Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

The Philippines: Proposed amendments to the IP Code

On December 22 2017, the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) published its proposed amendments to the IP Code (Republic Act No. 8293), just before it closed shop for the Christmas break, notifying the public to give their comments and informing it that the amendments shall be forwarded to the Philippine Congress this January 2018. Some of the major amendments are as follows:

1) Clarifying and expanding the functions and powers of the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) which is the adjudication arm of the IPOPHL to include: (a) declaration of marks as well-known, including revocation of said declarations, (b) declaration as true and actual inventor, (c) declaration of ownership or having the right to intellectual property, (d) having original and exclusive jurisdiction over administrative complaints for violation of intellectual property laws, (e) awarding of damages;

2) Replacing the Documentation, Information and Technology Transfer Bureau with two new bureaus: (a) the Bureau of Innovation and Business Development, (b) creating the IP Academy;

3) Allowing parallel applications or the filing of two patent applications for the same subject as an invention patent application, and a utility model application within one year from the filing of the first application, which applications shall be processed independently. However, once, the invention patent application has been granted, the utility model registration shall be automatically cancelled, and the letters patent shall be issued;

4) Allowing parts or components of products or handicrafts as subject of industrial design registrations;

5) Giving power to the Director General of the IPOPHL to grant compulsory license to exploit a patented invention even without the agreement of the patent owner;

6) Removing the requirement that a mark has to be visible to be registrable, giving way to possibly including scent or sound marks;

7) Allowing the registration of series of marks, and certification marks.

There are other amendments touching on the organisation of the IPOPHL itself, and also on the other aspects of intellectual property law. Some of the proposed amendments are subject to further modifications, according to the IPOPHL.


Editha R Hechanova

Hechanova & Co., Inc.Salustiana D. Ty Tower104 Paseo de Roxas AvenueMakati City 1229, PhilippinesTel: (63) 2 812-6561Fax: (63) 2

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Sukanya Sarkar shares her thoughts on this year’s annual meeting in Singapore, where debates ranged from AI opportunities to improving law firm culture
The court’s ruling is a good reminder that US parties aren’t guaranteed attorney fees just because they win, say sources
With business confidence in a shaky state, Rachel Tong and Lisa Yong of Rouse discuss how in-house IP teams can manage their trademark portfolios through uncertain times
The Court of Appeal had stern words for Med-El’s representatives after they highlighted a deputy judge’s background as a solicitor
Funders and NPEs say asserting patent portfolios can minimise risk at the USPTO’s PTAB, where procedure remains a controversial topic
The US Supreme Court’s ruling wasn’t a surprise and reflects a trend that had already been bubbling away for a while, say tech and pharma counsel
Previous attempts at major transatlantic tie-ups have failed, so lawyers will keep their eyes firmly on Allen & Overy’s grand plans
INTA CEO Etienne Sanz de Acedo shares his plans if he were to win the EUIPO leadership race and says his application does not affect his INTA role
The French finance minister told António Campinos the timing of an EPO event in Lisbon could be seen as interference in the EUIPO leadership race