Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Introduction
a. History
David A. Thomas, How Educators Can More Effectively Understand and Combat The Plagiarism Epidemic,
2004 B.Y.U. EDUC & L.J. 42 (2004) [Journal Online]; available from
http://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1191&context=elj ; Internet; accessed 1
March 2014
2
Chris Park, In Other (People's) Words: plagiarism by university students--literature and lessons.
Assessment & Evaluation In Higher Education 28, no. 5 (2003): 471-488. Academic Search Premier,
EBSCOhost; accessed 6 March 2014
3
Ashworth et al., The student lifeworld and the meanings of plagiarism." Journal Of Phenomenological
Psychology 34, no. 2 (Fall2003 2003): 257-278. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost accessed 7 March
2014
4
Id. (citing: Guidelines for Faculties on the Avoidance of Plagiarism (Edinburgh University, 1999))
5
Oscar Carlo F. Cajucom, Plagiarism within the Legal Profession and Academe, 55 Ateneo L.J. 787 (2010)
1|Page
Sophia Dedace, More schools reject Supreme Court denial of plagiarism, November 9, 2010, available at:
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/205543/news/nation/more-schools-reject-supreme-courtdenial-of-plagiarism; accessed 1 March 2014
7
Thomas, supra note 1
8
Cajucom, supra note 5 (citing Jaime Dursht, Judicial Plagiarism: It may be Fair Use but is it Ethical? (19967) Cardozo Law Review)
9
David E. Sorkin, Practicing Plagiarism, 81 ILL. B.J. 487 (1993) [Journal Online]; available from:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=1100323 ; Internet; accessed 1 March 2014
10
In the Matter of the Charges of Plagiarism, Etc., Against Associate Justice Mariano C. del Castillo, A.M
No. 10-7-17-SC, October 12, 2010 [hereinafter In Re: Plagiarism] (citing Websters New World College
Dictionary 1-31 (3d ed.))
11
Id.
12
Id. (J. Sereno, dissenting opinion) [hereinafter Sereno Dissent] (citing Stuart P. Green, Plagiarism,
Norms, and the Limits of Theft Law: Observations on the Use of Criminal Sanctions in Enforcing
Intellectual Property Rights, 54 HASTINGS L. J. 167, at 173)
13
Thomas, supra note 1
2|Page
Ralph D. Mawdsley, Plagiarism Problems in Higher education, I3 J.C & U.L. 65 (1986) [Journal Online];
available
from:
http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/jcolunly13&div=7&id=&page=; Internet;
accessed 1 March 2014
15
Chris Park, supra note 2
16
Paul Mooney, Plagued by Plagiarism. Chronicle Of Higher Education 52, no. 37 (2006): 69-72. Academic
Search Premier, EBSCOhost; accessed 6 March 2014
17
Cajucom, supra note 5
18
Natalie Cotton, The Competence of Students as Editors of Law Reviews: A Response to Judge Posner
154
U.
PA.
L.
REV.
951,
(2006)
[Journal
Online];
available
from:
http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1305&context=penn_law_review; accessed
1 March 2014
19
Cajucom, supra note 5
20
Id. (citing Joe Mirarchi, Plagiarism: What is it? How to Avoid it? And Why?. 4 T.M COOLEY J. PRAC. &
CLINICAL L. 381 (2001))
21
James Cross Giblin, Biography for the 21st Century. School Library Journal 48, no. 2 (2002): 44. MAS
Ultra - School Edition, EBSCOhost; accessed 1 March 2014
22
Cajucom, supra note 5 (citing Roger Billings, Plagiarism in Academia and Beyond: What is the Role of the
Courts?. 38 U.S.F.L REV. 391 (2004))
23
Id.
3|Page
24
Sereno Dissent, supra note 12 (citing Jaime S. Dursht, Judicial Plagiarism: It May Be Fair Use but Is It
Ethical?, 18 CARDOZO L. REV. 1253, at 1))
25
Bermingham et al., Plagiarism in UK law schools: is there a postcode lottery?. Assessment & Evaluation
In Higher Education 35, no. 1 (2010): 1-14. Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost; accessed 1 March 2014
26
Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino, Intellectual Property Law (Phoenix Press, Inc., 2006), 1
27
Aquino, supra note 26, 13
28
Narciso M. Aguilar, The Intellectual Property Code Annotated (Central/Print on Demand, 2004), 133
29
Id. (citing: Article 9 (2) of the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights of
GATT 994)
30
Rufus Rodriguez, The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines and Its Implementing Rules and
Regulations (Rex Bookstore, 2002), 119
31
Aquino, supra note 26, 20, 29
32
David Vaver, Intellectual Property Law. Essentials of Canadian Law Series (Irwin Law, 1997), 41
33
Rodriguez, supra note30, 134
4|Page
34
5|Page
Stearns, Copy Wrong: Plagiarism, Process, Property, and the Law, 80 CAL. L. REV. 513, 514 (1992))
Available from: Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost; accessed 6 March 2014
45
Cajucom, supra note 5 (citing: Bast & Samuels, Plagiarism and Legal Scholarship in the Age of
Information Sharing: The Need for Intellectual Honesty, 57 CATH. U.L.REV 777, 780 (2008)
46
Isagani Cruz, Is plagiarism a crime?, available at: http://www.philstar.com/education-and-home/201209-13/848455/plagiarism-crime; Internet; accessed 1 March 2014
47
Trinchera T. Cut and Paste Plagiarism: What It Is and What to Do About It. Community & Junior College
Libraries [serial online]. July 2001:5. Available from: Academic Search Premier, EBSCOHost Accessed
March 6, 2014.
48
Cajucom, supra note 5 (citing Stuart P. Green, Plagiarism, Norms, and the Limits of Theft Law:
Observations on the Use of Criminal Sanctions in Enforcing Intellectual Property Rights, 54 HASTINGS L. J.
167, at 200)
49
Id. (citing: Bast & Samuels, Plagiarism and Legal Scholarship in the Age of Information Sharing: The Need
for Intellectual Honesty, 57 CATH. U.L.REV 790 (2008)
50
Id.
51
Vinuya et al. v. Executive Secretary Romulo et al., G.R No. 162230, April 28, 2010
6|Page
52
7|Page
Id.
Sereno Dissent, supra note 12
61
Id. (citing Gordon Harvey, Writing with Sources: A Guide for Harvard Students (Hackett Publishing
Company, 2nd ed. [c] 2008))
62
RA No. 8293 (1998, Sec. 184 (b) )
63
Sereno Dissent, supra note 12
64
Id. (J. Carpio, dissenting opinion) [hereinafter Carpio Dissent]
65
Id. (citing RA No. 8293 (1998))
66
Id. (J. Carpio-Morales, dissenting opinion)
60
8|Page
researching for books that will aid them in revising their own work.
They discovered that the book of Robles was remarkably similar to
the contents, scheme of presentation, illustrations and illustrative
examples of their book. They then sued Robles and her publisher for
infringement and unfair competition with damages.67
Robles alleged that her sources were from foreign books. She
contends that similarity in styles cannot be avoided since they come
from the same background and orientation. The trial court and the
Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Robles. 68
2. The Decision of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that copying per se does not
constitute copyright infringement. What is prohibited is the copying
that produces an injurious effect. Furthermore, it is not required that
the entire work be copied in order for copyright infringement to exist.
It is enough that so much is taken that the value of the original work is
substantially diminished or the labor of the original author is
appropriated by another. 69
The respondents defense that the similarity in style can be
attributed to the fact that both of them are exposed to the same
syllabus and they have the same academic experience and teaching
approach is untenable. The Supreme Court noted that the similarities
in their works were too evident. Robles should have acknowledged
Habana as the source. Copying without permission is injurious thus,
constitute copyright infringement. 70
3. Dissent
Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. did not join the majoritys view
that Robles act constitutes copyright Infringement. Although he
concurs with the majority decision that it is not required that the entire
work be copied in order for copyright infringement to exist as long as
the labor of the original author is substantially appropriated, his
opinion differ as to the degree of consideration to be used in
determining substantial appropriation of a book. 71
He asserts that the similarity of the books written by Robles in
the present case does not amount to an appropriation of a substantial
portion of the work of Habana et al. The Chief Justice concluded that
the similarities exist due to the fact that the two books tackle the
same subjects and the sources are common. He believes that the
similarity in orientation and style can be attributed to the exposure of
67
Habana et al. v. Robles et al, G.R. No. 131522, July 19, 1999
Id.
69
Id.
70
Id.
71
Id. (CJ. Davide, dissenting opinion)
68
9|Page
The principle of a case law stems from the rule that where a
point has been once settled by a decision of the Supreme Court, it
forms a precedent which is not afterwards be departed from. After a
legal principle has thus been well settled, it becomes a binding rule to
be applied in all cases of similar nature.77 The policy of the doctrine is
to give uniformity, certainty and stability to the law.78
There are established rules recognized for the application of
precedents. It a fundamental rule that a) Each court is bound by the
decision of courts above it; b) Any relevant judgment of any court is a
72
Id.
Jose Manuel Diokno, Statement of the DLSU College of Law on the Plagiarism Case, November 5, 2010
available at: http://law.dlsu.edu.ph/_media/_pdf/Statement_Final_Draft.pdf; accessed 2 March 2014
74
Habana v Robles, supra note 67
75
In Re: Plagiarism, supra note 10
76
Cajucom, supra note 5
77
Emiliano Mina, The Doctrine of Stare Decisis and the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands, 16 Ph. L.
J., 405 (1937) (citing: Corpus Juris, Vol. 58, 1318)
78
Id.
73
10 | P a g e
Analysis
11 | P a g e
12 | P a g e
89
13 | P a g e
Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, which the
Philippines is a signatory.95
The ruling did not escape the eyes of the lay people. They find
that the Supreme Courts definition of what constitutes plagiarism still
reveal that del Castillos action constitutes plagiarism.96 They
expressed that The notion that plagiarism becomes plagiarism only
when it is done with malice will not go down in the annals of world law
as a legal insight; it will go down there as a joke. They perceive it to
produce a laughable effect instead of a chilling effect.97
4. Inference
Based on the standard used in determining whether or not a
case law is considered good, it is clear that the case of In the Matter
of the Charges of Plagiarism, Etc., Against Associate Justice Mariano
C. del Castillo is not considered as a good case law. Although it is
indisputable that the Supreme Court has the sole authority to
establish case laws that are binding in the legal profession, it must
not produce consequences that are deleterious to the legal
profession. The ruling falls short of the required respect from the
officers of the court as well as the lay people. If a precedent is to be
followed because it is a precedent, even when decided against
justice, there can be no possible correction of abuses, because the
fact of their existence renders them above the law.98
a. Habana V Robles
1. Legality and Reasonableness
The case of Habana v Robles satisfies the basic requirement
that it must have been made upon argument and be the solemn
decision of the court in order to consider it binding. It is regarded as a
landmark case for it is the only case that deals with books and fair
use of Republic Act No. 8293.99 It clearly illustrates the principles
codified in the Intellectual Property Law.
2. Implication
95
Andreo Calonzo, SC plagiarism ruling may have violated Berne copyright pact, expert says, October 22,
2010 available at: http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/204069/news/nation/sc-plagiarism-rulingmay-have-violated-berne-copyright-pact-expert-says; accessed: 1 March 2014
96
Randy David, Plagiarism: a tale of two cultures, October 24, 2010 available at: accessed 4 march
2014http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20101023-299338/Plagiarism-a-tale-oftwo-cultures
97
Conrado de Quiros, Malice in Wonderland, October 27, 2010, available at:
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20101025-299586/Malice-in-Wonderland;
accessed 4 March 2014
98
Mina, supra note 77
99
MILAGROS SANTOS-ONG, Copyright Laws, Issues Concerns and Cases, Available from: Academic Search
Premier, EBSCOhost; accessed 6 March 2014
14 | P a g e
The ruling in the case of Habana v Robles states that the intent
to infringe is immaterial in determining plagiarism. Ruling otherwise
will render lack of malicious intent as a defense to a charge of
violation of copyright law through lack of attribution.100 As a
consequence, strict adherence to the principles laid down in the
Intellectual Property Code is sustained.
3. Reverence
The case of Habana v Robles received wide acceptance
among the officers of court in the legal profession. Those who oppose
the ruling in the plagiarism case of del Castillo agrees with the
definition of plagiarism which was adopted in the case of Habana v
Robles. 101 The ruling has been used by Intellectual Property lawyers
in dealing with cases involving copyright infringement. 102 A Canadian
authority, in a recent work, proposes factors to consider in
determining whether there is infringement or not, and the proposal is
in agreement with the majoritys doctrine in the case of Habana v
Robles.103
4. Inference
Based on the standard used in determining whether or not a
case law is considered good, the conclusion is inescapable that the
case of Habana v Robles is a good case law. Its conformity with RA
8293 and the law on justice has drawn respect from the legal
profession. Its implication coincides with the purpose of the law which
is to protect and secure the exclusive rights of authors to their
intellectual property and creations.
VI.
Conclusion
15 | P a g e
107
Id.
Id.
109
Id.
108
16 | P a g e