View full case

RAPPLER v. ANDRES D. BAUTISTA

FACTS:

Rappler, Inc. filed a petition against Andres D. Bautista, in his capacity as the Chairman of the COMELEC, seeking to nullify certain provisions of the MOA on the 2016 presidential and vice-presidential debates. The MOA was signed by the COMELEC, KBP, and various media networks, including Rappler. The MOA designated KBP as Debate Coordinator and the media networks as Lead Networks. Rappler raised concerns about certain provisions of the MOA and communicated these concerns to the respondent and COMELEC Commissioners, but received no response. Rappler sought the nullification of the provisions that violated its rights and requested a prohibition on the respondent from implementing these provisions. The respondent argued for the dismissal of the petition, citing procedural defects. However, the Court decided to resolve the case, considering its public importance and the time constraint involved. The provisions in question pertained to online streaming and the use of debate excerpts for news reporting.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the petitioner has the right to live stream the audio of the debates as allowed by the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) they signed.

  2. Whether the MOA provisions regarding live broadcast and online streaming are discriminatory.

  3. Whether the petitioner complied with the "copyright conditions" to exercise their right to live stream the audio of the debates.

RULING:

  1. Yes, the petitioner has the right to live stream the audio of the debates as allowed by the MOA they signed.

  2. No, the MOA provisions regarding live broadcast and online streaming are not discriminatory.

  3. Yes, the petitioner complied with the "copyright conditions" to exercise their right to live stream the audio of the debates.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The urgency of resolving a case may be considered when the issues raised have public importance.

  • Contractual rights can be enforced if they are supported by provisions in the Memorandum of Agreement.

  • Compliance with copyright conditions is necessary to exercise the right to reproduce or communicate to the public works of a political nature.

  • The MOA must be interpreted in a manner that promotes the widest possible dissemination of debates.

  • Freedom of the press is protected and guaranteed under Section 4, Article III of the Constitution.

  • Once the conditions imposed under Section 184.1(c) of the Intellectual Property Code (IPC) are complied with, the information, in this case, the live audio of the debates, forms part of the public domain.

  • The presidential and vice-presidential debates are held primarily for the benefit of the electorate to assist them in making informed choices on election day.

  • The political nature of the debates and the public's interest in the wide availability of information for voter education justify allowing the debates to be shown or live streamed on other websites.