Non-Copyrightable Works | Copyrights | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

Non-Copyrightable Works in Philippine Law: An In-Depth Analysis

Under Philippine intellectual property law, particularly the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines (Republic Act No. 8293), copyright protection does not extend to certain types of works, commonly referred to as "non-copyrightable works." Understanding what constitutes non-copyrightable material is essential for legal practitioners, especially in fields where intellectual property concerns intersect with technology, media, and business. This guide outlines and analyzes the key categories of non-copyrightable works, with insights from relevant cases, policy interpretations, and practical considerations.

I. Statutory Basis for Non-Copyrightable Works

The primary legislation governing copyright law in the Philippines, Republic Act No. 8293 (RA 8293), provides specific guidance on copyrightable subject matter. Section 172 defines copyrightable works, and Section 175 explicitly outlines types of works not covered by copyright protection. This section's clarity helps delineate which works fall outside copyright protection.

According to Section 175, the following materials are explicitly classified as non-copyrightable:

1. Laws, Rules, and Official Issuances

   • This includes legislative enactments, administrative regulations, judicial decisions, and public records.
   • Rationale: These documents belong to the public domain because they are created by public officers as part of their duties and are necessary for public awareness and compliance. Additionally, copyright on these would restrict access to legal, regulatory, and judicial information, which would contravene public policy favoring transparency.

2. Government Works Created by Public Officers and Employees

   • This encompasses works produced by government agencies or public officers within the scope of their employment, including reports, statistical data, and other official documents.
   • Exceptions exist for works created under a contractual arrangement where copyright ownership is specifically assigned.
   • Implication: Works created under government commissions or collaborations with private entities may retain copyright if there is a clear contractual stipulation. However, these works must meet specific terms that separate them from typical government-created materials.

3. News of the Day and Mere Facts

   • News itself, including current events, cannot be copyrighted, although the expression or way it is presented can be.
   • Explanation: RA 8293 protects only the “original expression” of an idea and not the idea or fact itself. For example, a news article’s narrative style may be copyrighted, but the facts it conveys remain in the public domain.

4. Ideas, Procedures, Systems, Methods, and Principles

   • These non-copyrightable items extend to mathematical formulas, scientific theories, and business methods.
   • While these can form the basis for patents (if novel and applicable), they are excluded from copyright protection because they are conceptual frameworks, not fixed expressions of an idea.

5. Standard Forms, Familiar Phrases, and Expressions

   • Common phrases, proverbs, slogans, and simple forms used in ordinary activities (such as blank forms) are not copyrightable.
   • Rationale: The lack of original expression in these elements renders them outside the scope of copyright. Copyright law protects unique expression, not standard language or formats.

II. Additional Judicial and Administrative Interpretations

Philippine courts and intellectual property tribunals have further clarified these exclusions in several key cases:

• Case Law on Public Domain Works: Philippine jurisprudence has consistently upheld the view that government-created works are non-copyrightable when performed within an official capacity. This aligns with the principle that government works belong to the people.

• Media and Broadcasting Interpretations: Cases involving media and news agencies underscore that while factual reporting on events is not protected, the unique expression (e.g., an article’s specific style) is safeguarded. This demarcation aims to prevent monopolization of information dissemination while encouraging creative journalistic expression.

III. Theoretical Underpinnings and Policy Rationales

The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) of the Philippines and legislative history indicate that non-copyrightability stems from three main policy considerations:

1. Public Access to Essential Information: Works like laws, rules, and government documents must remain freely accessible to promote public knowledge, legal compliance, and civic engagement.
2. Promotion of Creativity and Innovation: By reserving copyright for original, expressive works, the law encourages creativity while ensuring that fundamental ideas and systems remain accessible for further development and application.
3. Avoidance of Monopolistic Control over Knowledge: Limiting copyright to expressions, rather than ideas or factual information, prevents the monopolization of knowledge and supports democratic information-sharing principles.

IV. Practical Implications for Various Sectors

For legal and commercial practitioners, understanding the limits of copyright protection has several implications:

• Media and Publishing: Journalists and publishers must navigate copyright law by emphasizing original expression in their reporting. While they can protect their specific writing style, the underlying information is accessible to all.

• Software and Technology Development: Tech companies must be cautious about relying on copyright for protection of ideas, algorithms, or processes, which are often better protected through patents, trade secrets, or specific contractual agreements.

• Legal Document Drafting: Lawyers drafting official documents for government agencies must acknowledge that these works typically fall into the public domain unless explicitly specified otherwise in a contract.

V. The Emerging Challenges in Digital and Internet Contexts

The rise of digital content and internet-based information sharing has raised new questions about the limits of copyright law. Social media, data aggregation, and online publishing have led to cases where the boundaries between copyrightable and non-copyrightable works blur. As a response, the IPO has occasionally issued guidelines clarifying digital copyright issues, although these are continually evolving.

• User-Generated Content and News Aggregators: Social media and news aggregation sites pose challenges as users can share news, opinions, and facts instantly. While these platforms can copyright their overall design and specific content, the factual data or news they share remains non-copyrightable.

• Data Collection and Analysis: In sectors where data analysis and algorithms are central, such as fintech and marketing, companies must often rely on trade secret protection or patents rather than copyright to protect proprietary methods.

VI. Conclusion

In the Philippines, non-copyrightable works are clearly defined by RA 8293 and further clarified through court rulings and IPO guidelines. The law’s approach to non-copyrightable works reflects a commitment to public access, creativity, and innovation. Legal practitioners must stay updated on emerging interpretations in the digital age to effectively navigate these areas. As technology evolves, further clarifications and perhaps legislative adjustments may be required to address the complexities of copyright law in an increasingly digital society.

This analysis provides a robust foundation for understanding non-copyrightable works, vital for protecting intellectual property while adhering to the Philippines' legal framework and public policy objectives.