless of whether there is actual sale of goods or services using the infringing material. 

11-             Prosource International, Inc. v. Horphag Research Management SA, G.R. No. 180073, November 25, 2009, 605 SCRA 523, 531; McDonald’s Corporation v. MacJoy Fastfood Corporation, G.R. No. 166115, February 2, 2007, 514 SCRA 95, 106; McDonald’s Corporation v. L.C. Big Mak Burger, Inc., 480 Phil. 402, 434 (2004).

12-             G.R. No. 164321, March 23, 2011

13- Sec. 172. Literary and Artistic Works. –

172.1 Literary and artistic works, hereinafter referred to as “works”, are original intellectual creations in the literary and artistic domain protected from the moment of their creation and shall include in particular:

(a) Books, pamphlets, articles and other writings;

(b) Periodicals and newspapers;

(c) Lectures, sermons, addresses, dissertations prepared for oral delivery, whether or not reduced in writing or other material form;

(d) Letters;

(e) Dramatic or dramatico-musical compositions; choreographic works or entertainment in dumb shows;

(f) Musical compositions, with or without words;

(g) Works of drawing, painting, architecture, sculpture, engraving, lithography or other works of art; models or designs for works of art;

(h) Original ornamental designs or models for articles of manufacture, whether or not registrable as an industrial design, and other works of applied art;

(i) Illustrations, maps, plans, sketches, charts and three-dimensional works relative to geography, topography, architecture or science;

(j) Drawings or plastic works of a scientific or technical character;

(k) Photographic works including works produced by a process analogous to photography; lantern slides;

(l) Audiovisual works and cinematographic works and works produced by a process analogous to cinematography or any process for making audio-visual recordings;

(m) Pictorial illustrations and advertisements;

(n) Computer programs; and

(o) Other literary, scholarly, scientific and artistic works.

172.2. Works are protected by the sole fact of their creation, irrespective of their mode or form of expression, as well as of their content, quality and purpose.

14-  Sec. 176. Works of the Government. –

176.1. No copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the Philippines. However,  prior approval of the government agency or office wherein the work is created shall be necessary for exploitation of such work for profit. Such agency or office may, among other things, impose as a condition the payment of royalties. No prior approval or conditions shall be required for the use of any purpose of statutes, rules and regulations, and speeches, lectures, sermons, addresses, and dissertations, pronounced, read or rendered in courts of justice, before administrative agencies, in deliberative assemblies and in meetings of public character. (Sec. 9, First Par., P. D. No. 49)

176.2. The Author of speeches, lectures, sermons, addresses, and dissertations mentioned in the preceding paragraphs shall have the exclusive right of making a collection of his works. (n)

176.3. Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions, the Government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest or otherwise; nor shall publication or republication by the government in a public document of any work in which copy right is subsisting be taken to cause any abridgment or annulment of the copyright or to authorize any use or appropriation of such work without the consent of the copyright owners. (Sec. 9, Third Par., P. D. No. 49)

15-       Sec. 184. Limitations on Copyright. –

184.1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter V, the following acts shall not constitute infringement of copyright:

(a) the recitation or performance of a work, once it has been lawfully made accessible to the public, if done privately and free of charge or if made strictly for a charitable or religious institution or society; (Sec. 10(1), P. D. No. 49)

(b) The making of quotations from a published work if they are compatible with fair use and only to the extent justified for the purpose, including quotations from newspaper articles and periodicals in the form of press summaries: Provided, That the source and the name of the author, if appearing on the work, are mentioned; (Sec. 11, Third Par., P. D. No. 49)

(c) The reproduction or communication to the public by mass media of articles on current political, social, economic, scientific or religious topic, lectures, addresses and other works of the same nature, which are delivered in public if such use is for information purposes and has not been expressly reserved: Provided, That the source is clearly indicated; (Sec. 11, P. D. No. 49)

(d) The reproduction and communication to the public of literary, scientific or artistic works as part of reports of current events by means of photography, cinematography or broadcasting to the extent necessary for the purpose; (Sec. 12, P. D. No. 49)

(e) The inclusion of a work in a publication, broadcast, or other communication to the public, sound recording or film, if such inclusion is made by way of illustration for teaching purposes and is compatible with fair use: Provided, That the source and of the name of the author, if appearing in the work, are mentioned;

(f) The recording made in schools, universities, or educational institutions of a work included in a broadcast for the use of such schools, universities or educational institutions: Provided, That such recording must be deleted within a reasonable period after they were first broadcast: Provided, further, That such recording may not be made from audiovisual works which are part of the general cinema repertoire of feature films except for brief excerpts of the work;

(g) The making of ephemeral recordings by a broadcasting organization by means of its own facilities and for use in its own broadcast;

(h) The use made of a work by or under the direction or control of the Government, by the National Library or by educational, scientific or professional institutions where such use is in the public interest and is compatible with fair use;

(i) The public performance or the communication to the public of a work, in a place where no admission fee is charged in respect of such public performance or communication, by a club or institution for charitable or educational purpose only, whose aim is not profit making, subject to such other limitations as may be provided in the Regulations; (n)

(j) Public display of the original or a copy of the work not made by means of a film, slide, television image or otherwise on screen or by means of any other device or process: Provided, That either the work has been published, or, that original or the copy displayed has been sold, given away or otherwise transferred to another person by the author or his successor in title; and

(k) Any use made of a work for the purpose of any judicial proceedings or for the giving of professional advice by a legal practitioner.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s