PHILIPPINES IPR TO ADDRESS FLICKER PIRACY

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 MANILA 001975 SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR EAP/MTS, EAP/EP, AND EEB/TPP/IPE STATE PASS USTR FOR BWEISEL, RBAE AND KEHLERS STATE ALSO PASS USAID, OPIC TREASURY FOR OASIA USDOC FOR 4430/ITA/MAC USDOC PASS USPTO BANGKOK FOR FCS JENNIFER NESS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KIPR ETRD ECON RP SUBJECT: PHILIPPINES IPR TO ADDRESS FLICKER PIRACY REF: Manila 497 ¶1. (U) Summary: Illegal recording of movies in cinemas, known as "flicker piracy," is becoming an intellectual property rights concern for both local and foreign film industry players in the Philippines. Specific legislation to address the problem is in the Lower House of the Philippine legislature, but not yet in the Senate. A new Manila City ordinance against flicker piracy is a stopgap measure. End Summary. Flicker Piracy in Metro Manila -------------- ¶2. (U) Flicker piracy is becoming a serious concern to foreign and local film industry players in the Philippines. Flicker piracy, the illegal recording of movies while being shown in cinemas using video recording gadgets such as a mobile phones or more sophisticated camera equipment, is a violation of intellectual property rights. According to the Philippine Motion Picture Anti-Film Piracy Council, the film industry in the country could generate about 7 billion pesos annually nationwide without film piracy, but with increased film piracy in the past two years, revenues from theater ticket sales of local as well as foreign films only reached about 4 billion pesos annually. Pirates have reportedly targeted Manila for flicker piracy since first run films are shown in English here without dubbing or subtitles. As a result, pirates get a "clean copy" of the film which they can then subtitle or dub as they please. Caught Watching "Wanted" -------------- ¶3. (U) Local enforcement agents of the National Bureau of Investigation arrested and charged two men caught illegally taking a video of Angelina Jolie's film "Wanted," while being shown inside a movie house in an SM Mall in Quezon City. The two suspects were discreetly using MP4 recorders to copy the film. When the local enforcement officers asked the suspects to show permission to record the movie, the two failed to do so. The Quezon City Prosecutor's Office charged suspects with violating Section 217.1 (on copyright infringement) of the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines. Need for an Enabling Law for Flicker Piracy -------------- ¶4. (SBU) Local IP stakeholders and practitioners such as the Philippine Motion Picture Film Anti-Piracy Council, as well as the Optical Media Board share the view that there is no precise law against flicker piracy and the IP Code as it stands may not be sufficient. Hence, both local and foreign IP stakeholders are advocating a law that would detail firm penalties for this IPR violation. ¶5. (SBU) The Optical Media Board, according to its Chairman, Eduardo Manzano, is looking at the possibility of amending the Optical Media Act to expand its scope, which is now limited to regulation and licensing of optical media for protecting and promoting intellectual property rights (reftel). He noted that given advances in technology, optical media may be obsolete in a few years. Proposed Legislation in Congress -------------- ¶6. (U) Representative Irwin Tieng filed an anti-piracy bill known as the Anti-Camcording Bill (House Bill 4117). This bill aims to prohibit and penalize the unauthorized possession, use and/or control of audiovisual recording devices for the unauthorized recording of cinematographic films, other audiovisual works and/or their soundtracks in public exhibition/ theatrical facilities. It defines such unauthorized acts as contrary to the public interest, economic growth, and the intellectual property rights of the owners of cinematographic films, audiovisual works and/or soundtracks. In a recent meeting with Economic Officers, a staffer of the House Committee on Public Information confirmed that the proposed Anti-Camcording Act is currently in the committee, but is not considered priority legislation. ¶7. (SBU) As yet there is not a counterpart bill in the Senate. In a meeting with Economic Officers, Matthew Cheetham of the Motion Picture Association International said that they are looking for MANILA 00001975 002 OF 002 Senators to file a similar bill. City Ordinance: A Stop Gap Measure -------------- ¶8. (U) On July 8, the City Council of Manila passed the Film Protection Ordinance of Manila which penalizes the use, possession and/or control of audio-visual recording devices for the unauthorized recording of cinematographic films and other audio-visual works and/or their soundtrack in cinemas or other exhibition facilities. Penalties for violation of the ordinance include imprisonment of up to one year and a fine of up to 5,000.00 pesos. Manila is the first municipality in the Philippines to enact such a measure. Members of the local film and movie industry, such as the Film Academy of the Philippines applauded this as a stopgap measure to combat flicker piracy. ¶9. (U) Comment: It is good to see the local film industry actively fighting for intellectual property rights in the Philippines. While the current IP Code is the basis for arrests for flicker piracy, industry stakeholders hope that new legislation will specifically address this violation. In the meantime, city ordinances such as the Film Protection Ordinance could serve as stop-gap measures. Kenney