Book Piracy: Whose Problem Is It?

In an INQ7.Net story, Chairman Edu Manzano of the Optical Media Board cites book piracy as the culprit behind the Philippines being put on the U.S. Trade Representative’s Special 301 Priority Watchlist. What he means is that book piracy is more prevalent in this country than optical disk piracy.

Well, that’s an eye-opener.

I can’t remember the last time I saw a pirated book for sale. I can’t remember the last time the media reported a crackdown on book pirates either printing or selling those materials. I can’t remember the last time someone approached me on the street asking me to buy a copy of a pirated book. In fact, I’m not even aware of any place that sells pirated books. But pirated software, music and movies contained in optical disks are available in most shopping places (not counting those door-to-door merchants going through offices). Although my data is anecdotal, I’ll bet Mr. Manzano’s conclusion is wrong..

On the one hand, his statement can be dismissed as being entirely self-serving. By diverting attention away from optical disk piracy, he’s relieving himself of the obligation to fight it more vigorously. After all, this kind of piracy doesn’t contribute so much to piracy overall.

But this position leads to the following questions: (a) If optical disk piracy isn’t such a priority in the fight against infringement, then why didn’t Congress pass a law on book piracy (say, one that regulates xerox copiers instead of optical disk duplication)? and, (b) Why must taxpayers fund the Optical Media Board when it won’t contribute as much to removing the Philippines from the Special 301 Watchlist? Given our meager resources, shouldn’t we instead fund a body designed to combat book piracy?

If he’s correct, then the policy response should be: “Let’s leave the optical disk pirates for now while we combat the larger problem of book piracy.”

I guess one could argue that thousands of textbooks are pirated on a yearly basis by students all over the country. As a law professor, I can attest that some law students do photocopy entire books but law books are written by Filipinos so this can’t affect the Special 301 Watchlist. But law books are the exception. I would venture that most books used in college and graduate schools (not to mention vocational schools) are foreign. So, I guess Mr. Manzano is correct in saying that book piracy is a problem. But I suppose the difference is that noone is engaged in large-scale book piracy to the same extent as optical disk pirates.

This leads to the next logical question which is: “Who’s responsible for fighting book piracy?” To this, Inq7.Net reports

Meanwhile, Intellectual Property Office Director General Adrian Cristobal, Jr. admitted that the problem of book piracy falls in a “gray area” since no single government agency is mandated to stamp out the problem.

Well, he’s right and he’s wrong. He’s right that no single government agency is mandated to stamp out the problem of book piracy. But he’s wrong that it falls within the “gray area.” Book piracy, like all other forms of piracy, can be fought only by the copyright owner. For some, this seems like a radical idea. So, I’ll repeat it: “IP rights owners are responsible for protecting their own intellectual property rights.” This is true because IP enforcement can’t be done except if initiated by the IP rights holder. After all, IP rights are private rights and may be assigned or licensed without reporting the matter to the authorities.

There’s also a practical reason for this — law enforcement officers can’t tell if an item violates someone’s IP. If you saw someone selling a book or a DVD, you can’t know for sure that the copyright owner has not licensed that person to sell it. In order to prosecute, the copyright owner must first report the violation and seek the assistance of the state. This is why the IP Office, which Mr. Cristobal heads, is in no position to stop book piracy unless a specific IP rights owner complains. In the absence of the same, the IP Office would have no evidence to prove the infringement. Worse, without the participation of the IP rights owner, the IP Office might be prosecuting someone who has a legitimate license from the IP owner.  Because of this, people should not blame the IP Office for the proliferation of piracy in the country.  It’s not their fault.  It’s the fault of the pirates and to some degree, the failure or refusal of the IP rights owners to protect their property.

Which leads me back to the Optical Media Board and my opposition to the Optical Media Law.  As I mentioned, IP enforcement should be done only when the IP owner reports a violation of his rights and pursues the case.  In other words, IP rights enforcement is a private matter funded by IP rights owners.  This is as it should be.  We all have property but we don’t require the State to protect it specifically.  If I have a car, I don’t require the PNP to assign one cop just to stand guard beside it at all times.

On the other hand, the Optical Media Law permits the OMB to pursue piracy cases even if the IP rights owner is unaware or is indifferent to protecting his rights.  This is because they’re authorized to pursue the illegal use of the media (optical disk) not necessarily the IP rights violation.  So what we have is a government agency funded by the taxpayers to protect private IP rights. Worse, the OMB will probably protect more foreign than local IP rights holders.

But that’s the nature of State policy towards intellectual property rights.  It goes against the Filipino first policy of the Constitution and surrenders the IP market to foreign domination.  I’ve always advocated that we review our IP policy and reform it to suit our national interest and the ideals of our Constitution.