The United States Trade Representative’s (USTR) 2022 Special 301 Report once again kept the Philippines out of its watch list of countries with intellectual property (IP) concerns and even recognized the country’s efforts to combat counterfeiting and piracy.
“We welcome the overall positive assessment of the USTR on the Philippine IP environment. This is yet another testament that the IP Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) and the National Committee on IP Rights (NCIPR) remain steadfast in fostering innovation, creativity and entrepreneurship and preserving the country’s attractiveness as a destination for foreign IP assets to thrive,” Director General Rowel S. Barba said.
The Report, released last month, mentioned parts of the country’s efforts to battle IP rights violations and increase awareness, including IPOPHL’s collaboration with the World IP Organization (WIPO) for a nationwide baseline survey to measure IP level awareness and identify gaps and priority areas.
“The Philippines also continues to conduct workshops for law enforcement officers and public prosecutors with the objective to strengthen coordination and capacity on enforcement,” the report added.
The enforcement of Anti-Camcording in the Philippines was also mentioned as the Report pointed out that countries “need to update legal frameworks to effectively deter unauthorized camcording and keep up with changing practices.”
“Our continuing growth as an IP rights-conscious country is evident in these best practices. But our commitment in the past years toward a more secure IP system goes beyond these examples. We have undertaken a wide array of partnerships, capacity building and promotions and this has helped us stay out of the USTR’s watch list for good,” Barba noted.
Barba also commended the National Committee on IP Rights’ (NCIPR’s) thrust toward clearing the markets of pirated content and counterfeit goods, including in Greenhills Shopping Center in San Juan City, which is the lone Philippine market in the USTR’s Notorious Markets List for Counterfeiting and Piracy. The NCIPR has been forming an action plan in response to Greenhills sellers’ increasing openness with its illicit trade.
Other recent efforts include the promotion of Anti-Counterfeit and Anti-Piracy (ACAP) policies, which has since been taken on by private partners and government agencies.
“The improvements in our battle against counterfeiting and piracy have always been attributed to our whole-of-nation approach. Best IP practices can start in each company, institution, barangay and down to our own homes,” Barba added.
Strengthening enforcement, speeding up proceedings
The Special 301 Report alleged once again that the Philippines, along with China, India, Vietnam, Indonesia and Pakistan, is among the top countries that are sources of counterfeit medicines globally. The USTR cited data from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union IP Office (EUIPO).
“The data from the OECD and EUIPO presented in the “Trade in Counterfeit Pharmaceutical Products” publication dates back to 2014-2016. Thus, it fails to consider subsequent efforts taken and more recent data. Regardless, we are strengthening our efforts to ensure that our pharmaceutical industry remains trusted and capacitated to combat the effects of counterfeiting,” Deputy Director General Teodoro C. Pascua said.
He noted that IPOPHL partnered recently with the Pharmaceutical Security Institute (PSI) to form a framework for capacity building, awareness and vital information exchange relevant to curb the circulation of counterfeit medicines.
Pascua noted that IPOPHL is also currently collecting data on counterfeiting reports from private pharmaceutical companies to have fuller and more accurate information on the amount of counterfeit medicines possibly sourced from the Philippines.
IEO data show pharmaceutical and medical products making up 4.4% of the total counterfeiting complaints and reports received by IPOPHL in 2021.
Meanwhile, the USTR Report also mentioned that “many countries, including India, Malaysia and the Philippines, reportedly have slow opposition or cancellation proceedings.” However, no details were provided to support this allegation.
Nevertheless, Barba noted that the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) has already introduced “game-changing” rules to reduce the timelines of the decision and disposal of these cases.
“The IPOPHL is right on track to make the opposition and cancellation proceedings one of the fastest in the ASEAN region, as our BLA targets to resolve this year the remaining opposition and cancellation cases filed in 2019 to 2021, including appeals to the Director from the decisions of the adjudication officers,” Barba said.
The Special 301 Report is the USTR’s annual review of concerns and developments in IP protection and enforcement in the markets of US trading partners.
