IIPA Wants RP on Piracy “Priority Watch List”

Posted on February 26th, 2010. Written by Rico.

Through the same report that has caused an online uproar, the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA) recommended that the US Trade Representative (USTR) scrutinize the Philippines further over piracy.

To help put pressure on the Philippine government over the issue, the IIPA suggests that the USTR reduce some of the benefits enjoyed by Filipinos exporting to the US, such as a tax-free trade arrangement designed to help businesses based in “developing countries”.

As an international copyright watchdog, the IIPA represents members like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). Both have come under fire for their heavy-handed anti-piracy tactics; a common criticism paints the MPAA and RIAA as out-of-touch with the market, desperate to sustain a business model that no longer makes sense today.

Whatever the case, it’s easy to believe that the IIPA itself is out-of-touch, based on the recommendations contained in its recent report to the USTR. While no one doubts that piracy remains rampant in the Philippines (are you taking note Microsoft?), heads scratched themselves over the IIPA’s recommendation regarding Indonesia.

The Indonesian government recently encouraged its agencies to start adopting free open source software (FOSS), to cut down on costs. The IIPA that Indonesia was pushing “a mindset that does not give due consideration to the value to intellectual creations”, even though using FOSS would reduce copyright infringement; no one can steal something that’s free.

The Consumer is Secondary

As for the Philippines itself, the IIPA report cited a local law limiting TV advertisements to 10 minutes per hour:

Under Presidential Decree 1986, advertising on pay television is currently limited to ten minutes per hour of programming. Restricting advertisement placement tends to reduce the utility of advertising, leading to a reduction in advertising-based revenue and further impeding the development of the television industry in the Philippines.

It’s clear from the above statement that the IIPA is only looking out for the interests of its members. Increasing ad time may create more ad opportunities and help channels earn more money, but it will also make the viewing experience worse and ironically drive viewers away. Lots of people already complain that local networks show too much ads.

The needs of consumers, even those who buy legit stuff and line the pockets of media companies, are definitely secondary. The IIPA is just doing its job as a representative of its members—working exclusively in their interests. But that narrow-minded approach comes off as nonsensical and, in the words of a British commentator, “ludicrous”.

International Intellectual Property Alliance 2010 Special 301 Report
Image: Jepoy