Say, a friend of mine, owns a consulting agency and does work for some of the largest corporations. His expertise is providing research and then formulating marketing strategies. Companies enjoy millions of pesos of increased revenues from his effort.

He takes the contract and is paid after the report is submitted. My friend receives no money up-front for his excellent and reputable work. No one can dispute that he is the best in the business.

Recently, his income has fallen off, and when the time came for him to present his study, the company declined to accept it and therefore did not pay him anything.

He discovered that someone else had gotten a copy of his report, submitted it to the company and received payment for it. It was exactly the same detailed study that he had prepared, with no changes. An insider told him they were very happy with the report they bought, not only for the content but because they paid much, much less than he was asking for his work.

Outrageous? Absolutely.

But that is, in effect, what happens every time we install pirated computer software, watch a “fake” DVD movie or listen to music on a CD bought from a street vendor.

The United States Embassy in Manila invited several journalists to meet Mr. Ralph Oman, a lecturer in intellectual-property law at George Washington University.

Mr. Oman is an expert in the field having served as Register of Copyrights for the US government and having been the principal adviser to the US Congress on copyright legislation. He was in the Philippines to meet not only with government officials involved in intellectual-property protection, but also with various members of the private sector. The discussion that I attended was organized and hosted by Ms. Rebecca Brown Thompson, first secretary and press attaché of the embassy, assisted by Mr. Stephen Ashby, assistant cultural affairs officer.

The Philippines has seen a dramatic change in government action toward intellectual-property rights (IPR) protection in the last few years. The policy was there but the enforcement was, shall we say, loose. This has changed since 2005 under the tenure of our Intellectual Property Office Director General Atty. Adrian Cristobal Jr.

I have known “Che” Cristobal for many years, and a finer public servant is not to be found. Through his dedicated efforts both in enforcement and, perhaps equally important, education, the Philippines is poised finally to be taken off the IPR watch list.

The director general has done a fantastic job, sometimes against all odds and much pressure. But come on, IPR is not something that keeps me awake at night worrying about.

Mr. Oman did open my eyes a bit when he talked about the fact that American authors, playwrights and music writers could not get their works published in Europe in the 1800s. The US did not enforce any sort of IPR protection for foreign authors and, therefore, the US was “blacklisted.”

Authors such as Mark Twain spearheaded the drive to have the US government protect foreign copyrighted works and, eventually, the US came onboard and American authors were acclaimed throughout Europe. Oh, and the US artists made fortunes from selling their books in Europe.

IPR is an extremely complex issue. Bill Gates and Microsoft are understandingly upset about not receiving any revenues from the thousands of copies of Windows sold here.

Well, he is not the only one having that problem. My columns are often taken from the BusinessMirror web site and used on “news service” web sites as their content. I wouldn’t mind so much except they charge a fee for their customers to read my intellectual property and I receive nothing. At least Mr. Gates and I have something in common.

I asked Mr. Oman about China being the No. 1 violator of IPR and always making the excuse that their country is poor, developing and deserving more time.

Mr. Oman related that the US hopes to have a $500 million a year fine levied on China for its violations of IPR. I did not ask him about the Spratly Islands.

As countries become richer, IPR protection increases. Mr. Oman’s thesis is that it is in the long-term economic interest for nations like the Philippines to protect IPR early because it is in the best interests of its own creative people. Absolutely correct. Yet, the price disparity between what an American pays for Windows and what a Filipino is charged makes that argument difficult to accept.

Microsoft Windows XP Professional costs about $145 (P6,000 plus) in the US versus P7,540 here. That is not a great difference, except that $145 is dinner and maybe a movie in New York. In Manila, P7,540 is two weeks’ wages for many fresh college graduates.

Yet, the IPR issue is not going to go away and protecting those rights is another step that the Philippines and we consumers must forcefully take to increase our stature and respectability in the world market. Simply put, violating IPR is cheating and stealing. And no nation or people can live with that kind of reputation forever. 

E-mail comments to mangun@email.com.

BECAUSE so much has been written about climate change and the many other things that imperil the planet—not to mention that it’s better to listen to or watch the experts and act accordingly, than do the preaching—this Earth Day editorial will be short but sweet.

In a previous article in this column, lawyer Raoul R. Angangco gave a comprehensive description of the mechanics of the Kyoto Protocol, enumerating the tools found there to achieve its goals.

There is no denying that intellectual property rights (IPR) must be protected against those who violate them, but when the owners of these rights are the ones abusing such rights by pricing their products beyond the reach of the public, such rights must be tempered or, in the words of educator Romulo Neri, such greed must be moderated.

Outside the Box: Intellectual-property rights: Who cares?

Say, a friend of mine, owns a consulting agency and does work for some of the largest corporations. His expertise is providing research and then formulating marketing strategies. Companies enjoy millions of pesos of increased revenues from his effort.

Omerta: The beauty of cross-ownership

In my column, “Something Cooking at the ERC?” last week, I said Meralco had to pay the National Power Corp. (Napocor) some P27 billion in damages for unilaterally revoking a 10-year supply-power contract it had with the latter for the period 1994 to 2004.

Sen. Edgardo J. Angara: The World Bank’s ‘New Deal’

Responding to the global food crisis, World Bank president Robert Zoellick called for a “New Deal” in agriculture and food for developing countries. He harks back to President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal Program, whose gargantuan agriculture program helped US farmers during the Great Depression.