FAQs
FILCOLS PRIMER
The Filipinas Copyright Licensing Society, Inc. (FILCOLS) is a non-stock, non-profit corporation mandated by authors, publishers, and other rightsholders in the text and image sector to
enforce their economic rights and moral rights as defined in the Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines (RA 8293 as amended by RA 10372).
Incorporated on January 8, 2008, FILCOLS is the national reproduction rights organization
(RRO) of the Philippines recognized by the government and the international copyright
community.
FILCOLS was organized in mid-2007 by the Book Development Association of the Philippines (BDAP), Unyon ng mga Manunulat sa Pilipinas (UMPIL), the National Book Development Board (NBDB), and the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL).
The heads of these agencies agreed to work together and organize FILCOLS in response to the recommendations of the US Trade Representative in its Special 301 Report and the
International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations (IFRRO).
The heads were: Atty. Adrian “Che” Cristobal Jr, Director General, IPOPHL; Dr. Dennis T. Gonzalez, Chair, NBDB; Mr. Lirio P. Sandoval, President, BDAP; and National Artist Virgilio
S. Almario, President, UMPIL.
Section 183 of the Intellectual Property Code (IP Code) states: The owners of copyright and related rights or their heirs may designate a society of artists, writers, composers, and other right-holders to collectively manage their economic or moral rights on their behalf.
For the said societies to enforce the rights of their members, they shall first secure the necessary accreditation from the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL).
In 2014, FILCOLS became the second Collective Management Organization (CMO) accredited by IPOPHIL. The first CMO, established in 1965, was the Filipino Society for Composers, Authors, and Publishers (FILSCAP), representing the music sector.
Both FILCOLS and FILSCAP operate as non-stock, non-profit associations. FILCOLS serves as a CMO for authors, heirs, and book publishers, while FILSCAP serves composers, lyricists, and music publishers.
FILCOLS’ accreditation was renewed on April 1, 2024, and is valid for five years, until March 31, 2029.
Copyright is the automatic legal protection given to authors or creators of scientific, literary, and artistic works. It is not just one right but a bundle of moral and economic rights.
Under Section 193 of the IP Code, authors and creators have the moral right to:
1. Require that the authorship of the work be attributed to him or her;
2. Make any alterations to his or her work prior to, or to withhold it from publication;
3. Object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, his or her work which would be prejudicial to his or her honor or reputation; and
4. Restrain the use of his or her name with respect to any work not of his or her own creation or in a distorted version of his or her work.
Under Section 177 of the IP Code, authors and creators have the following economic rights:
1. Right over the reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work.
2. Right over transformations of the work like dramatization, translation, adaptation, abridgment, arrangement, etc.
3. Right over the first public distribution of the original (e.g. paintings and sculptures) and each copy of the work (e.g. books) by sale or other forms of transfer of ownership.
4. Right over the rental of the original or copy of the movie, music, software, a compilation of data, or musical work in graphic form, irrespective of the ownership of the original or the copy that is the subject of the rental.
5. Right over the public display of the original or copy of the work.
6. Right over the public performance of the work.
7. Right over other manner or form of communication to the public of the work.
The reproduction right is one of the economic rights of authors under the IP Code.
It is the exclusive right of authors of literary, scientific, and artistic works to authorize publishers or entities to make copies of their articles, books, drawings, photographs, and other works.
It is described as exclusive because only the author has the right to authorize another
person or entity to make copies of his/her works.
Because copyright is automatically vested upon the author who creates an original work, it is not a matter of choice or belief, but a matter of law. This is true internationally because of the Berne Convention and it is true in the Philippines because our IP Code follows the Berne Convention.
However, an author may choose not to enforce their copyright by sharing the work freely. Still, this does not extinguish copyright. Another who shares his or her book today may later change his or her mind and sell it instead.
Just like other forms of property, the owner is free to dispose of it as they wish. But, no one may be compelled to give away their copyright for free except under specific limitations and exceptions under the law.
Simply put, copyright is the right to be recognized as the author of a work and the right to make a living from that work. Writing your name on a poem, short story, or book is an exercise of copyright. Selling a book and receiving royalties for its use is also an exercise of copyright.
According to the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), the Berne Convention of 1886 deals with the protection of works and the rights of their authors. It provides creators such as authors, musicians, poets, painters, etc. with the means to control how their works are used, by whom, and on what terms.
It is based on three basic principles and contains a series of provisions determining the minimum protection to be granted, as well as special provisions available to developing countries that want to make use of them.
The three basic principles are the following:
(a) Works originating in one of the Contracting States (that is, works the author of which is a national of such a State or works first published in such a State) must be given the same
protection in each of the other Contracting States as the latter grants to the works of its own nationals (principle of “national treatment”). This means that foreign works should be protected in the same way as domestic works.
(b) Protection must not be conditional upon compliance with any formality (principle of “automatic” protection). This means that authors and creators automatically gain copyright protection by simply creating original works. There is no need to register or give notice.
(c) Protection is independent of the existence of protection in the country of origin of the work (principle of independence of protection). If, however, a Contracting State provides for a longer term of protection than the minimum prescribed by the Convention, and the work ceases to be protected in the country of origin, protection may be denied once protection in the country of origin ceases. This means that given protection in one country is not dependent in the protection in another country.
(Source: https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html)
A Reproduction Rights Organization (RRO) is a specific type of copyright society that collectively manages the copyright, mainly the reproduction rights of authors, publishers, and other rightsholders in the text and image sector.
Many RROs from different countries, including FILCOLS from the Philippines, form part of an international network called the International Federation of Reproduction Rights
Organisations (IFRRO). This helps them represent different authors and publishers from all over the world and helps monitor and enforce their copyright internationally.
FILCOLS operates under a voluntary collective licensing model in line with Section 183 of the IP Code. We represent both local and foreign rightsholders. We gather mandates from local rightsholders individually. We receive mandates from foreign rightsholders through bilateral agreements with RROs from other countries.
FILCOLS collectively manages copyrights in literary, dramatic, scientific, educational, and artistic works. We license educational institutions, businesses, and other organizations for the secondary use of copyrighted materials for internal and institutional use. We determine and collect licensing fees for the copying of works through photocopying and similar means; and distribute remuneration to our members.
A bilateral agreement is a contract between RROs from different countries that enables them to represent each other’s members and repertoires or catalogs of works. These agreements help increase the collection of royalties across different countries while lowering the costs of cross-border enforcement.
FILCOLS signed bilateral agreements with the RROs of Argentina, Australia, Colombia, Denmark, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria, Singapore, South Korea, Trinidad and Tobago, the UK, and Vietnam. This means that FILCOLS now manages the reproduction rights of the member-rightsholders of the RROs from these countries.
FILCOLS continues to engage with RROs from other countries to enter into bilateral agreements, strengthen cooperation, and share useful knowledge.
Collective management of copyright has been shown to be an effective way to maximize the collection of royalties for authors and publishers while lowering the cost of licensing for both rightsholders and users.
Because of the large number of works available, it is impractical for users to seek permission from every single author or publisher. Likewise, because there is a large number of users, authors and publishers cannot go to every single user to issue licenses and collect fees. Such work is best left to a professional organization like an RRO to make the entire process easier. Collective management provides a low-cost and convenient way to serve the needs of the creators and the users of works. Authors and publishers get the income they deserve and users get the access that they need.
Educational institutions, businesses, and other organizations need to obtain the proper licenses from rightsholders so they can legally use portions (beyond what is considered fair use) of copyrighted works for internal and institutional use mainly through digital and
photocopying. Being the representative of a large number of authors and publishers, RROs like FILCOLS are able to issue blanket licenses that cover all the works in its repertoire, both
foreign and domestic.
Copyright societies or Collective Management Organizations (CMOs) differ from one another because of the type of rightsholders they represent. At present, the Philippines has five (5) accredited CMOs:
1. The Performers Rights Society of the Philippines, Inc. (PRSP) representing performers;
2. Filipino Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, Inc. (FILSCAP) representing composers, lyricists, music publishers, and other music copyright owners;
3. Philippines Recorded Music Rights, Inc. (PRM);
4. Independent Music Producers of the Philippines (IMPRO); and
5. Filipinas Copyright Licensing Society, Inc. (FILCOLS) representing authors, publishers and other right holders in the text and image sector.
Source: https://www.ipophil.gov.ph/services/copyright/collective-management-organizations/
The National Book Development Board (NBDB) and the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) endorsed FILCOLS as the national RRO.
The National Book Development Board is the lead government agency mandated to develop the local book publishing business into a globally competitive industry.
NBDB was created by RA 8047 or the Book Publishing Industry Development Act of 1995.
The Intellectual Property Code of the Philippines or RA 8293 is the law on Patent, Trademark, and Copyright which took effect on 1 January 1998. The IP Code created the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL), the lead government agency mandated to develop a strong IP System and ensure effective use of IP for national development.
The IP Code was amended in 2013 by RA 10372, which created the Bureau of Copyright and Other Related Rights (BCRR) and strengthened the copyright provisions of the law, including the accreditation and supervision of CMOs.
The Book Development Association of the Philippines (BDAP) and the Unyon ng mga Manunulat sa Pilipinas (UMPIL) endorsed FILCOLS as the national RRO.
BDAP provided FILCOLS with a soft loan to jumpstart its operations in 2009-2010. FILCOLS paid the soft loan in full in 2017.
The Book Development Association of the Philippines is one of the oldest book industry associations in the country. It was established on October 24, 1979 by industry stalwarts like Socorro Ramos (National Book Store), National Artist for Literature Francisco Arcellana, Felicito Abiva (FELTA Mutlimedia), Louie Reyes (Vera Reyes Inc.), and Jesus Ernesto Sibal (Phoenix Publishing), among others.
Since 1980, BDAP has been organizing the annual Manila International Book Fair. In 1981, BDAP established the biennial Gintong Aklat Awards (Golden Book Awards).
Established in 1974, Unyon ng mga Manunulat sa Pilipinas (Writers Union of the Philippines) is the largest association of Filipino authors in the country.
UMPIL annually recognizes individuals and groups through the following awards: the Gawad Pambansang Alagad ni Balagtas (National Disciple of Balagtas Award for writers), Gawad Paz Marquez Benitez (Paz Marquez Benitez Award for educators), and the Gawad Pedro Bucaneg (Pedro Bucaneg Award for literary organizations).
The Brussels-based International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations (IFRRO) and the Oslo-based Norwegian Copyright Development Association (NORCODE) support FILCOLS as the national RRO.
FILCOLS became member of IFRRO on June 3, 2009. NORCODE provided FILCOLS with grant for its operations for 2010-2012.
Established in 1984, the International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations is a global association with 157 members from 85 countries composed of national RROs, authors’ groups, publishers’ associations, and other creative sector organizations.
IFRRO is a partner of the Geneva-based World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), a specialized agency of the United Nations.
IFRRO is also a partner of the Paris-based International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC – Confédération Internationale des Sociétés d’Auteurs et Compositeurs). Founded in 1926, CISAC manages a worldwide network of CMOs and boasts of members from 121 countries.
Established in 2007, the Norwegian Copyright Development Association conducts international development work in copyright and is the only one of its kind in the world. It was founded by five CMOs namely, Kopinor, BONO, TONO, Gramo, and Norwaco.
Copyright is private property and any use of such property without the owner’s permission isa civil and criminal offense. This is called copyright infringement and it is punishable with fines and imprisonment. These protections are found in Part IV (Copyright) of the IP Code.
The protection of intellectual property (which includes copyright and related rights) is one of the express State Policies under Article 14, Section 13 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.
Under international law, copyright is a human right enshrined in Article 27.2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 15(1) of The United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (UNCESCR). Copyright infringement is a violation of authors’ human rights because it deprives them and their families of a decent living.
The Berne Convention allows certain limitations and exceptions on economic rights, that is, cases in which protected works may be used without the authorization of the owner of the copyright, and without payment of compensation.
These limitations are commonly referred to as “free uses” of protected works, and are set forth in Articles 9(2) (reproduction in certain special cases), 10 (quotations and use of works by way of illustration for teaching purposes), 10bis (reproduction of newspaper or similar articles and use of works for the purpose of reporting current events) and 11bis(3) (ephemeral recordings for broadcasting purposes).
Source: https://www.wipo.int/treaties/en/ip/berne/summary_berne.html
Article 9
(1) Authors of literary and artistic works protected by this Convention shall have the exclusive right of authorizing the reproduction of these works, in any manner or form.
(2) It shall be a matter for legislation in the countries of the Union to permit the reproductionof such works in certain special cases, provided that such reproduction does not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.
(3) Any sound or visual recording shall be considered as a reproduction for the purposes of this Convention.
More commonly known as the Berne Three-Step Test, Article 9(2) of the Berne Convention was incorporated into the Philippine IP Code as a limitation to copyright limitations and exceptions. This means that exceptions are not absolute but may only be used in special cases and under conditions that will not seriously harm the right holder’s moral and economic rights.
Under Section 184.2. The provisions of this section shall be interpreted in such a way as to allow the work to be used in a manner which does not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work and does not unreasonably prejudice the right holder’s legitimate interests.
The IP Code copied Article 9(2) and placed it after the enumeration of limitations on copyright. This is to emphasize that the fair use is not a free-for-all copying. The limitation like fair use still should not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work, for example buying a book, and not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author, which means the moral and economic rights.
If the limitation like fair use affects the livelihood of the author, where his or her book is not bought due to free-for-all copying masked as fair use, then this goes against the author’s legitimate interests.
Fair use is an open-ended limitation on copyright which allows users to use works under certain conditions without needing to secure the owner’s permission or pay them remuneration. It is used as a defense against copyright infringement.
Section 185.1 states that the fair use of a copyrighted work for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching including limited copies for classroom use, scholarship, research, and similar purposes is not an infringement of copyright.
In 2013, the copyright law part of RA 8293 was amended from “multiple copies for classroom use” to “limited copies for classroom use.”
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is fair use, the factors to be considered shall include:
(a) The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for non-profit education purposes;
(b) The nature of the copyrighted work;
(c) The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(d) The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Not absolutely. The copyright limitations and exceptions need to be read together with the Berne Three-step Test which states that for any exception or limitation to be valid, the following conditions must all be present:
1. It must only be allowed in certain special cases;
2. It must not conflict with the normal exploitation of the work; and
3. It must not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the author.
“The statute mentions ‘teaching’ and ‘multiple copies for classroom use’ as possible fair uses, but ‘the mere fact that a use is educational and not for profit does not insulate it from a finding of infringement.’
This copyright limitation must likewise be tested by the Fair Use factors. “Thus, the use must be examined under all four factors as must any other allegedly infringing work. The fourth factor relating to the effect on the potential market of the copyrighted work is undoubtedly the single most important element of fair use.”
(Vicente B. Amador, Intellectual Property Fundamentals, Quezon City: C & E Publishing, 2007, p. 402-403.)
The large-scale digital and photocopying of copyrighted materials for internal, institutional use without permission from and just remuneration to authors, publishers, and other rightsholders is copyright infringement.
Reproduction of the work or substantial portion of the work is an exclusive right of the author (IP Code, Section 177.1). Small-scale reproduction of works may be permitted under fair use. But large-scale reproduction of works or substantial portions of works without the permission of the author is illegal.
Unremunerated large-scale digital and photocopying of books, journals, and other works hurt the economic rights of rightsholders because it affects sales. Fewer books sold means lower profits for publishers and, consequently, lower royalties for authors. This makes the publishing business unsustainable and no longer worth pursuing.
Thus, unlicensed and uncontrolled copying of copyrighted materials leads to authors losing their income and losing their motivation to keep writing good books. This is a bad result for everyone involved, especially educational institutions that require access to high-quality and updated learning materials at all times.
Due to the large number of authors and also large number of consumers using their works, the best solution for educational institutions, businesses, and other organizations is to get a license from FILCOLS and pay a blanket license fee. Since FILCOLS represents local and international rightsholders, the consumer is dealing with only one entity that will make legal its use of copyrighted material through digital and photocopying.
The FILCOLS license gives the consumer peace of mind because it allows the lawful use of copyrighted works.
Absence of a license makes reproduction activities illegal and the consumer becomes vulnerable to copyright infringement suits which are expensive, unpleasant, and may damage the reputation of the institution.
Poverty is not an excuse to violate copyright because publishers and authors need to make a living just like everybody else. People need to pay for the use of copyrighted works the same way they pay for food or transportation because these are products of someone’s hard work.
Fortunately, the licensing fees collected in the Philippines are relatively lower compared to other countries in Southeast Asia and are affordable for learning institutions and other organizations.
Copyrighted materials (text and images) are crucial for the delivery of lessons and information. Since they are using copyrighted materials on a large scale, they should secure a proper license for the use of these works. Without a license, teachers will not be able to freely teach their lessons because they will be limited in the study materials they can provide to their students. Researchers will also be at a disadvantage because they will not have access to the best and most recent materials to support their research.
Poverty should never be an excuse because even schools from poorer countries know the value of securing licenses for the use of copyrighted materials. There have been CMOs operating in Africa even before the enactment of the Philippine IP Code in 1998. For example, MASA (Mauritius Society of Authors, est. 1989), COSOMA (Copyright Society of
Malawi, est. 1992), and KOPIKEN (The Reproduction Rights Society of Kenya, est. 1995). The authors of these African countries receive regular remuneration for the large-scale use of their works in educational institutions and other organizations.
FILCOLS and the educational institution licensee will enter into a Licensing Agreement which includes authorization to conduct a statistical survey within the premises of the educational institution licensee. The Agreement will stipulate that the result of the statistical survey will not be used against the institution.
The statistical survey will be conducted by the institution’s statistical and research group or any competent personnel assigned by the educational institution.
The result of the statistical survey will measure the amount of works reproduced, the kind of works (books, journals, newspapers, etc.), and determine the authors and publishers of the works.
The result of the statistical survey will also be used to determine how and where
remuneration should be distributed.
In the license agreement between FILCOLS and the Department of Education, DepEd provided FILCOLS with a list of works reproduced which made the identification of copyright owners easy and facilitated the distribution of remuneration.
The Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) issued joint Memorandum Circular number 08-02 on April 23, 2008 mandating State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and HEIs to formulate their IP Policies.
IPOPHL is the competent agency mandated to provide assistance to institutions developing their IP Policies.
IP Policies will enhance institutions’ capacity to develop, protect, and promote IP assets. As knowledge centers located in the regions, institutions develop IP assets like innovative technologies which can create employment opportunities and contribute to national development.
In 2013, the crafting of IP Policies was mandated by law under Section 230 of RA 10372 which amended RA 8293.
Section 230 states: Adoption of Intellectual Property (IP) Policies. – Schools and universities shall adopt intellectual property policies that would govern the use and creation of intellectual property with the purpose of safeguarding the intellectual creations of the learning institution and its employees, and adopting locally-established industry practice fair use guidelines. These policies may be developed in relation to licensing agreements entered into by the learning institution with a collective licensing organization.
Taking its cue from Section 230 of RA 10372, the Book Development Association of the Philippines (BDAP) crafted its Fair Use Guidelines for Classrooms in 2014.
The Fair Use Guidelines document was crafted after due consultation with representatives of authors’ associations, publishers’ associations, and government agencies like the Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), The National Library of the Philippines, the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA), and IPOPHL, among others.
Established in 1979, BDAP, the oldest and largest book industry association, directed its legal team to craft the eight-page Fair Use Guidelines for Classrooms.
Basically, the book industry agreed to treat the reproduction of 5% of a work as fair use. For example, it
is fair use to reproduce up to 5 pages of a 100-page book or 25 pages of a 500-page book.
Beyond 5% or beyond what is considered fair use, the institution should get a license from FILCOLS for
its large-scale secondary use of works. FILCOLS is mandated by its members to license up to 20% or one
chapter of a work. Other details on secondary use by institutions are stipulated in the FILCOLS License
Agreement.
In the first quarter of 2024, the IPOPHL’s Bureau of Copyright and Related Rights published its 56-page
Statutory Fair Use Guidelines to further help the book industry and its stakeholders.
You may view Hanna Dione Lucero’s article “IPOPHL releases statutory fair use guidelines to clarify rules
on copyright exceptions” and download the Statutory Fair Use Guidelines here.
Published works of professors are usually reproduced in large numbers by consumers from different educational institutions and organizations. As authors, their copyright should be
respected not only by citing them as the source of the work (attribution) but by just remuneration for the use of their works.
Professor-authors should join FILCOLS so that their reproduction rights may be managed collectively. There is no membership fee for anyone who wants to join FILCOLS.
The requirements are simple. The author needs to submit the following:
1. Updated resume with list of works
2. Notarized Membership Agreement with Assignment of Reproduction Rights
3. Copy of TIN and another government-issued ID
4. Signed Proxy Form
These documents should be sent to membership officer Regina Reyna V. Pastor
(regpastor01@gmail.com).
In accordance with the accepted administration cost of RROs in other countries, FILCOLS deducts 30% administration cost from the remuneration collected from the licensees.
With the enactment of the Book Publishing Industry Development Act of 1995 or RA 8047, private sector publishers were allowed to participate in the largest market for textbooks in the country: the public schools.
The privatization of the public schools’ textbook market allowed the private sector publishers to expand their businesses instead of just competing with the small private schools’ textbook market.
The law aims to help grow and develop the book publishing industry so it will become globally competitive.
In consultation with the NBDB, the DepEd shall prescribe “the guidelines, rules, and regulations in preparing the minimum learning competencies and/or prototypes and other specifications for books required by public elementary and secondary schools.” (RA 8047, Section 10)
The NBDB provides a registration mechanism for entities in the book publishing industry and accredits private sector publishers who intend to supply textbooks for public schools. The agency also provides fiscal and non-fiscal incentives to further support the industry.
After registration with the NBDB and guided by the specifications from DepEd, the private sector publishers are authorized to produce and supply textbooks for public elementary and secondary schools. (RA 8047, Section 11).
Publishers are mainly in the business of producing and selling books. After the publication of a book, the author’s copyrighted work is used for the first time. This is called primary use. After the sale of the book and the author received his or her royalties from the publisher, the one who bought the book may re-sell it at a second-hand shop. The author need not be paid royalties again because he or she already benefitted from the primary sale.
However, if the same book is reproduced via digital copying or photocopying, the author and publisher (if the copyright is jointly owned) must be remunerated for the secondary use or re-use of the work.
Why? Because according to Section 177.1 of the IP Code, the reproduction right exclusively belongs to the author.
FILCOLS manages the reproduction rights of its members: authors, publishers, and heirs of copyright owners. FILCOLS collects license fees for the secondary use of copyrighted works. FILCOLS supports the publishers with supplementary remuneration by collecting small amounts from licensees.
This is not unique to the Philippines. The oldest RRO called VG WORT was established in 1957 in Germany to provide supplementary remuneration to German publishing houses affected by the coming of photocopying machines.
With the implementation of the K-12 Program (Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 or RA 10533), the DepEd, NBDB, and private publishers were caught off-guard.
The administration of then-President Simeon Benigno C. Aquino III wanted to see the first graduates of the program within its term of office. This means the 13 year program (one year of Kinder and 12 years for Grades 1 to 12) must be implemented despite a lack of textbooks and learning materials.
The DepEd was pressed to come up with learning materials to meet the needs of the public school students and comply with the administration’s target. Meanwhile, the private sector publishers found it unworkable to tweak their usual two-year book development procedure.
In consultation with the NBDB, FILCOLS’s chair Dr. Isagani R. Cruz and DepEd secretary Br. Armin Luistro, FSC, signed a licensing agreement in 2013. This allowed DepEd t0 provide the much-needed learning materials by getting a license from FILCOLS and paying a token copyright license fee for the re-use of FILCOLS members’ written works.
DepEd and FILCOLS continue to work together, especially in cases where the private sector publishers cannot provide the learning materials. Some learning materials needed by the DepEd are not financially profitable to the private sector publishers.
With the implementation of the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE), DepEd needs learning materials for the various languages in the Philippines. Since the majority of the textbooks are in English and Filipino, producing learning materials for other languages with a smaller population is not financially viable.
In this instance, DepEd must explore other means to produce the needed learning materials. With COVID-19 and the resulting transfer to alternative modes of delivery of lessons including online classes, FILCOLS and DepEd will work to provide much-needed learning materials for their blended-learning strategy. This will benefit millions of public school students.
FILCOLS provides easy and legal access to HEIs who reproduce copyrighted works on a large scale for internal use. Getting a license from FILCOLS means the HEI deals with only one entity which is accredited by the government through the IPOPHL.
FILCOLS supported the passage of the Free Tuition Law (Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act of 2016 or RA 10931). This law provided funds for “the reproduction of materials” [RA 10931, Section 3(g)] in SUCs and LUCs.
During the crafting of the law’s Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR), FILCOLS team led by chair Dr. Jose “Butch” Y. Dalisay Jr. met with the Commission on Higher Education (CHED)-UNIFAST secretariat to discuss points that will be presented to its Board.
Later, FILCOLS executive director Alvin J. Buenaventura and legal counsel Atty. Javier Flores crafted a position paper that guided the CHED-UNIFAST secretariat to include in its IRR copyright license fees for the reproduction of works under library fees.
This means that the government will provide funds for the reuse of copyrighted works. The SUCs and LUCs just need to include the copyright license fee for the reproduction of works under library fees.
Private educational institutions that reproduce copyrighted works on a large scale for internal use must also get a license from FILCOLS. Otherwise, their large-scale reproduction (via digital copying and photocopying) may be a violation of the rights of authors.
In compliance with the requirements for accreditation, FILCOLS submitted its tariff to the IPOPHL and is publicly available on their website.
https://www.ipophil.gov.ph/services/copyright/collective-management-organizations/
FILCOLS STANDARD LICENSE FEE RATES (updated 2019)
TARIFF FOR REPRODUCTION (Photocopying and digital copying)
BLANKET LICENSING (license covers the whole institution)
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS
For elementary, junior and senior high school, and technical-vocational school:
PHP 50 per student/term or PHP 100 per student/year
For higher education institutions (including SUCs and LUCs):
PHP 100 per student/term or PHP 200 per student/year
(PHP 300 per student/year for tri-sems)
BUSINESSES AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
For businesses and other organizations: PHP 180 per employee/year
TRANSACTIONAL LICENSING (license covers only a particular transaction)
For commercial educational institutions, businesses,