LIMITATIONS

ABSCBN VS PMSI
The Must-Carry Rule under NTC Circular No. 4-08-88 falls under the
limitations on copyright. The Filipino people must be given wider access
to more sources of news, information, education, sports event and
entertainment programs other than those provided for by mass media
and afforded television programs to attain a well informed, well-versed
and culturally refined citizenry and enhance their socio-economic
growth. The (franchise) grantee like ABS-CBN, and other TV station
owners and even the likes of PMSI, shall provide at all times sound and
balanced programming and assist in the functions of public information
and education.
HABANA VS ROBLES
Robles act of lifting from the book of Habana et al substantial portions
of discussions and examples, and her failure to acknowledge the same in
her book is an infringement of Habana et als copyrights. The Supreme
Court also elucidated that in determining the question of infringement,
the amount of matter copied from the copyrighted work is an important
consideration. If so much is taken that the value of the original is
sensibly diminished, or the labors of the original author are substantially
and to an injurious extent appropriated by another, that is sufficient in
point of law to constitute piracy.

FILIPINO SOCIETY OF COMPOSERS VS BENJAMINE TAN
The Supreme Court has ruled that "Paragraph 33 of Patent Office
Administrative Order No. 3 (as amended, dated September 18, 1947)
entitled 'Rules of Practice in the Philippines Patent Office relating to the
Registration of Copyright Claims' promulgated pursuant to Republic Act
165, provides among other things that an intellectual creation should be
copyrighted thirty (30) days after its publication, if made in Manila, or
within the (60) days if made elsewhere, failure of which renders such
creation public property." (Santos v. McCullough Printing Company, 12
SCRA 324-325 [1964]. Indeed, if the general public has made use of the
object sought to be copyrighted for thirty (30) days prior to the copyright
application the law deems the object to have been donated to the public
domain and the same can no longer be copyrighted.

SONY VS UNIVERSAL STUDIO
The District Court concluded that noncommercial home use recording of
material broadcast over the public airwaves was a fair use of copyrighted works
and did not constitute copyright infringement. It emphasized the fact that the
material was broadcast free to the public at large, the noncommercial
character of the use, and the private character of the activity conducted
entirely within the home. Moreover, the court found that the purpose of this use
served the public interest in increasing access to television programming, an
interest that "is consistent with the First Amendment policy of providing the fullest
possible access to information through the public airwaves. Columbia
Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Democratic National Committee, 412 U.S. 94, 102."
Id., at 454. [n8] Even when an entire copyrighted work was recorded, [p*426]
the District Court regarded the copying as fair use "because there is no
accompanying reduction in the market for plaintiffs original work." Ibid.
The District Courts conclusions are buttressed by the fact that to the extent
time-shifting expands public access to freely broadcast television programs, it
yields societal benefits. In Community Television of Southern California v.
Gottfried, 459 U.S. 498, 508, n. 12 (1983), we acknowledged the public interest in
making television broadcasting more available. Concededly, that interest is not
unlimited. But it supports an interpretation of the concept of "fair use" that
requires the copyright holder to demonstrate some likelihood of harm before he
may condemn a private act of time-shifting as a violation of federal law.
HARPER & ROW VS NATION ENTERPRISES
The four factors identified by Congress as especially relevant in determining
whether the use was fair are: (1) the purpose and character of the use; (2) the
nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the substantiality of the portion used in
relation to the copyrighted work as [p*561] a whole; (4) the effect on the
potential market for or value of the copyrighted work
In the instant case
(1) The issue is not what constitutes "news," but whether a claim of newsreporting
is a valid fair use defense to an infringement of copyrightable expression. The
Nation has every right to seek to be the first to publish information. But The
Nation went beyond simply reporting uncopyrightable information and actively
sought to exploit the headline value of its infringement, making a "news event"
out of its unauthorized first publication of a noted figure's copyrighted
expression. The fact that a publication was commercial, as opposed to
nonprofit, is a separate factor that tends to weigh against a finding of fair
use.[E]very commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively an unfair
exploitation of the monopoly privilege that belongs to the owner of the
copyright.
(2) The fact that a work is unpublished is a critical element of its "nature." 3
Nimmer 13.05[A]; Comment, 58 St. John's L.Rev. at 613. Our prior discussion
establishes that the scope of fair use is narrower with respect to unpublished
works. While even substantial quotations might qualify as fair use in a review of a
published work or a news account of a speech that had been delivered to the
public or disseminated to the press, see House Report at 65, the author's right to
control the first public appearance of his expression weighs against such use of
the work before its release. The right of first publication encompasses not only
the choice whether to publish at all, but also the choices of when, where, and in
what form first to publish a work. A use that so clearly infringes the copyright
holder's interests in confidentiality and creative control is difficult to characterize
as "fair."
(3) In absolute terms, the words actually quoted were an insubstantial portion of
"A Time to Heal." The District Court, however, found that "[T]he Nation took what
was [p*565] essentially the heart of the book
(4) This last factor is undoubtedly the single most important element of fair use.
[n9] See 3 Nimmer 13.05[A], at 13-76, and cases cited therein. "Fair use, when
properly applied, is limited to copying by others which [p*567] does not
materially impair the marketability of the work which is copied." 1 Nimmer
l.10[D], at 1-87. The trial court found not merely a potential, but an actual, effect
on the market