Buhay, Guinaban, and Simbajon - Thesis Chapters 1, 2 and 3

TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT: AN ANALYSIS ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF
CYBERSQUATTING UNDER CYBERCRIME PREVENTION ACT OF 2012 TO
LEGAL STUDIES STUDENTS IN LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES
UNIVERSITY CAVITE
An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the
Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts and Education
Lyceum of the Philippines University Cavite
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Arts in Legal Studies
Zyrllen Ceasar V. Buhay
Ezra Aurora F. Guinaban
Tricia G. Simbajon
LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES UNIVERSITY CAVITE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
INTRODUCTION
Background of the Study 3
Statement of the Problem 6
Research Objectives 7
Significance of the Study 8
Scope and Delimitation 9
Theoretical Framework 10
Conceptual Framework 12
Definition of Terms 13
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The Primary Objective of Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 18
Cybersquatting Incidents in the Philippines 20
Trademark Infringement: Cybersquatting Under Republic Act 10175 22
Cybersquatting: Not Viewed as a Prominent Concern in the Philippines 23
COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND EDUCATION

No Case of Cybersquatting Raised in the Philippine Supreme Court 25
Policies and Mandates to Solve Trademark Infringement Disputes 26
Types of Cybersquatting 28
Domain Name Basics: Understanding Trademark Infringement 32
Typosquatting: The Infamous Category of Cybersquatting 33
Heightened Awareness on Domain Name Infringement

35
Diverging Methods in Preventing Cybersquatting 36
Synthesis 38
METHODOLOGY
Research Design 41
Variables and Measures 43
Research Locale and Research Respondents 44
Sampling Design and Technique 45
Research Instrument 46
Data Gathering Procedure 47
Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment 49

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The fundamental knowledge and guidelines that govern the study proposal
procedures are presented in this chapter. It includes the objectives and concepts that
collectively make up the research’s framework. It also defines the terms that are
operationally used throughout the study and discusses the study’s significance, scope, and
limitations.
1.1 Background of the Study
Cybersquatting is the act of purchasing, selling, or using a domain name to make
money off the reputation of another person’s trademark. It usually refers to acquiring
domain names that incorporate the names of existing companies to sell them to those
companies for a profit. The act that has come to be known as “cybersquatting” first
appeared when most businesses were still ignorant of the lucrative online opportunities.
Some enterprising individuals registered popular company names as domain names to sell
the names back to the organizations once they realized what they were doing. Opportunities
for cyber squatters are rapidly dwindling as more and more companies realize how
important it is to secure their domain names. (Kaspersky, 2023)
It is stated in the Official Gazette of the Philippines that cybersquatting is
punishable under the Republic Act No. 10175 also known as the Cybercrime Prevention
Act of the Philippines. Section 5 of the Republic Act No. 10175 states that cybersquatting

is the acquisition of a domain name over the internet, in bad faith, to profit, mislead, destroy
the reputation, and deprive others of registering the same, if such a domain name is:
a.) Similar, identical, or confusingly similar to an existing trademark registered with
the appropriate government agency at the time of the domain name registration;
b.) Identical or in any way similar to the name of a person other than the registrant,
in case of a personal name; and
c.) Acquired without right or with intellectual property interests in it.
Cybersquatting shall be punished with imprisonment or prison mayor or a fine of
at least two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) up to a maximum amount
commensurate to the damage incurred, or both: provided, that if it is committed against
critical infrastructure, the penalty of reclusion temporal, or a fine of at least five hundred
thousand pesos (P500,000.00) up to maximum amount commensurate to the damage
incurred, or both shall be imposed. However, despite the long existence of the law, a lot of
citizens are still not knowledgeable about the implications and repercussions of
cybersquatting in their lives. A lot of Filipinos still use similar or almost identical domain
names when creating websites that are subject to trademark infringement punishable as
above mentioned.
According to McCargo, H. (2022), cybersquatting can take many various forms,
all of which are prohibited. Typosquatting is one of them. Typosquatting is one of the most
common types of cybersquatting. In this instance, the cybersquatter deliberately buys

misspelled domain names for popular brands. If a domain name is typed incorrectly, the
intention is to redirect users to a malicious website. The basic goal of typosquatting is to
change a domain’s original spelling by adding or removing digits, characters, or periods.
Additionally, it involves altering the order of the letters or words within a domain.
Typosquatting is the practice of profiting from possible errors. Second, identity theft.
Cybersquatting can be used for identity theft because it allows someone to create a
comparable Uniform Resource Locator (URL) using the identity of a business. A user
visiting that business’s website might instead fall on the fake site. At the given moment,
the cybersquatter effectively took control of the target’s digital identity. Third, there is the
possibility of name-jacking on social media. Creating a profile that represents a famous or
well-known person without a registered domain name may be termed cybersquatting.
Given the proliferation of fan sites currently available online, this is a murky topic.
However, if the website begins selling goods that infringe on the victim’s brand or without
legal license, this might help strengthen the case for cybersquatting. Lastly, there is Reverse
Domain Name Hijacking (RDNH), also known as reverse cybersquatting, is a practice that
is similar to cybersquatting in several aspects. While cybersquatting is the purchase of a
domain name that incorporates a trademark with the intention of profiting from that
trademark, reverse domain hijacking is a little different. It occurs when a person or business
falsely claims to possess a trademark and then takes unreasonable actions to take away
your lawful domain name.

Since the 1990s, cybersquatting has been a problem. This is why governments as
well as organizations have enacted legislation to provide victims a fighting chance.
Continuously, it is no secret that it is one of the forms of cybercrime that has shown an
increasing pattern in 2020 and 2021, and it remains confusing to some individuals
(Armstrong, V., 2019). We are also aware of how reputation and credibility can be
exceedingly difficult to acquire but easily lost, causing considerable harm to the business’s
image and legitimacy. The researchers have chosen Cybersquatting to be the subject of
their study because they want people to be familiar with the Republic Act No. 10175 also
known as Cybersquatting under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 to at least have an
elementary knowledge of the law so that they would understand its purpose and where it
came from and what it entails.
1.2. Statement of the Problem
The study aims to determine the implications and repercussions of Republic Act
10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 in using domain names against trademark
infringement to Legal Studies students in Lyceum of the Philippines University Cavite.
Specifically, this seeks to answer the following questions:
1. Demographic profile of the respondents:
1.1 Age;
1.2 Sex; and

1.3 Year level.
2. Have the respondents encountered trademark infringement in the online
community?
3. How knowledgeable are students in terms of cybersquatting, and how do they seek
to adhere against such online infringement?
4. What are the implications of failing to protect intellectual property rights, including
trademarks and domain names, in the online environment?
5. How effective is the implementation and enforcement of Republic Act 10175 in
combating cybersquatting in the Philippines?
1.3 Research Objectives
Generally, this study aims to make an in-depth analysis about the implications of
cybersquatting under Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
Specifically, the study aims to attain the following objectives:
1. Determine the perception of Legal Studies students in Lyceum of the Philippines
University Cavite on cybersquatting and its connection to trademark infringement;
2. Assess the implications of cybersquatting to Legal Studies students in Lyceum of
the Philippines University Cavite;
3. Depict the effect of such implications to the effectivity of the law concerning
trademark infringement; and

4. Identify the issue that the Philippine government should consider in implementing
the Cybercrime Prevention Act concerning cybersquatting.
1.4 Significance of the Study
The acquisition of the research findings will be beneficial to the following
individuals:
1. Legal Studies Students. The findings of this study will help the Legal Studies
students to comprehend cybersquatting and trademark infringement issues within
the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, and contribute to a better understanding of
the effectiveness of existing legal frameworks.
2. Business Owners. The study is significant to business owners because
cybersquatting can harm their brand reputation, lead to financial losses, and confuse
consumers, impacting their ability to maintain customer trust and loyalty. The study
can reveal the disproportionate impact of cybersquatting on small businesses that
may lack resources for legal action, leading to policy recommendations for their
protection. Moreover, this will outline how trademark infringement affects their
businesses legally.
3. Domain Name Registration Practices. Investigating cybersquatting can inform
discussions on domain registration policies, including the need for stricter
verification procedures to prevent malicious actors from acquiring domains. Thus,

this will provide a cohesive study on the possibilities that may arise from trademark
infringement.
4. Consumer Trust. This study can reveal how cybersquatting affects consumer trust
in online brands, potentially leading to more informed consumer choices and
increased vigilance against fraudulent websites. Hence, consumers in any platform
will be able to comprehend the implications of cybersquatting in the products they
purchase.
5. Legislators. This study will serve as a guide for legislators in understanding the
implications of the current law affecting cybersquatting. The researchers’ objective
is to line out its implications for possible points of the Cybercrime Prevention Act
2012 for amendments. Legislators can create effective and enforceable laws that
can deter cybercrime, protect individuals and businesses, and establish a legal
framework for dealing with evolving digital threats.
6. Society. This study will enlighten the people of the true nature of the Cybercrime
Law, specifically the implications of cybersquatting. The researchers aim to present
the history and background of the law so as to know where it came from, and to
outline how such affects the society in its every sector. It is crucial for society to
protect intellectual property rights, foster fair competition, and maintain trust and
integrity in online transactions.
1.5 Scope and Delimitation

The scope of this study is limited only to all students enrolled under Bachelor of
Arts in Legal Studies for Academic Year 2023-2024 at the Lyceum of the Philippines
University Cavite, excluding the researchers.
The study was focused on determining the perceptions of the Legal Studies students
by subjecting them to a set of questions related to cybersquatting, trademark infringement
and the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. These questions are derived from the study of
Khan et. Al (2015), and were modified according to the information needed in the research
study.
1.6 Theoretical Framework
Bottom-Up Approach and Institutional Fit Approach
The bottom-up approach, which asserted that “implementation is in essence a
political procedure,” emerged as the ideal counterargument to skeptic top-down models in
which regulations is devised by political leaders and manually executed through impartial
providers of services and street-level bureaucrats. Notable die-hard bottom-uppers include
Berman (1978 and 1980), Lipsky (1978), Hull and Hjern (1987), who contend that a more
precise comprehension of how policies are implemented is likely to be acquired through
investigating its actual execution.
Implementation happens on two levels, according to Berman (1978): macro- and
micro-level implementation. The government program is created by centrally placed actors
at the macro-implementation level; at its micro-implementation level, local groups respond

to the macro-level plans by creating their particular initiatives and putting them into action.
According to Berman, the “interaction of a rule with the micro-level institutional setting”
is the primary cause for the majority challenges with implementation. The regulations
developed at the national level may be dominated by the local organizations and context-
specific variables, and legislators are unlikely to be able to regulate the processes. As a
result, there are significant differences in how the same national policy is carried out locally
(Palumbo, Maynard-Moody, and Wright 1984). Theorists of the bottom-up approach have
additionally come to conclusions that there certainly cannot be a “context free” theory of
implementations (Palumbo, Maynard-Moody, and Wright, 1984). Implementation is more
inclined to fall short if local administrators, or those at the “street level,” “are lacking in
the autonomy and opportunity of adapting regulations to their own realities.” Additionally,
they contend that in order to possess a better grasp of the course of a given policy, street-
level bureaucrats’ activities must be taken as well into account because it is at the small
scale that directly impacts citizens on ground level (Palumbo 1984).
In order to understand the discrepancy between the initial policy directions
imagined at the national level and their actual execution on the ground, this study will apply
Michael Lipsky’s notion of street-level bureaucrats including their utilization of freedom
of choice. Michael Lipsky described street-level bureaucrats in his seminal work as “public
service workers that relate closely with citizens in the ordinary course of their duties, and
who also have significant control in the performance of their duties” (Meyers and
Vorsanger 2003). As a result, they play a distinctive and important part in the

implementation process. Only law enforcement officials, city or provincial prosecutors,
state counsels, government attorneys, judges, and other individuals involved in cybercrime
who directly affect policy execution would be regarded street-level bureaucrats in this
study. This presents us once again to the idea of “institutional fit,” which means that new
programs cannot simply be created at the national level and brought in in a particular
location, particularly if street-level bureaucrats relish some discretionary freedom (Lejano
and Salvador 2006). The amount of alignment between the policy and its locale context,
which is mostly shaped by local bureaucrats and other social influences, should also be
taken into account by legislators (Lejano and Salvador 2006).
1.7 Conceptual Framework
The research study adopts the system approach (Input-Process-Output) in
describing the conceptual framework of the study. An effective method for both analyzing
and capturing the key elements of a transformation process is provided by the IPO Model.
The paradigm below serves as an illustration of the study’s conceptual framework.

Figure 1. A Table Showing the Input Process Output Model of the Study
The study’s input box contains information about the age, sex, and academic year
of the Legal Studies students. In accordance with the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012,
it also incorporates some ideas of trademark infringement and cybersquatting.
The procedure box demonstrates how survey questions are distributed while using
both qualitative and quantitative data collection for the undertaking. The mean, percentage,
frequency count, and standard deviation were used to evaluate and interpret the data.
Answers were gathered using SWOT analysis in essay-style questions.

The study’s findings are displayed in the output box, giving legal studies students
at the Lyceum of the Philippines University Cavite a thorough understanding of
cybersquatting, trademark infringement, and the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 and
its repercussions.
1.8 Definition of Terms
The following terminologies are operationally used in the study:
Acquisition – refers to the process of one company or organization purchasing or
taking over another company or its assets.
Copyright – a legal protection granted to the creators of original creative works,
such as literature, music, art, software, and other intellectual property.
Cyberbullying – a form of bullying that takes place through digital communication
technologies, such as the internet, social media platforms, text messages, or other digital
means. It involves using these technologies to harass, intimidate, threaten, or harm others,
typically with the intention of causing emotional distress or harm.
Cybercriminals - are individuals or groups who engage in criminal activities using
digital technologies, the internet, and computer networks.
Cybercrime – refers to criminal activities that are carried out using computers,
computer networks, and the internet.

Cybersex – refers to a form of sexual interaction or communication that takes place
over the internet or through digital devices. It typically involves individuals using text,
audio, video, or other digital means to engage in sexually explicit conversations or
activities with one another.
Cyber squatters – often take advantage of the fact that some individuals or
companies may want to secure domain names related to their brands or trademarks and are
willing to pay a premium to acquire them.
Cybersquatting – refers to the act of registering, trafficking in, or using an internet
domain name with the intent to profit from the goodwill of someone else’s trademark.
Damage – refers to harm, injury, or loss suffered by an individual, group, or entity
as a result of the actions or negligence of another party. Damages are a crucial concept in
legal contexts, particularly in civil law, where they are a remedy sought by a party who has
been wronged or injured by another.
Domain name – is a piece of text that corresponds to an IP address that is
alphanumeric and is used to access websites from client software.
Enforcement – refers to the act of compelling or ensuring compliance with a law,
rule, regulation, or agreement.
Implementation – refers to the process of putting a plan, idea, or concept into
action or practice.

Imprisonment – refers to the act of confining or incarcerating someone, typically
as a legal penalty or punishment for committing a crime.
Infringement – refers to the violation or a breach of a law, regulation, rule, right,
or agreement, particularly in the context of intellectual property or legal rights.
Intellectual Property – refers to the legal rights that are granted to individuals or
entities for their creations or inventions of the mind.
Law suit – A lawsuit is a legal dispute or case that is brought before a court of law
for resolution. It is a formal legal proceeding in which one party, known as the plaintiff,
files a complaint or a claim against another party, known as the defendant, alleging that the
defendant has violated a legal right, committed a wrongdoing, or caused harm.
Liberty – is a concept that refers to the state of being free from oppressive
restrictions or control. It encompasses the idea of personal freedom, individual rights, and
the ability to make choices and decisions without undue interference from external
authorities or forces.
Penalty – punishment, fine, or adverse consequence imposed on an individual,
group, or entity for violating a law, rule, regulation, contract, or some established standard
of conduct.

Phishing attacks – a type of cyberattack in which cybercriminals use deceptive
tactics to trick individuals or organizations into divulging sensitive information, such as
login credentials, financial data, or personal details.
Stipulations – conditions, terms, or requirements that are specified in a contract,
agreement, or legal document.
Trademark – is a legal concept that refers to a unique symbol, word, phrase,
design, or combination thereof that is used to identify and distinguish the goods or services
of one business or individuals from those of others.
Trademark infringement – is an unauthorized use of a brand or service mark
which might be in relation to products or services, and could cause misunderstandings,
deception, or confusion regarding the true source of a good or service.
Trademark law – a legal framework that governs the protection of trademarks. A
trademark is a distinctive sign, symbol, word, or phrase used by businesses to identify and
distinguish their products or services from those of others.
Trafficking – refers to the illegal trade or transport of goods, services, or
individuals, often involving activities that exploit vulnerable people for various purposes,
including forced labor, sexual exploitation, or other forms of abuse.
Typosquatting – is one of the most common types of cybersquatting. In this
instance, the cyber squatter deliberately buys misspelled domain names for popular brands.

If a domain name is typed incorrectly, the intention is to redirect users to a malicious
website.

CHAPTER II
LITERATURE REVIEW
The researchers were able to select a number of well-known studies from the wide
variety of resources available. There are numerous materials available online, as well as
some in the university library. A number of critiques of the Cybercrime Prevention Act of
2012, including cybersquatting, which constitutes one of particularly obscure unlawful
practices covered by its provisions, emerged as the general public monitored the evolution
of the law.
2.1 Local Studies
The Primary Objective of Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012
According to Dizon (2008), the increase in Internet utilization in the
Philippines has concurrently resulted in an escalation in instances of
cybersquatting, which refers to the illicit act of registering and employing a domain
name associated with a prominent brand or trademark that is owned by another
entity. The increasing prevalence of local domain name speculators, commonly
referred to as domainers, is resulting in a higher incidence of cybersquatting
instances within the nation. The COVID-19 pandemic expedited the utilization of
digital breakthroughs as individuals, constrained by mobility restrictions, hastened
their transition to online platforms. Nevertheless, the proliferation of connections
is accompanied by a corresponding rise in cyber dangers. On an individual basis,

Filipino individuals exhibit vulnerability to instances of data breaches and
infringements upon their privacy in the online realm.
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 is enacted to address and mitigate
cybercrimes through proactive measures, including pre-emption, prevention, and
prosecution. These cybercrimes encompass a range of illegal activities, such as
violations against the privacy, confidentiality, integrity, and availability of
computer data and systems. Additionally, the act also encompasses offenses that
are directly related to computers, as well as those involving objectionable material.
Similarly, Republic Act 10173 aimed to address identity theft and unsolicited
electronic messages. However, there were other factions that expressed opposition
towards the inclusion of Internet posts under the purview of libel law. As a result,
the Supreme Court intervened by issuing a temporary restraining order and a status
quo ante decree. Moreover, this legislation stipulates that legal action taken under
the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 would not exempt individuals from any
legal consequences for breaching any section of the Revised Penal Code, as
modified, or any other relevant statutes. (Villanueva, 2021)
In connection to cybersquatting, the data provided by the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) stipulates that there was a 1.3 percent increase in
the number of domain name disputes in 2017 compared to the previous year. In the
year 2018, the United States accounted for the most number of conflicts, reaching
a cumulative total of 920. Certain countries, such as the Philippines and the United

States, have implemented strict regulations against cybersquatting that go beyond
the standard provisions of trademark law. In contrast, nations like China have more
relaxed laws pertaining to the protection of intellectual property in the online realm,
hence, creating an environment conducive to the proliferation of cybersquatting
activities. Chinese individuals who engage in squatting activities have gained
notoriety for their practice of registering domain names that have a resemblance to
prominent American firms. An instance worth mentioning is a legal dispute
initiated by Pinterest, a platform for sharing photographs, against an individual
from China. The lawsuit alleges that the said individual registered the domain name
“pintersts.com” with malicious intent. Additionally, the individual was accused by
the corporation of utilizing the distinctive 'red-coloured’ logo associated with
Pinterest on his website, a practice intended solely for the purpose of displaying
adverts. The individual engaged in cybersquatting activities in China was subjected
to a monetary penalty amounting to USD 7.2 million, which included the costs
incurred for judicial proceedings.
Cybersquatting Incidents in the Philippines
A cybersquatting incident is causing a stir in the Philippine e-commerce
industry and domain squatting industry rocks the Philippine e-commerce start up
scene in the Philippines. A local blog that focuses on tech startups, The Bobbery,
revealed that daily deals website Metrodeal is said to be the owner of a number of
domain names that are connected to pornographic websites and are all versions of

the names of competing companies. The list of web addresses that were link to adult
content like cash-cash-pinoy.com, cashcashpinoys.com, cashcash-pinoy.com, deal-
grocer.com, dealdozens.com, ensogos.com, and kerendeals.com were reported to
be a subject of trademark infringement.
Cybersquatting is the act of registering a domain name that is confusingly
similar to a well-known website. The person who registered it typically intends to
capitalize on the domain name or even harm the reputation of the intended website.
No matter who the site’s owner is, the prohibitions banning cybersquatting that are
part of the new law are unable to be put into effect due to the Cybercrime Law’s
indefinite suspension as a result of debates over online libel. Many media
professionals, journalists, and citizens reject the Cybercrime Prevention Act of
2012 (RA 10175), however a Catholic leader by the name of Legazpi Bishop Joel
Baylon asked the populace to allow the newly enacted law the chance to apply the
bill’s provisions. The Chairman of the CBCP Episcopal Commission on Youth,
Legazpi Bishop Joel Baylon, acknowledged that the law has advantages and
disadvantages.
Additionally, Baylon said that citizens who were victims of cyberbullying
and e-libel have a right to protection against those who use the internet with harmful
intent. This protection extends beyond just protecting politicians, celebrities, and
other well-known members of society. Thus, Baylon asked the administration to
execute the IRR, which will negate all of the public’s negative sentiments and

assertions. According to the law’s provisions, it is illegal to access or use any
computer data, publish or distribute illegal files online, access or use any account
passwords online, use any illegal online services, or engage in cybersex or child
pornography, all of which are pervasive in today’s society. (Krisa, 2013).
Trademark Infringement: Cybersquatting Under Republic Act 10175
Cited in the study of Banzuela and Garcia in 2015, ten years after former
congressman Eric D. Signson’s original proposal, Republic Act 10175, more
commonly referred to as the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, was passed into
law. The passage of the law required some time because it was necessary for
lawmakers and other individuals to comprehend the scope of cybercrime including
whether or not the stipulations for punishment under Republic Act 8792, the E-
Commerce Law, were enough. Hence, when these issues emerged, Republic Act
10175 was enacted. In Philippine law, cybercrimes are enumerated as follows: (1)
Illegal Access; (2) Illegal Interception; (3) Data Interference; (4) System
Interference; (5) Misuse of Devices; (6) Computer-Related Forgery; (7) Computer-
related Identity Theft; (8) Computer-related Fraud; (9) Cybersex; (10) Child
Pornography; (11) Libel; (12) Aiding or Abetting in the commission of cybercrime;
(13) Attempt in the commission of cybercrime; and the most innominate
cybercrime in the Philippines, (14) cybersquatting.
According to the stipulations of RA 10175, cybersquatting, or the
acquisition of domain name over the Internet in bad faith to profit, mislead, destroy

reputation, and deprive others from the registering of the same, includes those
existing trademark at the time of registration; the names of persons other than the
registrant; and acquired with intellectual property interests in it. Those who get
domain names of prominent brands and individuals which in turn are used to
damage their reputation, can be sued under such provision. This constitutes the fact
that the freedom of expression and infringement on trademarks or names of persons
are treated separately because a party may exercise his liberty to express himself
without the need to violate the trademarks of brand names or such of a person.
Moreover, the penalty prescribed under the Revised Penal Code of the
Philippines indicate Prision Mayor or imprisonment of six years and one day up to
twelve years or a fine of at least five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) up to
a maximum amount commensurate to the damage incurred or both shall be
imposed, or if committed against critical infrastructure, Reclusion temporal
(imprisonment for twelve years and one day to twenty years) or a fine of at least
five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) up to a maximum amount
commensurate to the damage incurred or both. (Philippine Republic Act 10175,
2012)
Cybersquatting: Not Viewed as a Prominent Concern in the Philippines
In a study of Secure Connections which is an Initiative of the Asia
Foundation, it was reported in the year 2022 that the underlying essence of the
Internet is in the interconnectedness and dissemination of information. The act of

exchanging knowledge facilitates the acquisition of insights. Insights serve as
catalysts for the generation of ideas. Ideas serve as the foundation for the
development of both ideology and philosophy. Ideology and philosophy serve as
motivating factors for individuals to engage in self-organization and proactive
behavior. The rate at which information diffuses and ideas are adopted has
accelerated significantly with each successive change in the medium of
dissemination.
The Internet has undeniably facilitated the global distribution of economic
opportunities, resulting in several achievements. These achievements are evident in
the increased integration of supply chains across nations, as corporations strive to
identify the manufacturer offering the most cost-effective and dependable
solutions. The business process outsourcing (BPO) industry in the Philippines has
emerged as an additional avenue for generating service export earnings,
supplementing the traditional reliance on remittances from overseas Filipino
workers.
Cybersquatting is not currently regarded as a prominent concern in the
Philippines. Due to the nascent state of digital transformation in the country, there
appears to be a prevailing assumption that threat actors do not provide a significant
threat or that the Philippines is not a prime target. The global systemic shocks
experienced worldwide were a result of the pandemic and the intense and divisive
polarization of political discourses. These unexpected events disrupted the

established assumptions and prevailing knowledge about the Internet. The twin
shocks, if anything, have revealed the vulnerability of social, economic, and
political frameworks. With heightened urgency, the imperative to proactively
prevent or, at the very least, minimize the potential harm that could arise by giving
more thought and taking more action towards the adoption and enforcement of
cybersecurity protocols.
No Case of Cybersquatting Raised in the Philippine Supreme Court
The Philippines passed the Cybercrime Act in 2012; roughly three years
later, the Departments of Justice, Interior and Local Government, and Science and
Technology published the Act’s Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR). It
defined several offenses relating to cybercrime, including cybersquatting.
In the study of Alberto and Pelongco in 2020, they stated how the United
States implemented its cybercrime law and what is the Philippines Cybercrime Act
status. It stated that taking into account the newly implemented but untested
provisions of the Philippines’ Cybercrime Act raises the question of how the
Philippine jurisdiction’s designated cybercrime courts would respond to a UDRP
case. The network of contracts that ICANN and Providers use to bind all parties
interested in a dispute is not available to courts. A less-than-friendly climate for
registrants accused of cybersquatting may result from the fact that Philippine
legislation, unlike ACPA in the U.S., does not define reverse domain name
hijacking. In other words, it has yet to be determined if the Cybercrime Act will

protect the legitimate claims of trademark owners and registrants.
The Supreme Court emphasized that RTCs designated as Special
Commercial Courts in the same document are also further designated as
Cybercrime Courts to try and decide Cybercrime cases covered by the law in this
Administrative Matter, titled “Designating Certain Branches of the Regional Trial
Courts to Try and Decide Cybercrime Cases Under Republic Act No. 10175.”
Even though cybersquatting is specified by law, no case that directly
addressed the pertinent provisions has ever made it to the Philippine Supreme
Court. The Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Cybercrime reports that there
were just four cases in 2014, two in 2015, and one in 2016. The need for more legal
guidance on handling ongoing or concluded administrative actions involving
cybersquatting cases is even more concerning. As far as the authors are aware, there
have yet to be any instances that address this specific conundrum. There has yet to
be a corresponding law in the Philippines, unlike the U.S., where the courts have
ruled that the UDRP is only a cause of action to begin a review under the ACPA196
and not an arbitration subject to minimal review. It differs from the processes that
are envisioned by arbitration laws.
2.2 Foreign Studies
Policies and Mandates to Solve Trademark Infringement Disputes
Cybersquatting is illegal as it is a form of extortion or as an attempt to steal

business from the authentic owners. Through the laws, rules, and frameworks that
are put into place, cyber security also indirectly influences political interactions and
interactions among nations, regions, international organizations, and corporate
entities. It is impossible to bring cybersquatting under the authority of only one law.
Over and beyond the standard laws governing trademark law, certain nations have
additional prohibitions against cybersquatting. Thus, in an effort to stop
cybersquatting, some countries have imposed rather arbitrary restrictions on the use
of domain names, such as demands that the domain name be distinct or contain no
broad terms.
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the international
organization that acts as a global hub for intellectual property (IP)-related
information, collaboration, and services. In the study of Bhusari and Rampure in
2022, the WIPO has been significant in putting a stop to cybersquatting. Around
7000 cybersquatting cases were submitted to the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO) in 2022, and over 7900 domain names were present in the
total. Particularly since 2012, when there were almost 2900 such conflicts, the
number of cases submitted to the World Intellectual Property Organization has
grown (Petrosyan, 2022). As a result of this, the study of Singh entitled
“Cybersquatting and Regulatory Mechanisms in 2021” stated that providing tools
for online dispute resolution could aid in resolving complaints and increase
consumer confidence in online commerce.

To resolve disputes involving domain names, the WIPO established the
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Policy, which is
an online domain name dispute resolution process. Its responsibility is to maintain
the stable and secure operation of the unique identifier systems that are used
throughout the entire global Internet. This approach is not only quicker, but also
more economical. On the other side, the United States became the leading protector
against cybersquatting. Along with the WIPO, the Anticybersquatting Consumer
Protection Act of the United State is working together to offer anti-cybersquatting
protection to people and owners of distinctive trademarked names. Similarly in the
Philippine scenario, the Republic Act No. 10175, otherwise known as the
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, categorizes cybersquatting as a criminal act
(Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines, 2012). Under the new
Senate Bill, squatters could spend six to twelve years in prison if found guilty
(Realtime Register, 2012). The Philippine adopted the Uniform Domain Name
Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP) which is the legal basis for resolving disputes
between a domain name registrant and a third party about the unauthorized
registration and use of an Internet domain name in the generic top level domains
(World Intellectual Property Organization, n.d.).
Types of Cybersquatting
Cybersquatting is the most severe domain dispute that takes place
worldwide. As old as the World Wide Web (www.) itself, cybersquatting is a

recognized practice that dates back to its inception. Many organizations and
individuals lacked a thorough knowledge of the commercial prospects offered
online in the early years of the internet. During this time, some fraudsters would
profit from this situation by registering domains in the names of well-known
businesses (Kaspersky, 2023). According to the study of Bhusari and Rampure in
2022, there are many different sorts of cybersquatting being formed nowadays
because the primary objective of cyber-squatters is to conduct illicit internet
commerce at the expense of the goodwill and trade name of legitimate trademark
owners.
The types of cybersquatting ate the following:
1. Typosquatting
Typosquatting is the most prevalent sort of cybersquatting, in which a
cybersquatter registers domain names with variations of well-known
trademarks (Stella & Kumari, 2022). The cyber squatters will create a typo in
the domain name that will be registered on purpose. Since these typos are
generic in nature, there is a risk that many users will enter them erroneously and
subsequently be forwarded to the website of cybersquatters (Bhusari &
Rampure, 2022).
2. Identity Theft
Identity theft is the common cybercrime that can be under the manipulation of

the cybersquatters. The internet sources different identity theft issues. The
cybersquatters monitor the expiration of domain names registered in the names
of renowned or well-known trademark owners using a variety of techniques,
including internet programs. Cybersquatters register domain names in their own
names after the ownership of such names expires in order to deceive website
visitors into believing that the website is maintained by the same original
trademark owner who also owned the domain name .
3. Name Jacking
Name jacking takes place when a cyber squatter utilizes the real name of a
famous person to construct an imitation website. Similarly to the study of
Bhusari and Rampure in 2022, Cybersquatters register domain names in the
names of such well-known public figures with the intention of attracting visitors
to the website associated with their legitimate online identity. They are typically
employed to increase traffic to the website of the cybersquatter, which may have
nothing at all to do with the content of the famous person.
4. Reverse Cybersquatting
This strategy, often referred to as reverse domain name hijacking, involves
hackers taking advantage of the current legal system to help their domain
squatting. Cyber squatters will exploit the law, such as the Anti Cybersquatting
Consumer Protection Act (ACPA), to try and take over the website in question

by claiming that the actual owner is web squatting using the business name that
they own (Kaspersky, 2023). The legitimate trademark owner, who properly
registered the domain name and protected it, would be intimidated by the cyber
squatters, who would then urge him to transfer the domain name into their
name.
The growth of trade relationships from the physical world into the digital one
today fosters a positive trading environment for players. However, some groups
have turned the Internet’s expansion into a site of dishonesty in addition to its
positive qualities. Famous brand names and domain names are being misused,
which is leading to unfair market rivalry. This activity is referred to as cyber-piracy
in some nations and unfair competition in others. The goodwill of a firm is
identified and represented through its trademarks. There has been a lot of
controversy in recent years around trademark infringement using various tactics,
including cybersquatting. The future potential of a corporation may be
compromised by such misinformation. However, there is no law in India that
regulates cybersquatting, and efforts to do so have largely been fragmented. Even
if there is a global framework to stop cybersquatting, it is not enough to stop the
growing menace of cybersquatting. This document lays the foundation for anti-
cybersquatting legislation to be passed in India. In order to reach their results, the
authors employed secondary sources such as books, online journals, databases,
media reports, statistical data, etc. (Hein Online, 2021) The words, images,

expressions, logos, or mottos that distinguish one company from another are known
as trademarks.
Nowadays, trademark encroachment is frequently observed in an effort to
capitalize on the generosity of an existing brand name. Cybersquatting is one such
type of brand name infringement. Cybersquatting is described as a method for
registering, purchasing, or using a domain name with the intention of profiting from
the generosity of another person’s existing brand name. It pertains to the practice
of buying up domain names that contain the names of already-established
businesses with the intention of offering them at a profit to those legitimate owners
or to masquerade as the official website of the brand in an effort to confuse or dupe
current and potential customers. Although there are related laws and international
structures in this way, some laws does not have a specific systematized method to
handle instances of cybersquatting. As a result, they fall short of effectively
managing the constantly growing risk of cybersquatting.
Domain Name Basics: Understanding Trademark Infringement
In Khal, et. Al, study in 2015, it was cited that understanding the
technological context that has allowed the problems outlined in the research study
have developed is crucial. Alongside every website moniker on the Internet is an
IP address. A Domain Name System (DNS) is necessary for every web server in
order to convert domain names to IP addresses. A collection of numbers called an
IP address looks like 192.91.247.53. Characters which are simpler to remember

make up the domain name. In Figure 2, a domain name example is shown.
Figure 2. A Diagram Showing Domain Name System
In order to route demands to link computers on the Internet, dispersed
databases execute the task of locating domain names to their respective IP
addresses. These databases hold a database containing domain names and their
associated Internet Protocol (IP) addresses. The hierarchical nature of the DNS
enables a distributed administration of name-to-address conversion. (Khan, et. Al,
2015)
Typosquatting: The Infamous Category of Cybersquatting
Typosquatting, where a cyber squatter registers domain names with
variations of well-known trademarks, is the most prevalent type of cyber squatting.
Typo squatters are dependent on the assumption that people using the Internet will

type domain addresses incorrectly into the web browsers they use. Through these
minor misconstructions, people will unconsciously delve into infringed domain
names, which will negatively affect the original owner of a trademark. People will
be able to open the infringed versions of the authentic domain name. Some
instances of typosquatting consist of the following:
Table 1. A Table Showing Different Kinds of Typosquatting
It is important to remember that the Internet Corporation for Assigning
Names and Numbers (“ICANN”) is responsible for managing and coordinating the
domain name system by controlling the dispersion of distinctive Internet Protocol
(“IP”) addresses and domain names. However, many domain name registries
located throughout the world are responsible for handling actual domain name
registration. Cybersquatting Competitor Disputes and Parody Disputes have been
the key concerns in the different domain name disputes that have been brought
before courts across the world.
By doing this, a cyber squatter violates the trademark proprietor’s

entitlement to make use of his own brand. In this way, the online squatter infringes
the trademark owner’s fundamental freedom to utilize the trademark. The domain
names which have been “squatted” are occasionally, however not constantly paid
for within the process for registration by the cybersquatters, which makes
cybersquatting somewhat distinct. It is crucial to remember, though, that
registering a domain name is a perfectly acceptable procedure. Entrepreneurs who
attempt to capitalize on the goodwill generated by others through declaring domain
names that draw in the public are adding to the problem caused by cybersquatting.
Of particular concern is the practice that is on the rise of registering celebrities’
names, especially when the domain name ends up being utilized for a pornographic
website. The fact that more cybersquatting claims have been submitted with the
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in 2005 than in 2004 is further
evidence of the nuisance that cybersquatting causes more today that the world is in
a more modernized and globalized situation.
Heightened Awareness on Domain Name Infringement
During the early days of the Internet, a significant number of enterprises
and individuals had only a little understanding of the broad spectrum of commercial
prospects that existed in the online realm. During this period, a subset of hackers
exploited the situation by engaging in the registration of domains under the guise
of reputable companies, so capitalizing on this activity for financial gain. This
marked the inception of the practice commonly known as cybersquatting. In

contemporary times, the prevalence of technological literacy among individuals has
increased significantly, leading to a heightened awareness of the significance of
managing domain names associated with their own corporate enterprises.
Consequently, the practice of cybersquatting has witnessed a decline in frequency
compared to previous periods. However, despite efforts to mitigate its occurrence,
cybercrime continues to persist, posing unexpected challenges for its targets.
Consequently, it is imperative for prominent corporations and individuals to
acquire a comprehensive understanding of its mechanisms and potential impact.
(Kapersky, 2023)
In addition, he provided that In order to address an instance of
cybersquatting, a corporation or proprietor of a trademark may opt to initiate
communication with the individual engaging in the practice and provide monetary
compensation in exchange for obtaining control over the domain name.
Nevertheless, the existence of specific legislative measures has facilitated the
potential for constructing a legal argument against the individual occupying the
property without authorization, enabling the initiation of criminal proceedings.
(Kapersky, 2023)
● The burden of proof is with the claimant in establishing a case of illicit
online squatting. In order to accomplish this task, it is typically necessary
for individuals to provide substantiating proof that:
● The reputation or trademark of the entity in question has become widely

recognized and has been weakened due to the practice of domain squatting.
● The individual who engaged in squatting activities deliberately registered a
domain name with the purpose of encroaching upon the rights of, and
deriving financial gain from, the pre-existing corporation, individual, or
owner of a trademark.
● In order for a web squatting site to be established, it is necessary for the
domain to either match or bear resemblance to an already existing name or
trademark.
Diverging Methods in Preventing Cybersquatting
In relation to the substantive basis of a claim, Panton, V. (2013) stated that
there exists a wide range of methods. It is worth noting that a majority of European
countries tend to derive the foundations of anti-cybersquatting assertions from
overarching legislations pertaining to trademarks, unfair competition, passing off,
as well as the safeguarding of personal and trade names. This study presents an
analysis indicating that in certain instances, conventional legal mechanisms prove
inadequate in addressing the complexities posed by the Internet, resulting in
jurisprudential outcomes that are deemed unacceptable. The phenomenon of
cybersquatting, specifically when it involves obstructing domain name
registrations, presents challenges for courts when it comes to determining the
concept of “use in commerce” within the context of trademark law, as well as in

cases involving deception in passing off actions. The realm of conflicts between
competing rights, including trademarks and personal and trade names, presents an
additional source of stress. The absence of well-defined regulations in this area
contributes to a state of uncertainty. Several governments, such as Belgium,
Finland, France, and Denmark, have deemed the matter critical and have
implemented specialized legislation to address the issue of cybersquatting. The
implementation of anti-cybersquatting legislation effectively addresses the
challenges arising from the endeavor to apply conventional legal rules, while
preserving their supplementary applicability, without any bias.
The utilization of trademark infringement continues to be the predominant
strategy employed in addressing the issue of cybersquatting. Numerous European
nations have created an established corpus of legal precedents pertaining to domain
names that violate trademark rights. The confrontation between the accessibility of
cyberspace and the idea of territoriality gives rise to several challenges. Put
differently, there exists the possibility of a single domain name, such as xyz.com or
xyz.de, with 200 trademark registrations for the term “xyz” in 100 distinct nations,
each registered within different classes. These circumstances give rise to conflicts
between trademarks and domain names. Furthermore, it appears that trademark law
is inadequately equipped to address the issue of cyber squatters, and the judicial
system has encountered difficulties in applying the principles of trademark
infringement to cases involving cybersquatting. The concept of “use in commerce”

refers to the requirement for a trademark to be actively utilized in connection with
the sale or provision of goods or services in order to establish and maintain legal
protection. Various legal avenues are available to address the issue of
cybersquatting. These include pursuing claims of trademark infringement, unfair
competition, passing off, relying on specific anti-cybersquatting legislation,
seeking protection for personal names, and exploring sui generis solutions. The
consideration of these factors will be examined sequentially within the jurisdictions
of countries that adhere to the common law and civil law legal systems. (Panton,
2013)
2.3 Synthesis
A trademark, design, slogan, or instantly recognizable image is a carefully designed
personality profile of a person, organization, business, good, or service. (Khan, et. Al,
2015) This means that image cannot be easily remembered without studiously crafting
one’s personality profile. The market for internet domain names is enormous. The globe is
seeing a major revolution in the area of communications, which has given internet residents
countless new options. The wide-ranging web has evolved into an effective instrument for
organizations to market, advertise, as well as sell products and solutions as a result of its
growing relevance. Unfortunately, cybersquatting, which results from dishonest and illegal
behavior, has also proliferated.
According to the study’s review of related literature, cybersquatting, also known as
domain name squatting, is defined by the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 as the

registration, trafficking, or use of a domain name alongside the malicious intention of
generating revenue by exploiting the goodwill of another person’s trademark. The cyber
squatter then makes an exorbitant offer to market the domain to the individual or business
that is the owner of the trademark associated with the name. The word originates from
“squatting,” which is the action of inhabiting an empty or deserted property or place
without the owner’s, tenant’s, or other authorized user’s approval. The domain names
which have been “squatted” are occasionally, however not constantly paid for within the
process for registration by the cyber squatters, which makes cybersquatting somewhat
distinct. The costs cyber squatters typically want are much higher than the ones they
originally paid. Several cyber squatters post disparaging comments about the person or
business the domain is meant to symbolize in an attempt to persuade the target to purchase
the domain from them. Others monetize their squatting by posting sponsored connections
through ad networks to the real website that the user probably wanted.
In conclusion, cybersquatting in the Philippines has broad repercussions in the fields
of cybersecurity, law, and economics. Cybercriminals might use cybersquatting to set up
phishing attacks, disseminate malware, or steal confidential data. Cybersquatting litigation
or arbitration is frequently used to settle disputes, which can be time-consuming and
expensive. This burdens the legal system and raises the cost to those who are affected. To
preserve intellectual property, uphold online trust, and promote a secure digital
environment, enterprises, governmental organizations, and international stakeholders must
work together to address this issue.

CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the research design, the sampling design, respondents’
description, research instruments, data gathering procedure, data analysis, as well as
statistical treatments used in order to establish reliable and pertinent study results.
3.1 Research Design
In the research study, mixed methods were employed to gain a comprehensive
understanding of the complex relationship between Legal Studies student perceptions of
trademark infringement and the implications of cybersquatting. By incorporating both
qualitative and quantitative approaches, researchers aimed to delve deeply into the
subjective experiences and attitudes of Legal Studies students regarding trademark
infringement (qualitative) while simultaneously quantifying the extent and impact of
cybersquatting (quantitative). This mixed methods approach allowed for a multifaceted
exploration, enabling the researchers to triangulate data from diverse sources. Qualitative
data provided rich insights into students’ perceptions, motivations, and contextual factors
influencing their understanding of trademark infringement, offering a nuanced perspective.
On the other hand, quantitative data pertaining to cybersquatting helped establish statistical
patterns and correlations, providing a broader perspective on the prevalence and
implications of this phenomenon. By combining these methods, the study could offer a
holistic view, bridging the qualitative nuances of student perceptions with the quantitative
data on cybersquatting’s tangible consequences, thus enriching the overall analysis and
enhancing the depth of the research findings.

Consequently, Explanatory Sequential Design (ESD) will be applied to the study.
In this approach, the research begins with qualitative data collection and analysis, followed
by quantitative data collection to explain or validate the initial qualitative findings. In this
study, researchers initially conduct qualitative surveys with Legal Studies students to
explore their perceptions of trademark infringement in-depth. Through open-ended
questions, researchers can gather rich qualitative data, capturing the nuances and
underlying reasons behind the students’ attitudes and beliefs regarding trademark
infringement. Qualitative methods allow for a deep exploration of the topic, uncovering
various perspectives and contextual factors that might influence students’ views.
Essentially, a SWOT analysis on the essay questions concerning the perceptions of
Legal Studies students on cybersquatting and trademark infringement will provide valuable
insights into the qualitative data gathered. By utilizing this structured analytical framework,
researchers can systematically evaluate the content of the essay responses. This methodical
approach enhances the understanding of students’ perceptions and allows for tailored
interventions and educational strategies to address specific areas of improvement,
ultimately contributing to a more nuanced and informed perspective on cybersquatting and
trademark infringement within the Legal Studies context.
After analyzing the qualitative data, the researchers can identify patterns, themes,
and hypotheses. To further validate and explain these qualitative findings, quantitative
methods can be employed. A structured, Likert-scale based survey designed to quantify the
prevalence of certain attitudes or beliefs identified during the qualitative phase, will be

employed. In essence, researchers develop a questionnaire assessing students’ awareness
of cybersquatting cases and their perceived impact on trademark infringement. By
employing an Explanatory Sequential Design, the study can provide a comprehensive
understanding of Legal Studies student perceptions of trademark infringement and its
relation to cybersquatting. The qualitative phase offers depth and context, while the
quantitative phase validates the qualitative findings on a larger scale, enhancing the study’s
overall reliability and validity.
3.2 Variables and Measures
The table below shows the variables and measures used in the study.
VARIABLES MEASURES
Perception of Legal Studies The researchers adapted questions from Khan et al.'s
students with trademark (2015) study, specifically tailored to explore a unique set
infringement. of questions to probe the respondents' perspectives on
cybersquatting and trademark infringement. These
questions were meticulously designed to delve into the
participants' views, shedding light on their perceptions
concerning the cybersquatting and trademark
infringement cases in the realm of cybercrimes.
Perception of the Legal Modified questions from Khan et al. (2015) that would
Studies students on their establish the effects of their familiarity on
familiarity with the cybersquatting and how it would affect their day to day
cybercrime of cybersquatting. online activities.
Perception of Legal Studies Modified questions from Khan et.al (2015) regarding the
students with the effect of trademark infringement in a cyber setting and lay out its
Cybersquatting under effects under Republic Act 10175.
Cybercrime Prevention Act of
2012.

Table 2. A Table showing the variables and measures of the study
3.3 Research Locale and Research Respondents
The research was conducted at Lyceum of the Philippines University Cavite,
situated at Governor’s Drive, Barangay Manggahan, City of General Trias, Cavite. The
university, established in June 2008, served as the backdrop for this study.
The participants selected for this research were students enrolled in the Legal
Studies program at Lyceum of the Philippines University-Cavite Campus during the
academic year 2023-2024. The researchers gathered information from the College of
Liberal Arts and Education (CLAE) and LPU Legal Studies Society (LLSS) indicating that
the Legal Studies program comprised 67 students, both male and female, excluding the
researchers themselves.
These students were chosen as respondents due to their relevance to the study’s
subject matter, aligning with their course of study. Furthermore, their age group represents
one of the initial generations exposed to the 21 st century, constituting approximately
seventy percent of the Philippine population. Moreover, they possess diverse knowledge
about technological advancements and are well-versed in modernization, which is
particularly pertinent given that cybersquatting incidents primarily stem from
technological advancements.
3.4 Sampling Design and Technique

For this study on the perceptions of Legal Studies students regarding cybersquatting
and trademark infringement, a stratified random sampling method will be employed. The
population of interest comprises 67 Legal Studies students at Lyceum of the Philippines
University-Cavite Campus during the academic year 2023-2024. The students will be
divided into strata based on their familiarity and experience with online activities and
intellectual property issues, which are directly relevant to the study on trademark
infringement and cybersquatting.
The stratification will take place by dividing the 67 Legal Studies students into
strata based on their level of engagement with online activities, such as social media usage,
online shopping, blogging, or website ownership. This division ensures that participants
have varying degrees of exposure to the online environment, where issues like
cybersquatting and trademark infringement commonly occur.
Stratum 1: Students actively engaged in online activities (e.g., frequent social media
users, online entrepreneurs).
Stratum 2: Students moderately engaged in online activities (e.g., occasional social
media users, online shoppers).
Stratum 3: Students with minimal online activity (e.g., infrequent internet users, limited
social media presence).
For the survey administration, the researchers will administer the survey
questionnaire to the randomly selected students within each stratum. The questionnaire will

focus on gathering the students’ perceptions of cybersquatting and trademark infringement.
Then the researchers will analyze the survey responses to draw conclusions about the
perceptions of Legal Studies students regarding cybersquatting and trademark
infringement. Ensure the findings are representative of the entire Legal Studies student
population by accounting for the stratified sampling method during the analysis.
By stratifying the students based on their online activities and intellectual property
awareness, you ensure that the sampled participants represent diverse backgrounds and
experiences relevant to the study’s focus on trademark infringement and cybersquatting.
This approach provides a nuanced understanding of how different levels of online
engagement and intellectual property awareness influence Legal Studies students’
perceptions in these areas.
3.5 Research Instrument
The researchers formulated a survey questionnaire comprising questions structured
on the Likert scale and open-ended inquiries. These questions were fashioned based on
themes explored in the study conducted by Khan et al. (2015). These themes encompassed
students’ perceptions regarding trademark infringement, the ramifications of these
perceptions within a cyber context, and their influence on cybersquatting implications
under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012. To mitigate bias, the researchers
meticulously consulted their research adviser, ensuring the questionnaire’s integrity.
Subsequently, following validation by experts, the questionnaire was finalized.

Prior to survey administration, the researchers diligently sought approval from the
Dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Education, formally addressing this request
through a letter. Upon securing consent, the survey was administered to the participants.
The questionnaire included a consent letter, aimed at affirming participants’ voluntary
agreement to partake and acknowledging that their responses would be subject to the Data
Privacy Act. Essentially, the questionnaire encompassed socio-demographic information,
Likert scale-based queries, and subsequent open-ended questions. These elements were
strategically designed to extract pertinent insights from respondents, illuminating their
perspectives on trademark infringement within a cyber context and its concomitant
implications on cybersquatting under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
3.6 Data Gathering Procedure
The researchers followed a systematic procedure, which included the following
steps:
1. Submit the research proposal for approval;
2. Validate the survey questionnaire meticulously by experts in the respective field.
3. Obtain approval to conduct the study through a formal letter signed by the Dean
of the College of Liberal Arts and Education.
4. To gather data, two distinct methods were employed. The first method involved
data mining, wherein the researchers explored various sources such as research
articles, journals, published theses, and unpublished theses, primarily accessed

through online platforms. The second method encompassed a survey approach,
aiming to elucidate the self-reported characteristics of the target population. This
survey method involved setting study objectives, selecting a suitable survey frame,
determining the sample design, questionnaire design, data collection, processing,
analysis, distribution, and comprehensive documentation of the survey process.
5. The researchers will personally collect the completed survey questionnaires from
the participants.
6. Subsequent to the collection phase, the researchers will collate and analyze the
gathered data. They will collaborate with a statistician and utilize XLSTAT in
Microsoft Excel for this purpose.
7. The results of the descriptive survey will be methodically compiled, tabulated,
and computed utilizing quantitative data descriptive statistics such as frequency
count, mean, percentage, rank, and standard deviation. Additionally, the responses
to open-ended questions were compared, grouped, and summarized utilizing
SWOT analysis techniques.
3.7 Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment
The researchers employed a comprehensive approach, integrating qualitative and
quantitative data to evaluate the perceptions of Legal Studies students regarding the
ramifications of Cybersquatting under the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.

To gauge these perceptions accurately, a refined 4-point Likert Scale was utilized.
This scale allowed participants to express their opinions clearly, with each point
representing a distinct viewpoint on the topic. The Likert scale encompassed responses
ranging from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree,” ensuring a forced choice of opinion
and preventing neutral responses. This structured approach enabled a meticulous analysis
of students’ attitudes and viewpoints concerning cybersquatting and its implications,
providing valuable insights into their perspectives on trademark infringement within the
digital realm.
Furthermore, the study delved into additional factors such as participants’
awareness of legal regulations, prior experiences, and socio-demographic characteristics,
enhancing the depth and breadth of the data analysis and statistical treatment. By
incorporating these multifaceted elements, the research aimed to yield a comprehensive
understanding of Legal Studies students’ perceptions, enriching the study’s findings and
implications.
REFERENCES
Berman, P. (1978). “The Study of Macro- and Micro-Implementation.” Public Policy 26,
no. 2: 157-84.
Bernat, F. P., & Makin, D. (2014). Cybercrime Theory and Discerning if there is a Crime:

The Case of Digital Piracy. International Review of Modern Sociology, 40(2), 99–
119. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43499904
Bhusari, R., & Rampure, K. (2022, January 15). Cybersquatting: A Threat To The
Globalising World. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research, 3(2). https://doi-
ds.org/doilink/01.2022-68535724/IJLLR/V3/I2/A221
Cabel, K. (2015). Combating Cybercrime in the Philippines. United Nations Asia and Far
East Institute Resource Material Series No. 97. Tokyo, Japan.
http://www.unafei.or.jp/english/pdf/RS_No97/No97_IP_Philippines.pdf
Dizon, D., (2008, September 13). Cybersquatting cases in RP rising. ABS-CBN News.
https://news.abs-cbn.com/features/09/11/08/cybersquatting-cases-rp-rising
Domingo, F. (2016). Strategic Considerations for Philippine Cyber Security. ADR Institute
for Strategic and International Studies.
http://www.academia.edu/20823505/Strategic_Considerations_for_Philippine_Cy
ber_Security.
Hein Online. (2021, March 8). About | HeinOnline.
https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ijlmhs13&div=73
&id=&page=
Hjern, S., Benny, F. and Chris, H. (1987). “Implementation Research as Empirical
Constitutionalism.” European Journal of Political Research 10, no. 2: 105-16.

Ivankova, N. V., Creswell, J. W., & Stick, S. L. (2006, February). Using Mixed-Methods
Sequential Explanatory Design: From Theory to Practice. Field Methods, 18(1), 3–
20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822x05282260
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed Methods Research: A Research
Paradigm Whose Time Has Come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3700093
Kaspersky. (2023). Cybersquatting Issues. www.kapersky.com. Retrieved September 16,
2023, from https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/preemptive-
safety/cybersquatting
Kapersky. (2023, April 19). What Is Cybersquatting? www.kaspersky.com. Retrieved
October 9, 2023, from https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/preemptive-
safety/cybersquatting
Krisa, J. (2013, March 19) Review of Related Literature on Cybersquatting. Jamelle Krisa
Blog Spot. http://jamellekrisa.blogspot.com/?m=1
Lipton, J. (2009). Bad Faith in Cyberspace: Grounding Domain Name Theory in
Trademark, Property and Restitution. Harvard Journal of Law and Technology,
Forthcoming, Case Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-28.
https://ssrn.com/abstract=1484763
Lipsky, M. (1980). Street level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service.

New York: Russel Sage Foundation.
Lipsky, M. (1978). “Standing the Study of Policy Implementation on Its Head.”
Cambridge, Massachussets: MIT Press.
Magdirila, F. (2013). Domain Squatting Controversy Rocks E-Commerce Startup Scene.
Tech in Asia – Connecting Asia’s Startup Ecosystem.
https://www.techinasia.com/domain-squatting-controversy-rocks-ecommerce-
startup-scene-philippines
Matland, R. (1995). “Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict
Model of Policy Implementation.” Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory 5, no. 2: 145-74.
http://orion.luc.edu/~rmatlan/pdf/1995SynthesizingtheImplementationLiterature.p
df.
Matland, R. (1995). “Synthesizing the Implementation Literature: The Ambiguity-Conflict
Model of Policy Implementation.” Journal of Public Administration Research and
Theory, 5:02:145-174.
Mazmanian, D., and Sabatier, P. (1984). “Implementation and Public Policy,” Policy
Sciences 17, No. 1: 95-97.
Pantov, V. (2013, September 10). The prevention of cybersquatting in Europe: diverging
approaches and prospects for harmonization.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2427582
Petrosyan, A. (2022, December 13). Cybersquatting: most domain name dispute filings
2022. Statista. Retrieved September 17, 2023, from
https://www.statista.com/statistics/416159/domain-name-cases-filings-wipo/
Rodriguez, A., (2012, February 5). Cybersquatters Face Serious Sentences in the
Philippines. Realtime Register. Retrieved September 17, 2023, from
https://realtimeregister.com/blog/cybersquatters-face-serious-sentences-in-the-
philippines/
Rupal, P. (2019, July 6). Jaiswal Symbisosis Law School. Volume 6. The Web of
Cybersquatting. http://penalclaims.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Rupal-
Jaiswal
Saydjari, O. Sami. (2008) “Structuring for Strategic Cyber Defense: A Cyber Manhattan
Project Blueprint.” (paper presented at the Twenty-Fourth Annual Computer
Security Applications Conference, ACSAC 2008, Anaheim, California, USA, 8-
12).
Shackelford, Scott, Scott Russell, and Jeffrey H. (2015) Bottoms Up: A Comparison of
Voluntary Cybersecurity Frameworks. United States: UC Davis Business Law
Journal.
Sosa, Gilbert. (2015). Country Report On Cybercrime: The Philippines. The Criminal

Justice Response To Cybercrime Course.
Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines. (2012, September 12). Republic
Act No. 10175. Official Gazette. Retrieved September 17, 2023, from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/09/12/republic-act-no-10175/
Singh, V. (2021, December 16). Analysis of Current Global position on Cybersquatting.
Khurana And Khurana Advocates and IP Attorneys. Retrieved September 17, 2023,
from https://www.khuranaandkhurana.com/2021/12/16/cybersquatting-regulatory-
mechanisms/
Stella, J., & Kumari, A. (2022, March). Cyber Squatting – The Digital Version of Passing
Off. The Law Brigade, 8(2). https://thelawbrigade.com/wp-
content/uploads/2022/03/Jenifer-Stella-S-JLSR-1.pdf.
Stephan, F. F. (1941). Stratification in Representative Sampling. Journal of Marketing,
6(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.2307/1245763
Timans, R., Wouters, P., & Heilbron, J. (2019). Mixed methods research: what it is and
what it could be. Theory and Society, 48(2), 193–216.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/45200451
Van, M., Donald S., Carl E., and Van H. (1975). “The Policy Implementation Process: A
Conceptual Framework.” 6, no. 4: 445-88. Accessed December 20, 2016.
Villanueva, V. (2021, December 5). R.A. No. 10175: The Cybercrime Prevention Act: The

Net Commandments. Philippine Legal Research.
https://legalresearchph.com/2021/12/05/r-a-no-10175-the-cybercrime-prevention-
act-the-net-commandments/
World Intellectual Property Organization. (n.d.). WIPO Guide to the Uniform Domain
Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP). WIPO. Retrieved September 17, 2023,
from https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/guide/
Winter, S. (1986) “How Policy-Making Affects Implementation: The Decentralization of
the Danish Disablement Pension Administration.” Scandinavian Political Studies
9, no. 4: 361-85. Accessed December 20, 2016.

Buhay, Guinaban, and Simbajon - Thesis Chapters 1, 2 and 3

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Buhay, Guinaban, and Simbajon - Thesis Chapters 1, 2 and 3

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT: AN ANALYSIS ON THE IMPLICATIONS OF

CYBERSQUATTING UNDER CYBERCRIME PREVENTION ACT OF 2012 TO

LEGAL STUDIES STUDENTS IN LYCEUM OF THE PHILIPPINES

An Undergraduate Thesis Presented to the

Faculty of the College of Liberal Arts and Education

Lyceum of the Philippines University Cavite

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

Bachelor of Arts in Legal Studies

Zyrllen Ceasar V. Buhay

Ezra Aurora F. Guinaban

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Background of the Study 3

Statement of the Problem 6

Significance of the Study 8

Scope and Delimitation 9

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

The Primary Objective of Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 18

Cybersquatting Incidents in the Philippines 20

Trademark Infringement: Cybersquatting Under Republic Act 10175 22

Cybersquatting: Not Viewed as a Prominent Concern in the Philippines 23

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND EDUCATION

No Case of Cybersquatting Raised in the Philippine Supreme Court 25

Policies and Mandates to Solve Trademark Infringement Disputes 26

Domain Name Basics: Understanding Trademark Infringement 32

Typosquatting: The Infamous Category of Cybersquatting 33

Heightened Awareness on Domain Name Infringement

Diverging Methods in Preventing Cybersquatting 36

Variables and Measures 43

Research Locale and Research Respondents 44

Sampling Design and Technique 45

Data Gathering Procedure 47

Data Analysis and Statistical Treatment 49

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND EDUCATION

1.1 Background of the Study

Cybersquatting is the act of purchasing, selling, or using a domain name to make

important it is to secure their domain names. (Kaspersky, 2023)

It is stated in the Official Gazette of the Philippines that cybersquatting is

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND EDUCATION

a.) Similar, identical, or confusingly similar to an existing trademark registered with

in case of a personal name; and

c.) Acquired without right or with intellectual property interests in it.

Cybersquatting shall be punished with imprisonment or prison mayor or a fine of

at least two hundred thousand pesos (P200,000.00) up to a maximum amount

commensurate to the damage incurred, or both: provided, that if it is committed against

thousand pesos (P500,000.00) up to maximum amount commensurate to the damage

According to McCargo, H. (2022), cybersquatting can take many various forms,

common types of cybersquatting. In this instance, the cybersquatter deliberately buys

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND EDUCATION

intention is to redirect users to a malicious website. The basic goal of typosquatting is to

change a domain’s original spelling by adding or removing digits, characters, or periods.

possibility of name-jacking on social media. Creating a profile that represents a famous or

well-known person without a registered domain name may be termed cybersquatting.

is similar to cybersquatting in several aspects. While cybersquatting is the purchase of a

your lawful domain name.

COLLEGE OF LIBERAL ARTS AND EDUCATION

well as organizations have enacted legislation to provide victims a fighting chance.

came from and what it entails.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

infringement to Legal Studies students in Lyceum of the Philippines University Cavite.

Specifically, this seeks to answer the following questions:

1. Demographic profile of the respondents: