6 | DAILY DOSE OF 32-0 | THE RAFFY TULFO IN ACTION VS. ATTY. LIBAYAN COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT CASE
00:26.3
but also invoke fair use
00:29.0
whenever they are confronted with these kinds of cases.
00:35.0
Because like what I said, mga kabatas natin,
00:37.1
tulad ng sinabi ko,
00:38.7
kahit sa sobrang ingat mo,
00:40.1
at ako, sobra yung ingat ko, mga kabatas natin,
00:43.0
makakasuhan at makakasuhan ka
00:44.5
dahil meron at meron kong pikod.
00:47.4
Ang importante ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
00:49.3
you are armed with the resources
00:56.9
no instance cases,
00:59.7
slap cases against you.
01:02.9
Ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
01:04.1
a huge part of me actually
01:11.0
umabot sa Supreme Court ito,
01:15.4
na mag-petition for a certiorari sila
01:17.5
based on Rule 65,
01:20.4
pakit sa Court of Appeals,
01:22.6
tapos pupunta sa Supreme Court.
01:25.7
a huge part of me, mga kabatas natin,
01:36.2
what the judge did here.
01:40.5
To immortalize what the judge did here.
01:44.0
Para, pag sinerch mo, mga kabatas natin,
01:50.9
lalabas itong kaso na ito,
01:55.7
it will be available for everyone,
01:59.2
it will be immortalized,
02:00.8
it will be part of our case law.
02:03.8
I think that will give justice
02:11.3
that the judge made here.
02:20.3
Napakaganda, mga kabatas natin.
02:25.7
Magkaroon ng GR number.
02:28.0
Pero, syempre, tulad ng sinabi ko sa inyo,
02:29.6
the citations here cannot be discounted
02:32.4
because, like I said,
02:34.3
yung mga US law na kanyang sinayit dito
02:36.7
si judge, mga kabatas natin,
02:38.3
they are secondary sources of law
02:39.9
here in the Philippines.
02:43.4
So, I'm fine with that.
02:45.4
That's a different case anyway.
02:49.0
When they will be filing it,
02:51.3
kapag nag-file sila noon,
02:52.6
it's a petition for review
02:55.7
Based on Rule 65.
02:59.4
grave abuse of discretion
03:01.3
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
03:04.0
on the part of the judge.
03:07.0
Sasabihin nila unfair o kaya
03:08.9
partial yung judge.
03:12.1
How can you attribute
03:14.2
impartiality here?
03:21.3
It's well written.
03:23.1
It's well researched.
03:25.6
It's backed up by case law.
03:43.9
Sabi ni Paps Chulo,
03:45.6
if ever mag-file sila certiorari
03:48.4
ang RTC magiging jurisprudence na ba yan?
03:53.4
Magiging jurisprudence na siya.
03:55.6
Which is also I like,
04:08.2
Yun, mga kabatas natin.
04:11.8
That sort of claim,
04:14.9
ito kasi mga kabatas natin,
04:15.9
dun sa mga hindi nakasunod
04:18.1
galing sa kabila.
04:19.4
Hints of jurisprudential shift
04:21.9
of failures from defense
04:24.2
to copyright limitations.
04:24.6
Copyright limitations.
04:25.6
Ang nangyari na kasi mga kabatas natin,
04:27.6
before copyright,
04:31.4
ang fair use kasi
04:38.1
But, mga kabatas natin,
04:41.4
based on jurisprudence,
04:45.0
a copyright limitation.
04:51.6
Mas makikita natin yung mas malalim na wisdom
04:53.8
ng judge na nagslot niyan.
04:55.3
That judge will fight tooth and nail.
05:00.2
Actually, kapag ano,
05:01.9
kayo, kapag umakyat yan
05:04.1
sa doon sa korte,
05:07.1
most of the time,
05:07.8
hindi na sumasagot yung mga judges dyan eh.
05:10.4
Most of the time,
05:11.2
I will be defending
05:12.8
na lang the decision of the judge
05:19.2
yung judge usually hindi na sumasagot.
05:21.4
Pero ewan ko kung sasagot siya.
05:22.6
Ewan ko kung ano yung i-attribute sa kanya.
05:30.6
Kung sasagot siya o hindi.
05:36.8
malamang, malamang.
05:39.6
Kasi kung kunwari,
05:40.9
itong mga judge natin,
05:41.9
they're very busy people.
05:46.1
pag nag-file ng isang
05:47.3
Rule 65 yung isang tao,
05:49.2
tapos nakikita naman nila
05:50.3
na wala silang ginawang mali.
05:51.5
They leave it to the court na.
05:54.2
To see kung may mali.
05:58.9
Kung sasagot siya,
06:02.2
Pwede rin naman siyang
06:04.1
huwag nang sumagot.
06:07.2
Ngayon, mga kapatid natin,
06:14.3
to copyright limitation.
06:16.8
that sort of claim
06:17.6
that fair use limits copyright infringement
06:19.5
instead of just carving out holes from it,
06:21.7
it will strike most copyright lawyers
06:23.5
as odd or mistaken.
06:26.3
Sinasabi kasi nila
06:30.3
well, yung mga hindi copyright lawyers,
06:33.3
iniisip nila na ano,
06:37.3
o carving holes lang,
06:42.3
ito, mga kabatas natin,
06:48.3
Sabi niya, hindi yan depensa.
06:52.3
it's been declared repeatedly
06:54.3
is an affirmation.
06:55.3
It's an affirmative defense.
06:56.3
You only reach the issue of fair use
06:58.3
if it's already been determined
07:00.3
that the plaintiff has established infringement.
07:03.3
It's too late to rebut the infringement claim
07:11.3
But while the modern cases
07:13.3
all say fair use is just a defense,
07:15.3
it's clear it's more than just,
07:17.3
it's more than that.
07:21.3
is a critical part of how copyright lawyers
07:23.3
and judges determine what is infringing
07:25.3
in the first place.
07:27.3
Which is why copyright analysis
07:31.3
before infringement has been clearly established.
07:34.3
Anong sinabi dito, mga kabatas natin?
07:36.3
Ang sinabi dito, sabi kasi, no?
07:40.3
Parang, ops, sandali.
07:42.3
May ginamit na video.
07:44.3
Copyright infringement yan.
07:46.3
Tapos, ang iniisip nila,
07:48.3
default copyright infringement agad.
07:50.3
Huwag mo munang pag-usapan.
07:51.3
O huwag muna natin pag-usapan.
07:52.3
Huwag muna natin pag-usapan
08:00.3
Ang pag-iisip, ang ano ngayon,
08:02.3
ang usapan ngayon,
08:04.3
copyright infringement ba ito
08:10.3
Pag fair use siya,
08:14.3
Kasi nga mga kabatas natin,
08:16.3
before nangyayari,
08:18.3
o copyright infringement yan.
08:21.3
O patunayan mo na fair use.
08:24.3
Doon mo patunayan.
08:28.3
Ganon, yung parang sinasabi nila.
08:32.3
Kahit obvious na obvious na na fair use,
08:35.3
sasabihin pa rin nila,
08:37.3
wait, let's go to court.
08:39.3
Doon mo patunayan na fair use yan.
08:47.3
Ngayon, ang usapan na,
08:51.3
copyright infringement yan,
08:57.3
Ganon ang usapan na.
09:01.3
Sabi niya dito mga kabatas natin,
09:03.3
copyright owner sending takedown notices
09:05.3
under section 512
09:15.3
can be sued if they don't take fair use into account,
09:18.3
which would be inexplicable
09:20.3
if it was just a defense.
09:24.3
This applies to YouTube too.
09:28.3
kapag ikaw ay nag copyright strike,
09:31.3
tapos false yung copyright strike mo,
09:34.3
hindi lang na yung copyright strike mo ay pwedeng,
09:38.3
o yung false copyright strike mo ay maging copyright strike mo,
09:42.3
pwede rin, mga kabatas natin,
09:47.3
Ito yung sa states.
09:50.3
Nung nag-uusap pa kami, mga kabatas natin,
09:56.3
naalala nyo ba si,
09:59.3
Sa Axie Infinity din.
10:04.3
Invested Lifestyle.
10:06.3
Nung nag-uusap pa kami ni Invested Lifestyle, mga kabatas natin,
10:11.3
maraming nag-false copyright strike sa kanya.
10:14.3
Ngayon, dahil nasa states sila,
10:16.3
yung mga false copyright strike na ginawa sa kanya,
10:19.3
kinasuhan niya daw,
10:21.3
o kakasuhan niya yung mga yun,
10:26.3
Pinakita niya sa akin, ito.
10:31.3
Copyright owners sending take-down notices under Section 512
10:35.3
can be sued if they don't take fair use into account.
10:38.3
Kasi pag nakita mo na nga na fair use,
10:40.3
di ba, yung ginawa,
10:42.3
and you yourself believe it's fair use,
10:44.3
bakit mo pa kakasuhan?
10:48.3
it's a nuisan suit or a slap suit.
10:52.3
Kaya pwede ka rin kasuhan.
11:01.3
Ngayon, mga kabatas natin,
11:04.3
there's a long history in copyright law of treating fair use
11:07.3
as not simply a series of carve-outs,
11:10.3
but as the inverse of infringement.
11:14.3
Inverse of infringement?
11:17.3
parang true or false.
11:21.3
Kasi ano ang inverse ng true?
11:24.3
So, take for example, no?
11:27.3
True ang copyright infringement,
11:30.3
false ang fair use.
11:36.3
There can only be one answer.
11:38.3
It's either true, copyright infringement,
11:41.3
or false, fair use.
11:44.3
Hindi pwedeng, wait,
11:48.3
Copyright, hindi pwedeng, wait, false yan.
11:59.3
True pa rin ngayon, ha?
12:01.3
Copyright infringement yan,
12:03.3
kasi nga hanggang hindi tayo pumupunta sa korte,
12:09.3
hindi mo pwedeng sabihin false.
12:19.2
Hindi mo pa pwedeng
12:22.5
We have to go into
12:25.0
A full-blown trial
12:25.9
Before you say it's copyright
12:28.0
Before you say it's fair use
12:37.6
Ngayon mga kabatas natin
12:40.6
Nagiging baliktad kasi
12:42.5
Yung burden of proof
12:43.3
Kaya ang dapat na way
12:45.2
Is to start from the action
12:46.9
This is not fair use
12:48.4
Therefore infringement
12:51.3
Proof by contradiction
12:55.6
Ang sinasabi kasi nila
12:56.6
No, you infringed it
13:03.9
Hindi mo pwedeng sabihin fair use
13:07.0
Pwedeng i-invoke yan
13:15.1
Dapat sasabihin mo
13:16.5
Hindi yan fair use
13:17.6
Kaya titignan din nung ano
13:22.7
Oo nga hindi ito fair use
13:24.4
Copyright infringement yan
13:30.3
Pag sinabi mo talaga na
13:31.8
It's just a defense
13:32.8
That you can only set up
13:34.8
Kawawa yung mga judges natin
13:37.6
Ngayong ang dami-dami
14:04.8
The private complainant
14:07.0
The issue on fair use
14:10.9
The private complainant
14:16.0
Therefore recognize that
14:17.1
It is not merely a defense
14:18.9
But a limitation to its copyright
14:23.4
Paano ba inopen dito
14:24.9
Nang Rafi Tulfo in action
14:34.2
Yung depensa na yan
14:35.3
Magagamit niya lang sa trial
14:36.7
So dapat pumasok to sa korte
14:46.6
If the fair use defense
14:48.4
Can only be invoked in trial
14:50.0
Wouldn't that send a nationwide chilling effect?
14:52.0
It will of course
14:56.5
Basta ginamit mo yung video ko
14:58.7
And if you say fair use
15:00.4
Let's talk in court
15:01.5
Hire a lawyer first
15:07.4
Na gustong mag-criticize
15:08.8
Hindi na sila mag-criticize
15:10.5
It stifles somehow
15:11.8
The freedom of speech
15:18.6
Pero kahit tama yung ginagawa ko
15:20.3
Hindi ko nalang gagawin
15:25.1
They can still drag me to court
15:27.6
Pwede pa rin akong
15:30.9
Tapos dalhin sa korte
15:33.4
And even if the case
15:35.7
Will be dismissed eventually like this
15:40.5
At nasayang na oras
15:42.6
That's still a lot
15:57.7
There is a paradigm shift
15:60.0
In the Philippine jurisprudence
16:07.8
Philippine jurisprudence na
16:10.5
It started with the defense
16:13.1
To the defense of truth
16:14.6
To the defense of actual malice
16:16.2
And the consequent need
16:17.5
For the prosecution to prove truth
16:19.5
This was traced by the Supreme Court
16:22.5
In the case of Seriyaki Boy King King
16:24.5
Versus the Honorable Court of Appeals et al
16:28.9
Shift in paradigm illustrates
16:30.7
The balancing of rights
16:32.1
Between the protection of the interest of the state
16:34.3
And its officials
16:35.3
And the individual's freedom of expression
16:37.8
And freedom of speech
16:40.5
So it is in copyright
16:44.4
There is a need to balance
16:47.7
The proprietary right of the maker
16:49.5
To encourage pursuit of creative
16:51.5
Artistic, literary, and scientific endeavors
16:54.1
And the right of the society
16:55.9
To freedom of expression
16:57.3
Freedom of speech
16:58.5
And the use of works
16:59.8
For the greater humanitarian need
17:01.6
Ang ganda, di ba?
17:15.5
What are you fighting for?
17:19.2
To balance the proprietary right of the maker
17:24.3
To encourage pursuit of creative
17:26.2
Artistic, literary, and scientific endeavors
17:29.0
And the right of the society
17:30.7
To freedom of expression
17:32.1
Freedom of speech
17:34.0
For the greater humanitarian need
17:35.5
Tamang tama yung sinabi ni Fiona kanina
17:39.1
It will send a chilling effect
17:40.4
Imbes na magsasalita ka
17:42.5
Hindi ka nalang magsasalita
17:46.0
Kakasuhan ka lang
17:51.8
This balancing interest was also shown
17:54.1
In the case of Andy Warhol Foundation
17:55.8
For the Visual Arts Incorporated
17:57.4
Versus Goldsmith et al
18:01.1
The Copyright Act encouraged creativity
18:03.9
By granting the author of an original work
18:06.5
A bundle of exclusive rights
18:09.2
Harping on the fact that the copyright act is a bundle of exclusive rights
18:10.0
Harping on the fact that the copyright act is a bundle of exclusive rights
18:10.4
In the case of Harper & Row Publishers
18:12.4
Blah blah blah blah
18:12.6
Take note nyo nalang yung mga
18:16.8
I take note nyo nalang yung mga
18:22.7
The Congress shall have power
18:25.9
The progress of science
18:27.6
By securing for limited times
18:29.1
To authors and inventors
18:31.1
The exclusive right
18:32.0
To their respective
18:32.9
Writings and discoveries
18:34.4
That bundle includes the right
18:35.4
To reproduce the copyrighted work
18:37.1
To prepare derivative works
18:38.8
And in the case of pictorial in the world
18:40.3
graphic works to display the copyrighted work
18:42.3
publicly. Ito na.
18:47.3
The act, however,
18:48.8
reflects balance of competing
18:50.6
claims upon the public interest.
18:52.8
Creative work is to be encouraged
18:54.6
and rewarded, but private
18:56.6
motivation must ultimately serve
18:58.3
the cause of promoting broad
19:00.4
public availability of literature,
19:07.4
Copyright thus trades
19:08.4
off the benefits of incentives to
19:10.4
create against the cost of restrictions
19:12.2
on copying. The act, for example,
19:14.5
limits the duration of copyright as
19:16.4
required by the Constitution, makes
19:18.5
facts and ideas uncopyrightable,
19:20.4
and limits the scope of copyright owners'
19:22.6
exclusive rights. This balancing act
19:24.5
between creativity and availability,
19:26.9
including for use in new works, is
19:28.4
reflected in one such limitation,
19:30.8
the defense of fair
19:38.4
It limits the scope of copyright
19:44.6
owners' exclusive
19:48.9
It's a limitation.
19:55.9
The defense of fair use.
20:02.7
in one such limitation.
20:04.7
Ang ganda, di ba?
20:16.0
the issue herein is whether
20:18.7
or not the proprietary rights of the copyright
20:20.7
owner prevail over the right
20:22.7
of the accused to freedom of expression
20:24.8
or the right of the press to freedom
20:26.5
of speech. For strange
20:28.7
as it is, it is the lawyer accused
20:30.7
as commenter to a legal public
20:32.6
service program of a journalist who
20:34.7
is in the position of a journalist herein.
20:36.9
The journalist, by
20:38.4
doing the public service program delving
20:40.5
on the legal system, opens himself
20:42.7
up to public criticisms by
20:44.6
anyone, and most certainly
20:46.4
by rights as officers of the
20:56.5
Yung ginagawa ni Rafi Tulfo, sinabi
20:58.5
dito mga kabatas natin, binubuksan
21:00.7
niya yung sarili niya
21:06.3
Sino yung mga magkikritisize?
21:08.4
Kasi nagdedelge siya sa batas.
21:13.5
Ngayon, it's because
21:16.1
are officers of the court
21:22.4
I am in the best interest
21:24.4
to criticize that.
21:34.6
cannot be shielded from said criticism
21:36.4
by the very nature of his profession.
21:38.4
It is the public service
21:40.2
nature of the program, not the profession
21:42.5
of the program maker-host that opens up
21:44.4
the limitation of fair use on
21:46.3
the copyright of the publisher at the
21:48.5
very outset of the case
21:50.2
as a function of freedom of speech and
21:52.2
freedom of the press.
21:57.2
Attorney, I will end
22:01.3
papasok sa susunod. Attorney Ronnie Randolph
22:04.4
Libayan is required by his
22:06.0
profession. Required?
22:13.5
It makes sense that
22:14.5
YouTube takes fair use into account sa start
22:16.3
pa lang kasi sila ang mayayari
22:18.2
sa false claims sa US. Yes, they will be
22:23.1
Kung ayaw ni Idol Ju Process
22:24.4
e panira ng discount.
22:34.4
Attorney Ronnie Randolph Libayan is
22:38.4
Anong ibig sabihin ng
22:53.8
Basahin muna natin
22:56.0
Attorney Ronnie Randolph Libayan is required by his profession
22:58.8
as a lawyer to uphold the following provisions
23:01.2
of the Code of Professional
23:02.9
Responsibility and Accountability.
23:05.3
Propriety. Responsible use of
23:07.7
A lawyer to uphold the following provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Accountability.
23:08.3
A lawyer shall uphold the dignity of the legal profession in all social media interactions in a manner that enhances the people's confidence in the legal system as well as promote its responsible use.
23:23.4
Anong ibig sabihin ng required?
24:07.2
It's indispensable.
24:15.1
Because I'm here.
24:18.8
Ito sabi ni Mang Renesas.
24:21.5
Because I'm here.
24:23.5
I have to do this.
24:29.0
I have to protect
24:31.3
the Constitution.
24:34.1
The Constitution.
24:37.8
The legal profession.
24:43.3
Grey side judicial bodies.
25:10.4
Yan, mga kapatid natin.
25:11.9
Maraming salamat.
25:15.0
Your process is still the king.
25:16.5
It will always be the king.
25:20.0
Maraming salamat po.
25:21.2
Siyempre, tulad na lang yung sinasabi.
25:22.5
Matulog po tayo ng mahimbing
25:24.3
na yung natutulog ng mahimbing,
25:26.0
siya yung lagi yung panalo.