Intellectual property rights are vital for fostering innovation, creativity, and economic growth, but their implementation varies across jurisdictions. The United States and the Philippines, while sharing commitments to international standards, have distinct approaches to intellectual property laws and enforcement. Examining their legal frameworks offers valuable insights into how trademark laws operate in these two countries.
This article offers a comparative analysis of the IP laws of the US and the Philippines, thereby highlighting both challenges and opportunities in safeguarding trademarks across borders
The Legal Frameworks of the US and Philippines on Trademark
At a glance, both the US and the Philippines are member-States of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) which provides services to protect IP rules across borders and resolve disputes, when necessary. As such, some aspects of IP between these member-States are similar, such as abiding to the international standard of enabling creators, innovators, and entrepreneurs to protect their intellectual creations.
Upon closer look, both countries differ in implementing IP laws. In the Philippines, the Intellectual Property Code (IP Code)1 governs intellectual property rights, further providing guidelines for trademark protection and defining their limitations.
In the US, trademark protection does not originate from the Constitution’s Intellectual Property Clause; instead, it is grounded in Congress’s authority to regulate interstate commerce, which is now the Trademark Act of 1946, as amended.
3 Key Insights on Trademark Laws: U.S. v. the Philippines
The following comparative factors applied are centered on how rights are conferred to trademark owners, penalties and remedies, and enforcement mechanisms:
1. As to rights conferred
In the US, trademark owners have the right to prevent other businesses or business owners from using similar marks to identify their goods or services if such use is likely to result in consumer confusion.2 In the Philippines, the owner of a registered mark has the exclusive right to prevent all third parties not having the owner’s consent from using in the course of trade identical or similar signs or containers for goods or services that are identical or similar to those in respect of which the trademark is registered where such use would result in a likelihood of confusion.3
Based on the foregoing, the trademark laws of the US and the Philippines show minimal differences in terms of the rights they confer.
2. As to infringement
Trademark infringement occurs when a trademark is used without authorization in connection with goods or services, leading to confusion, deception, or misunderstanding about their origin.4
Similarly, it is the tendency of the allegedly infringing mark to be confused with the registered trademark that is the gravamen of the offense of infringement of a registered trademark as emphasized by the Philippine Supreme Court.5
3. As to enforcement mechanisms
In the U.S., trademark owners can file a lawsuit in either state or federal court, with federal court being the preferred option. They may seek to transfer the case to federal court, and if infringement is proven, remedies can include an injunction, destruction of infringing items, monetary compensation, and attorney's fees.
In the Philippines, the IP Code stipulates that remedies for infringement, such as damages, injunctions, and the destruction of infringing goods, can only be ordered if the court finds that infringement has occurred. Without proof of infringement, these remedies cannot be granted.6
To know more about trademark infringement in the Philippines, read What is Trademark Infringement: Penalties and Remedies in the Philippines.
Conclusion
In summary, the trademark laws of the U.S. and the Philippines share similarities in essence. Regarding rights conferred, the gravamen of infringement, and enforcement mechanisms, both legal systems aim to protect trademark owners' exclusive rights while preventing consumer confusion. Although slight differences exist in enforcement and jurisdictional applications, the fundamental principles of trademark law in both countries align closely, reflecting a shared commitment to safeguarding intellectual property and promoting fair competition globally.
Want to learn more about how Philippine trademark law differs from the rest of the world? Book a consultation with a trademark attorney. You may also email us at admin@pinollaw.com.
1 An Act Prescribing the Intellectual Property Code and Establishing the Intellectual Property Office, Providing for its Powers and Functions, and for other Purposes, Republic Act No. 8293, §1(January 1, 1998) [hereinafter Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines]
3 Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, §147.
4 15 U.S.C. §§1114,1116-1118 (The Lanham Act, as amended)
5 Victorio P. Diaz v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 180677, February 2013.
6 Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines, §156
