Wednesday, October 26, 2016

Resurrection TO Ascension

Matthew Hussey, the "reluctant" "relationship mentor," said (in that uber sexy British accent) that a great litmus test to determine whether you want your ex for the right reasons is to ask yourself this question, "if someone came along tomorrow, would you still want your ex back?". If the answer is "No" then you don't really want him back, you're just lonely and that's never a good reason to go back to your ex.

And if I were to be truly authentic and honest to myself, I'd rather be single than with my ex again. But the loneliness, after being in a relationship for close to two years, is extremely painful. But it also means I am just "feeling" lonely but I don't really want him back. And you can't possibly "lose" or "miss" someone you don't want in your life in the first place.

So recognizing and "surrendering" to that feeling of loneliness gave me the freedom to see this period in my life for what it truly is, God's rare and precious gift to put the spotlight on me. To put myself under a microscope. To figure "me" out. It's rare because many people never get or refuse to grab the chance. And it's precious because it would be such a waste to live someone else's life.

I asked God why I have to go through this pain again. If it is loneliness that is killing me then why doesn't He send his BEST to me na? If the only reason it hurts is because I haven't met my God's BEST yet, why won't He reveal him to me? And He answered, because I need you alone right now. I need you outside of a relationship so you can put the focus and attention on yourself. To grow. To self-improve. To discover the dreams I put in your heart and to make them come true. Growth requires focus. Transformation requires attention.

Aminin mo, you're a "dream enabler". You're so good at helping people realize and pursue their dreams, but not yours. You're good at it because you love doing it. You are naturally interested in what drives people. And you enjoy being a part of what makes those dreams real. But in the process, you lose sight of your own dreams. Or worse, and you've done this so many times that it hurts to watch, you discard your own dreams to align your life with someone else's plans.

Solidify your character and values first. Build your own life. That whoever comes along will always just be icing on the cake but never the cake. That the icing may eventually leave but its leaving will never leave the cake half a cake. 

I also kept bugging God about why death and resurrection have to be a part of life. I know resurrection requires death, the dying of something. But why do we need resurrection in the first place.

His answer (finally :)) is ascension. Because resurrection is a prerequisite to ascension. To ascend is to go to a higher place. If Jesus hadn't accepted death, there wouldn't be a resurrection nor ascension and He would have remained human with an unfulfilled mission. But God wants us to ascend, to join Him in heaven, that is how much He loves us.

I used to fear the thought that my God is a jealous God Who will remove anything and anyone that takes His place in my life. But now that thought just makes me kilig. That kind of love that I've been searching all these years was mine all along. And no man can compare. But an enlightened man can be God's perfect expression of His love for me.

Do not trust your circumstances. Have faith in God and His grand plans for you. 

May God shower you with grace and blessings more than you could ever imagine. :)

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Deconstruct to Reconstruct

Remove your "definitions" of yourself. Definitions breed limitations.

Only now do I understand fully what a law professor once said, "here in the College of Law, we break you so that we can rebuild you."

Yes, sometimes we need to be rebuilt. Especially when we've gone on for so long on our own, and so far off from the path God wants us on.

He needs to remove the old so that the new may come out.

Death is necessary for a resurrection.

Transformation requires the dying of the old.

He strips us of everything that is not from Him and that we don't need for our mission.

And He reveals what is in us that is of Him.

But this process of deconstructing is painful.

But this process of deconstructing is necessary to reconstruct.

And to be deconstructed and reconstructed by the Master's hand is a privilege and an honor.

This process is painful but exciting.

I am forced to question all my life long held beliefs and things I said about myself.

I am forced to break my self-imposed barriers by refusing to "define" myself.

I am more than just a lawyer.

It was a mistake to define myself as someone's girlfriend and I will never let that happen again. In my future relationship, I will be a woman in a loving and committed relationship.

I am not "in between relationships". I am living my life. Pursuing my mission, which includes discovering it.

I am no longer one thing and not another. At the moment though there are things I haven't tried but most likely will, at least once.

Don't get me wrong, my values are very much intact. I know right from wrong. But my guideposts are kindness and obedience to God, everything not contrary to those, I will try.

I will learn how to cook.

I will learn ballet again.

I will learn bookkeeping and manage my own finances.

With God on board, we will create and re-create me.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

Cheating is a Character Flaw

Angelina Jolie to Divorce Brad Pitt, Ending ‘Brangelina’

If the rumors are true and it's another woman, then it seems the boss is right, "cheating is a character flaw". And character is HARD to change.

But NOT impossible. We women can still train our men, from our children to our partners, not to cheat. To treat us with love and respect. But it will take a lot of courage and strength and faith. It will require first OUR transformation. And transformation, from what I heard, requires FOCUS on ourselves. To put ourselves under a microscope. To identify and correct our own character flaws. Especially the ones that inspire and encourage men's bad behavior. We must believe in their capacity to be the PRINCES that God made them. But they need our help.

But to help another we must first help ourselves. Or we'll end up with the blind leading the blind.

Monday, September 19, 2016

From One Woman To Another

Hi Princess.
Yes you. You're a princess. Not because you have a prince. But because your Father is THE KING.

I feel the need to write to you because as women I believe we should watch each other's back.
Naloko ka na ba? Napagpalit? Na two-time? I have. TWICE.

It was so painful that at one point I told our Father THE KING that I don't want to be someone's girlfriend anymore. I want to be the girl he chooses over his girlfriend na lang.  The one he "chooses". The one he cheats with. Ganun.

But God has been generous with me. He showed me the real big picture.

I was once "that" girl. Actually, to be accurate, I was "twice" that girl. Two times I was chosen over the girlfriend. Two times I broke up a supposedly committed relationship. In my sort of defense, they both told me that they were single na. But I know I came in the picture before they were single. While I did not actively pursue them, I encouraged their cheating by playing along. I played along, without thinking. Without any thought for that other woman whom I've never met and who has done me no wrong, na masasaktan ko.

It felt good. Kilig.

At first. And then the insecurities came flooding in. Because now you're the girlfriend. Ikaw na yung pwedeng iwan at ipagpalit. Because deep inside you know, you were not chosen over the many other women he could have met and would DEFINITELY meet. You were chosen over this one woman. You weren't chosen because you're better than her. Disabuse yourself from that absurd reasoning. You were chosen for the simple and obvious reason that you're different. You're different from the girlfriend. You're unknown territory, so to speak. And that is exciting. I'm sorry to burst your bubble but that's not love. Not even close.

And what happens when the new becomes old?

So, princess, please, please DISCOVER TRUE LOVE. Be so deeply and fully in love with you. Be so deeply immersed in God's love and the true love that He has surrounded you with through your family and friends. Be so deeply immersed in true love that no counterfeit love will ever be enough for you. Get to know true love in your relationship with our Father THE KING. Know true love in the comforting words and hugs of the people who have been with you equally through your ups and downs.

And date. Wholesome dating ha. Date to know thyself. To know what your likes and dislikes are. To know your non-negotiables and to know what you're willing to compromise on. Date so you can choose. Don't get into a relationship with the first guy na you are attracted to that tells you you're pretty then bobolahin ka sa txt tapos dadalhan ka ng isang box ng pasalubong from Nueva Ecija. Okay?

If you just use your logic a little bit you'll see the absurdity of it all. To base your entire future and your happiness on a few kilig moments.

Date so you can, by God's grace and guidance, choose His best. Date with eyes wide open. And ask him to date too. To date with his eyes wide open. That is the only way he can really choose you too. Tell him you'd rather have him date around now than when you are already committed to each other or when you have children to consider.

Use your intellect to make the right decisions and choices, rather than to rationalize and excuse your wrong decisions.

A couple of other things you must remember. First, believe me when I say na mas masarap marining ang "ang sarap mo kausap at kasama", "I love our conversations", "I learn so much from you", "I feel like I'm growing and becoming a better person because of you", "You're genuinely kind", "You're so wise and smart", "You make me laugh", "You are authentic and honest", mga ganun. Kesa "ang ganda-ganda mo" and its derivatives.

I've been there. Iba pala to be appreciated for your mind and your heart, your faith and your soul. Rather than be appreciated for something as shallow and fleeting as looks.

And second, maganda ka naman talaga and you SHOULD be treated special kasi prinsesa ka. So why act like that's such a big deal? So much so na dahil tine-txt ka lang ng good morning, kamusta, and good night eh dapat ka na mag-commit sa kanya? You know yourself and what you're capable of bringing into the relationship. And that is not cheap. Your love, loyalty, and support are worth so much more than a few kilig moments.

The reason it's so hard to find the right man is because we've made them so rare. We women must train our men to become the right men. Let's not baby them. Let's stop making excuses for them. Call a cheat a cheat. Call them on their bad behavior. Don't accept anything less than what you deserve as a daughter of Christ. Don't be scared of losing them. Because you are more than enough on your own. And often being alone is exactly what you need to move to the next level. To complete your mission.

Believe me. I am the quintessential Libra who "seems" unable to function well outside of a relationship. And I am telling you this from my heart. I found my smile again, yung ngiting hanggang mata, after my second relationship ended.

I thought time and my numerous rationalizations can make right what was wrong from the start. Pero salamat sa wisdom, generosity, and love of our Father THE KING, sa wakas tinama na Niya ang mali.

And I pray we all learn from it.

Love,
Princess Di :)

Thursday, December 5, 2013

MUSINGS of a BROKEN spirit and a BROKEN heart

My spirit is broken.

As THE bar exams are fast approaching, the fear and anxiety are becoming increasingly strong.

The voice inside my head telling me "you'll never reach it" it's becoming louder and is finding so many reasons to discourage.

That voice almost won me over. Until I remembered the joy and fulfillment I found as I imagined the lawyer I wanted to be. The lawyer I WILL BE.

It's not unusual to be scared or to feel inadequate. It's not unusual to make mistakes. It's not unusual to quit.
Fortunately, I've never been "not unusual".

My heart is broken.

God's wisdom in Paul Walker's tragic death eludes me. This especially as I learn of so many stories of his generosity and strength of character, his faithfulness. But then again, God's wisdom is not for us to comprehend. But I hope his family finds comfort in the reality that he did not just touch lives he inspired greatness.  I want to know more about how he lived, how he loved, how he reached out to people who were suffering. I want to know my model. If I enter heaven with as many stories of kindness as he does, I'd say my life had been well lived.


Monday, May 13, 2013

Ruin is a Gift



“Ruin is a gift. Ruin is the road to transformation.” That is a line from a movie-I’ve-seen-based-on-a-book-I-have-not-read, “Eat, Pray, Love”; the same words that kept ringing in my head while listening to the first of the series of CLP talks (Christian Life Program).  CLP Talk 1 was about God’s love and to my mind ruin is the ultimate expression of God’s love.

Yes, it is hard to believe how that could possibly be true.  In fact, one of the key points of Talk 1 is how the evil in the world makes it hard, if not impossible, to believe that we are loved by our God.  You probably expect me to tell you to believe in God’s love despite the presence of evil in the world and in our personal lives because, after all, isn’t faith “confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see”[1]?  That’s true, yes, but it is equally true that we should stand firm in our belief in God’s love for us, not only despite of but also because of the presence of evil.

In the dark, in the midst of a tragedy, we question God’s love and wisdom.  I guess it’s in our nature.  Perhaps when you believe in God and actually have a relationship with Him, a little tampo now and then is inevitable.  Oh I have met some people who have never questioned God’s love for them because they believe that He exists only in the heads of the unenlightened.  But read on as I make a case FOR RUIN.

Case in point No. 1, my first heartbreak.  Without going into details, suffice it to say that I have not really known betrayal or despair before that.  And I have never prayed as hard as I have then.  I would pray at 3:00 am and at every hour after that.  I cried myself to sleep and woke up crying.  With that lifestyle it was not a surprise that I lost a lot of weight, a lot of unwanted weight.  In just a few months I had the body I never thought, but always dreamed, I could have.  And believe me, after surviving that much pain, it is close to impossible not to come out a little more stronger and braver.  That I am standing strong and tall after that episode is proof undeniable that if God brings you to it, He’ll get you through it.  Since then, every time my heart feels fear, a little voice in my head cries, “you’ve been through worse!”.

With all the confusion that comes with a relationship that ends so suddenly, I found and learned to love ME.  While I used to always fear being alone, I now value and wear as a badge of honor my independence and my individuality.  While I used to aspire to be a prototype/perfect girlfriend I now only wish to be me and to, each day, grow into a woman after God’s own heart.  While I made the mistake of making my life revolve around making a relationship last no matter how painful and unhealthy, I now understand that some relationships MUST end.  I am nowhere near perfection but believe me when I say that many of the qualities I always wanted but feared I could never have, have been revealed to me as PART of me. 

Yes, I was for some time ruined but that ruin was part of God’s perfect plan. 

Case in point No. 2, my first failed examS.  Months after receiving my Tax 2 and Evidence midterm exams I was still devastated.  I feared failing these subjects but even more heart wrenching, I feared that maybe this is not the profession I was called to practice.  Perhaps I was not cut out be a lawyer?  Perhaps going back to law school was a mistake?

When I quit my first law school, I said that the law profession was just not for me, then someone reminded me, “destiny is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice”.  I never talked to him again since. But I know now that there’s some wisdom there.  After my failed midterm exams, I no longer go to law school because in there I find something that I’m good at but because this is the path I have chosen and I have chosen to be excellent at it.  There are days when my heart is scared and my brain is overwhelmed but those days I still choose to show up because my failure has shown me na mahal ko na pala ‘to kasi after I failed, not just once, my first thought was not quitting but how to be better.  And that has been my armor ever since.

It is God’s love which makes ruin a gift.  It is God’s love which turns our darkest hour, our biggest failures, and our heartbreaking disappointments into a moment of grace.  He makes the cause of our downfall the road to our salvation.  That is what differentiates the love of our Heavenly Father from that of our earthly parents.  They all love us, that’s for sure, but while our earthly parents would move heaven and earth to shield us from pain, Father God brings us pain so we could live the life He has promised us.

But as in anything in life, we have a choice; God after all has also given us free will.  We can choose to embrace God’s love or turn our backs from Him.  It’s SWIM to Him or SINK in evil.  The choice is yours, my friend.



[1] Hebrews 11:1 (New International Version)

Wednesday, March 6, 2013

The Role of Copyright Law in the Information Age



The Role of Copyright

            If we were to summarize the raison d'ĂȘtre of copyright law, it would be thus, “the encouragement of learning”[i].  The first copyright act in the United Kingdom (UK), the Statute of Anne of 1710 was, in fact, subtitled An Act for the Encouragement of Learning, by vesting the Copies of Printed Books in the Authors”[ii]. It is not, as would appear at first blush, simply the protection of the “expression” of an author or creator of an original work.  These expressions are being protected precisely to give authors and creators the freedom incentive to create and to share their knowledge and ideas in tangible form without the fear of other people taking credit for and profiting from them.  So, therefore, while protecting the rights of ownership, copyright also serves a social function.  It is in this context that the role and the future of copyright laws must be appreciated.
Intimately connected with the creation of knowledge is the concept of “authorship”.  The amount of time, energy, money, and thought that goes into a “work” or “creation” cannot be lightly brushed aside.  And as an attribute of ownership, the right of control over these works/creations naturally is vested upon their authors/creators.  In this regard, copyright law has provided authors/creators with the mechanisms for the protection of such right and for redress for its infringement.  Such works/creations are also rightfully considered as investments and copyright law has, thus, given authors/creators the opportunity to capitalize on these investments.
Back in the days when there was yet no copyright laws, the likes of Shakespeare had to resort to ingenious ways to keep their works from the public while also making a profit out of such works.  It was common practice for Shakespeare and his contemporaries to furnish their actors only with the scripts for their own characters while the full text of the play stays with the writer.  This is to “make unauthorized performances and publishing the full text more difficult”[iii].     
Imagine living in a world like Shakespeare’s; a world where the Spielbergs and Ricky Lees of the world would have to keep their works from the public to protect their income.  Who would bother writing and publishing the Harry Potter series or The Hunger Games when there was hardly a way to profit from it?  Luckily for us, the writers of the 1700s fought and lobbied for the right to “retain the value of their ideas” [iv] and won.
But beyond the rights of the individual authors and creators is the bigger body of knowledge that the copyright law seeks to enrich.  Without the protection that this branch of the law affords, not only will authors and creators be hard-pressed for an incentive to share their work they will also have to actively keep it from the public if only to ensure a return on their investment. 
Dialogues and discourse are the foundation of knowledge.  It is a beautiful irony that we grow in wisdom by sharing and by sharing we create wisdom.  As abovementioned, copyright laws came into existence because of the need to encourage learning and the growth of information.  It was devised to encourage the sharing of information; as a means to encourage authors and creators to share their works to the public.  Therefore, it would seem that protecting the authors’ rights is necessary to achieve the end sought which is the growth of information.  It cannot be denied that some “create” for the love of their craft but it is equally true that many of the very best of these creations require a significant amount of investment.  And without such protection it is very likely that we will end up killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.
            It is, thus, essential to strike a balance between ensuring a fair reward for authors/creators for their works/creations and an “open discussion of ideas”[v] failing which will render nugatory the very foundation of its existence.

Fair Use

            Thus, if we were to imagine the balancing act that lawmakers have to deal with in copyright, we will have on the one end of the balance the bundle of rights belonging to the copyright owner and fair use (or fair dealing in the UK) on the other end; “creator and user”.  Fair use is the mechanism which allows the sharing of knowledge.
            Fair use is one of the most significant limitations on copyright.  What uses or scenarios would come under the concept of “fair use” varies in different jurisdictions but generally it is the principle that allows certain “uses” of copyrighted work without securing permission or compensating the owner of the copyright[vi].

Direction taken by other countries
            
             To continue being relevant, copyright law must, of necessity, evolve with the “changes in technology and social attitudes”[vii].  The ease by which media content and information are shared, downloaded, stored, and replicated have given the issue of copyright a different dimension.  The advancements in technology have upset the delicate balance of intellectual property and information freedom and different jurisdictions have reacted in different ways.
            The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of the U.S., enacted in 1998, contains a “safe harbor” provision, which shields “online service providers from most forms of liability for the infringing acts of their users, provided that the service providers comply with certain requirements after becoming aware of such acts”[viii].  Under the said provision a service provider shall not be held liable for any infringement if “it has neither ‘actual knowledge’ of infringement by its users nor awareness of ‘facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent’”[ix].  In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that in order to make service providers liable for the infringing acts of its users, awareness of a “specific infringing activity” is an essential element, and even then they can only be held liable if it fails to “expeditiously” remove the infringing material[x].
            As to the importation of copyrighted material for personal use, countries like the U.S., Australia,   and the U.K. have all taken to provide for this exception under their respective copyright laws albeit under specific and narrow cases.

Direction taken by the Philippines
           
            On this side of the world, legislators have taken a different approach to copyright law amendments.  The bicameral bill which seeks to amend certain provisions of R.A. 8293, otherwise known as “The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines” (Note: as of posting, President Benigno Aquino III signed Republic Act 10372 into law on the amendments to the IP Code amidst controversies on some of its provisions) has the following controversial features:

1.      Under Sec. 2 of said bill, the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), through its Director-General, shall have visitorial powers over “establishments and businesses engaging in activities violating intellectual property rights and provisions [of this act] based on report, information, or complaint received by the office” (Emphasis supplied).
2.      Under Sec. 5, it adds another dimension to the definition of “reproduction”. Under this expanded definition, any making of one (1) or more copies of a work, even if only temporary is already “reproduction” which, if unauthorized by the creator/author constitutes infringement of copyright.
3.      Sec. 14 deletes in its entirety the Secs. 190.1 and 190.2 on importation for personal purposes.
4.      Sec. 22 extends the liability for infringing acts to any person who “[b]enefits from the infringing activity of another person xxx if the person benefiting has been given notice of the infringing activity and has the right and ability to control the activities of the other person” (Emphasis supplied).
            The “visitorial power” granted under Sec. 2 of the bicameral bill is symptomatic of the general direction that this Congress has been taking in addressing the issues of today.  The direction undertaken by this bill is clearly leaning towards more government control and less due process and right to privacy; this despite the clear Constitutional mandate against unreasonable searches and seizures. 
            The bicameral bill (Note: R.A. 10732) has also expanded the coverage of the term “reproduction” as an infringing act to include even the mere making of temporary copies.  So, therefore, while under the current state of the Philippine IP Law, the mere “use” of pirated software, for as long as you are not making copies of said software, is not in itself an infringing act.  However, once this amendment becomes law, even simply “running” a piece of software on your computer, which act creates a temporary copy in the computer’s memory, is already an infringing act[xi].
            Equally controversial as the above amendments is the deletion of the provision on “personal use”.  While under the current regime allowances are given for the importation of copies of copyrighted works for personal use, and the law sets out the qualifications and specific instances covered under “importation for personal use”, the amendments to the IP Code, if they do become effective, shall remove our rights to bring home copyrighted materials even if strictly for personal use only.  As abovementioned, the practice in other countries is to provide for a “personal use” exception under their copyright laws, under specific and narrow cases.  This proposed amendment is a complete deviation from the international standard and practice because the “personal use” exception is deleted entirely.  Thus, the explanation given by the Intellectual Property Office Director-General Ric Blancaflor, that the deletion was actually intended to broaden the rights under “personal use” because the deleted provision actually limited such right, finds no legal support even in international practice.  It is argued that without the provision on “Importation for Personal Use”, the amended IP Code will actually allow the importation for personal use beyond that previously allowed by the law.  However, as pointed out by some camps without this provision on the “personal use” exception, importation of copyrighted works, even if for personal use, will cease to have a legal leg to stand on.  It is a statutory right given to users and a limitation upon the rights of copyright owners; absent this provision, the law in effect disallows the importation of copyrighted materials without prior authorization of the copyright owner under any and all circumstances. 
            To assuage consumers’ fears, the argument posed by the Intellectual Property Office is that the said office actually has a good relationship with the Bureau of Customs; hence, “there can be no misinterpretation of the real intention of the amendment”[xii].  This argument must fail because by completely deleting the provisions on “personal use” there is simply nothing to interpret or to misinterpret for that matter.
            Another controversial amendment is the provision extending liability for an infringing act to anyone who benefits from said act and “who has been given notice of the infringing activity and has the right and ability to control the activities of the other person”.  Liability attaches as soon as said person becomes aware of the infringing act.  If this amendment becomes effective, a computer-shop owner who receives payment for use of their facilities, will incur liability for the infringing acts of its customers as soon as said owner is notified of the infringing act[xiii].  There is, thus, “no opportunity to remedy the situation”[xiv].  As discussed above, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) of the U.S. with its “safe harbor” provision, at least allows such third parties the remedy of removing the infringing material to escape liability.  This makes more sense as in such a scenario what is in effect being penalized is the failure or omission to remove the infringing material after due notice. 

Quo vadis?
            
         It would appear from the discussion above that the direction intended for copyright law in the Philippines is towards substantially limiting the public’s access to copyrighted work while strengthening the mechanism for the protection of the rights of copyright owners.  While the protection of authors’/creators’ rights are desirable enough this cannot be pursued at the expense of    the growth of knowledge and the public’s access to information.
            We turn our attention back to the historical roots of copyright law.  As earlier mentioned, copyright laws came into being as a means to encourage learning.  The rights belonging to the copyright owner are “property rights” as a necessary incident of their ownership of the original work.  Copyright law was, thus, put in place not to establish such rights but for the double purpose of establishing a mechanism for the protection of such rights thereby encouraging copyright owners to “create” and “share” their work to the public.  Without such laws, we go back to the days of old when authors and creators devised ways to monopolize access to their works so as to maximize its economic value.  Such a state of affairs would effectively prevent the sharing of knowledge, discourse, and ultimately learning.
Thus, the desired effect is, in reality, the growth of knowledge through free use and access to information.   Even our 1987 Constitution recognizes the role of copyright, thus, in Sec. 13, Art. XIV, it provides:
Section 13. The State shall protect and secure the exclusive rights of scientists, inventors, artists, and other gifted citizens to their intellectual property and creations, particularly when beneficial to the people, for such period as may be provided by law. (Emphasis supplied)
            So, therefore, I submit that in substantially limiting the public’s use of and access to copyrighted works is to lose sight of the very objective of copyright law.  It cannot be said that the protection of copyright is an end in itself.  It is only the means by which we encourage discourse and the sharing of information. 
            Our legislators will do well to remember that “copyright laws are based on [the] expectation that, by creating these property rights, we will encourage the creation of new artistic and literary works”[xv].  Thus, whatever amendments will be introduced in the future should be in view of such purpose.

Back to the Past

              To continue down the road the abovementioned bicameral bill is looking to take will result to a negation not only of the raison d'ĂȘtre of copyright law but also nullify whatever gains we have achieved in information technology. 
While the rest of the world continues with its path of globalization and the continued development of the internet as the information gateway, I submit that the Philippines would be in a better position if it were to align its laws with these developments.  As the world becomes more interconnected the response is hardly to restrain the same.  Otherwise, such laws may stifle ingenuity and undermine whatever strides we have achieved in technological development.


[i] Parry, Roger. The Changing Role of Copyright.Web. 4 March 2013. http://copyright-debate.co.uk/?p=159
[ii]History of Copyright.Web. 5 March 2013. http://www.copyrightsandwrongs.nen.gov.uk/ipr-and-copyright/history-of-copyright
[iii]Supra.
[iv]Id.
[v]Id.
[vi]Regents of the University of Minnesota.Understanding Fair Use.Web. 5 March 2013. https://www.lib.umn.edu/copyright/fairuse
[vii]Supra.
[viii]Covington & Burling LLP.Significant Developments in U.S. and European Copyright Law 2012.Web. 5 March 2013. http://www.cov.com/files/FirmService/00db8d97-278e-47d2-937d-865859233f2f/Presentation/ceFirmServiceBrochure/Significant%20Developments%20in%20U.S.%20and%20European%20Copyright%20Law%202012.pdf
[ix]Ibid
[x]Ibid
[xi]Dimacali, TJ. New IP law allows warrantless searches, 'erases' right to personal use. GMA News. 14 February 2013. Web. 5 March 2013. http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/294998/scitech/technology/new-ip-law-allows-warrantless-searches-erases-right-to-personal-use\
[xii]Ibid.
[xiii]Ibid.
[xiv]Ibid.
[xv] Sprigman, Christopher. Copyright and the Rule of Reason. Web. 6 March 2013. http://jthtl.org/content/articles/V7I2/JTHTLv7i2_Sprigman.PDF