Mcdo vs. Big Mak trademark case

I recently  saw the food chain  in  Mauban, Quezon which was  involved in one of the landmark trademark case of McDo vs. BigMak. 

The Supreme Court ruled in August 2004 that aurally the two marks are the same, with the first word of both marks phonetically the same, and the second word of both marks also phonetically the same. Visually, the two marks have both two words and six letters, with the first word of both marks having the same letters and the second word having the same first two letters. In spelling, considering the Filipino language, even the last letters of both marks are the same. Clearly, respondents have adopted in “Big Mak” not only the dominant but also almost all the features of “Big Mac.” Applied to the same food product of hamburgers, the two marks will likely result in confusion in the public mind.Absent proof that respondents’ adoption of the “Big Mak” mark was due to honest mistake or was fortuitous, the inescapable conclusion is that respondents adopted the “Big Mak” mark to “ride on the coattails” of the more established “Big Mac” mark. This saves respondents much of the expense in advertising to create market recognition of their mark and hamburgerhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/aug2004/143993.htm

It's More Fun in the The Philippines and "sloganeering"

Anxieties and questions about the originality of the Philippines' new slogan "It's More Fun In the Philippines" unveiled Friday morning ensued  after netizens were confronted with an unsettling posting of a purported 1951 ad touting Switzerland, and with the same key phrase 'it's more fun.'

The black and white magazine ad of the Swiss National Tourist Office shows “a smiling, leggy Swiss lass in a bikini on a boat underneath the words —It’s more fun in Switzerland!”

The tourism Secretary Ramon Jimenez Jr. claimed that this was merely a “coincidence”.“ He stressed "Our strategy is simple: while other countries invite you to observe, Filipinos can promise a more heartfelt and interesting experience. Wherever you go, whatever you do in the country, it’s the Filipinos that will complete your vacation and will make your holiday unforgettable."


However, I am just bothered by the DOT secretary's twitter "MonJQuotes" account: "No one can own the expression "it's more fun" but it's very true for the Philippines so it becomes ours." 


Under copyright law, no one can own ideas but he can own the expression of that ideas. Fun is an idea but to popularize  fun through the wordings like "it's more fun" can be considered as an "expression of idea.".  In essense, , "its more fun" is   a slogan "owned' by the Swiss.

A slogan is a memorable motto or phrase used in a political, commercial, religious and other context as a repetitive expression of an idea or purpose. The word slogan is derived from slogorn which was an Anglicisation of the Scottish Gaelic sluagh-ghairm (sluagh "army", "host" + gairm "cry").Advertising slogans are short, often memorable phrases used in advertising campaigns. They are claimed to be the most effective means of drawing attention to one or more aspects of a product.Slogans vary from the written and the visual to the chanted and the vulgar. Often their simple rhetorical nature leaves little room for detail, and as such they serve perhaps more as a social expression of unified purpose, rather than a projection for an intended audience.An effective travel slogan will not only distinguish you from the competition, but it will also affect the business image you project to your target market.


Aside from copyright, slogans can also be the subject of trademark protection, as shown by the list posted  below.  Brand owners have to prove that the slogan they wish to protect has acquired a “secondary meaning” on its own. This means that a distinctive character of the slogan has resulted from the use made of it, before the trademark application was filed. A slogan is thought to have acquired a secondary meaning if the brand owner can demonstrate in the trademark application that the use of this slogan by another party would cause confusion amongst consumers as to the producer or provider of the goods or services.Unless the slogan is in itself inherently distinctive and qualifies as a mark in itself, the trademark office requires that the slogan be identified with the product or service so that the consuming public, upon hearing the slogan, relates it to the particular product or service (secondary meaning). 


Some argue that copyright does not protect names, titles, slogans, or short phrases. But In some cases, these things may be protected as trademarks.

Copyright does not protect ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something. You may express your ideas in writing or drawings and claim copyright in your description, but be aware that copyright will not protect the idea itself as revealed in your written or artistic work.


In the event that the Swiss government has a trademark registration for "its more fun", and it is still alive at the moment, then I guess there will be legal issues that may ensue in view of the DOT's statement that "No one can own the expression "it's more fun" but it's very true for the Philippines so it becomes ours." Although the issue of territoriality is significant in trademark  matters, the fact remains that a company that was paid millions (i guess taxpayers' money) should have been more "cautious" in not repeating the mistake of the earlier campaign

Last year, sacked Tourism Secretary Albert Lim came up with a grand launching of the country’s new tourism logo, with the slogan of “Pilipinas kay ganda” which received a lot of flak and was found to have been copied from the tourism poster of the Polish government’s Tourism office.

 Here is an initial list of Popular Travel slogans i sourced from the net. Feel free to add more or make corrections .  Please note that in most sites, WOW Philippines is  still recognized as our slogan until now..

Albania A New Mediterranean
Amazing Thailand
Anguilla Feeling is Believing
Aruba One Happy Island
Belize Mother Nature’s Best Kept Secret
Brazil Sensational!
California Find Yourself Here
Canada Keep Exploring
Croatia The Mediterranean As it Once Was
Ecuador Life at its Purest
Viva Cuba
Egypt Where It All Begins
El Salvador Impressive!
Visit Finland Breathe
Visit Florida
Florida Keys Come As You Are
France Rendez-Vouse En France
Germany Affordable Hospitality
Grenada Rhythms of Spice
Hong Kong Best Place Best Taste
Hungary A Love for Life
I heart New York
Incredible India
Indonesia Admit It You Love It
Italy Much More
Jamaica Once You Go, You Know
Cool Japan
See the world. Visit London
1 Malaysia
Maldives Sunny Side of Life
Montenegro Wild Beauty
Namibia Land of Contrasts
New Zealand 100% Pure
Romania Land of Choice
Discover Peru
WOW Philippines
Uniquely Singapore
Slovakia Little Big Country
Slovenia I Feel Love
Smile! You are in Spain
Switzerland Get Natural
Taiwan Touch Your Heart
Tanzania Land of Kilimanjaro Zanzibar and the Serengeti
Texas (visual representation of ‘Everything’s bigger in Texas’ – I think)

Popular slogans that are protected by trademark registrations

Slogan	Product or Company	First use	Author or Agency	Source and notes
A diamond is forever.	DeBeers	1948	N.W. Ayer & Son	Steve Cone, Powerlines: Words That Sell Brands, Grip Fans, and Sometimes Change History‎ (2008), p. 129.
A little dab'll do ya!	Brylcreem			Susan Wilson, One Good Dog (2010), p. 296.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste.	United Negro College Fund	1970s	Young & Rubicam	George R. Bonner Jr., "Public-service advertising nears No. 1 ad pace in US", Christian Science Monitor (April 26, 1983), Business, p. 10.
Always Coca-Cola.	Coca-Cola	1993		Mark Pendergrast, For God, Country, and Coca-Cola: The Definitive History of the Great American Soft Drink and the Company That Makes It (2000), p. 398.
An apple a day keeps the doctor away.	Apples	1900s		Michael Pollan, The Botany of Desire (Random House, 2001), ISBN 0375501290, p. 22, cf. pp. 9 & 50.
Be all that you can be.	United States Army	1981-2001	N. W. Ayer	Craig C. Pinder, Work Motivation: Theory, Issues, and Applications (1984), p. 50.
Between love and madness lies Obsession.	Calvin Klein's Obsession	1985		Robert Jackall and Janice M. Hirota, Image Makers: Advertising, Public Relations, and the Ethos of Advocacy (2003), p. 212.
Breakfast of Champions	Wheaties	1935	Blackett-Sample-Gummert	Later "The Breakfast of Champions" into the 1990s; cited by Kurt Vonnegut eponymously in Breakfast of Champions (1973), preface: "The use of the identical expression as the title for this book is not intended to indicate an association with or sponsorship by General Mills, nor is it intended to disparage their fine product."
Cabinets fit for royalty, but affordable for all!	Kitchen Cabinet Kings	2011	Anthony Saladino	James R. Gregory, The Best of Advertising Slogans: Best Practices in Corporate Building (2011), p. 23.
Connecting People.	Nokia	1992		Dan Steinbock, Winning Across Global Markets: How Nokia Creates Strategic Advantage in a Fast-Changing World (2010), p. 73.
Did somebody say McDonald's?	McDonald's	1997		Gale Group, Major Marketing Campaigns Annual 2‎ (1999), p. 243.
Do you...Yahoo!?	Yahoo!	1996		Kevin Lane Keller, Best Practice Cases in Branding: Lessons from the World's Strongest Brands (2008), p. 251.
Eat Mor Chikin!	Chick-fil-A	1995		The Richards Group, Atlanta PRNewswire‎ (1995).
Every kiss begins with Kay	Kay Jewelers			Tom Altstiel, Jean Grow, Advertising Strategy: Creative Tactics from the Outside/In (2006), p. 167.
Give me a break, give me a break; break me off a piece of that Kit Kat bar	Kit Kat	1986	Ken Shuldman (lyrics) and Michael A. Levine (music), DDB Worldwide	Joe Tracy, Web Marketing Applied‎ (2000), p. 187.
Good things happen when Home Depot comes to town.	The Home Depot	1993		Chris Roush, Inside Home Depot: How One Company Revolutionized an Industry Through the Relentless Pursuit of Growth. (1999), p. 130.
Good to the last drop.	Maxwell House coffee	1926	Allegedly coined by Theodore Roosevelt in 1907, although the claim is dubious; adopted as Maxwell House's tagline in 1926.	Isaac E. Lambert, The Public Accepts: Stories Behind Famous Trade-marks, Names and Slogans‎ (1941), p. 35.
Got Milk?	Cow's milk (for the California Milk Processor Board)	1993	Goodby Silverstein & Partners	Margo Berman, Robyn Blakeman, The Brains Behind Great Ad Campaigns (2009), p. 160.
Have it your way.	Burger King	1973	BBDO	Al Ries, Jack Trout, Marketing Warfare (2005), p. 159.
Have You Met Life Today?	Metropolitan Life	2001		Bonnie L. Drewniany, A. Jerome Jewler, Creative Strategy in Advertising (2007), p. 139.
Home of the Whopper.	Burger King	1957		Al Ries, Jack Trout, Marketing Warfare (2005), p. 163.
I want my MTV.	MTV			Mark Tungate, Media Monoliths: How Great Media Brands Thrive and Survive‎ (2004), p. 41.
I'd walk a mile for a Camel.	Camel cigarettes	1921		Henry Hobhouse, Seeds of Wealth: Five Plants That Made Men Rich‎ (2006), p. 226.
I'm lovin' it.	McDonald's	2003	Heye & Partner, an affiliate of DDB Worldwide	Tom Altstiel, Jean Grow, Advertising Strategy: Creative Tactics from the Outside/In‎ (2006), p. 293.
Is it live, or is it Memorex?	Memorex video cassettes	1970s		Richard D. Leppert, Susan McClary, Music and Society: The Politics of Composition, Performance, and Reception (2001), p. 174.
It pays to advertise!	Advertisements	1920s	Dorothy L. Sayers for S.H. Benson's	Mitzi Brunsdale, Dorothy L. Sayers (1990), p. 94.
It takes a licking and keeps on ticking.	Timex Corporation	1956		William Harley Davidson, José R. De la Torre, Managing the Global Corporation: Case Studies in Strategy and Management (1989), p. 21.
It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken.	Perdue	1972	Scali, McCabe & Sloves	Robert F. Hartley, Marketing Successes, Historical to Present Day: What We Can Learn (1985), p. 171.
Ivory Soap - 9944/100% Pure.	Ivory Soap	1882	Unknown employee of Procter & Gamble	Julian Lewis Watkins, The 100 Greatest Advertisements: Who Wrote Them and What They Did‎ (1959), p. 7.
Just Do It.	Nike	1988	Wieden & Kennedy	Robert Goldman, Stephen Papson, Nike Culture: the Sign of the Swoosh‎ (1998), p. 19; authorship attributed to Wieden & Kennedy in Communication Arts (1988), p. 151.
Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.	State Farm Insurance	1971	DDB Worldwide	Richard Jackson Harris, A Cognitive Psychology of Mass Communication‎ (2004), p. 100.
M'm! M'm! Good!	Campbell's Soup	1931		James R. Gregory, The Best of Branding: Best Practices in Corporate Building (2004), p. 84.
Maybe she's born with it. Maybe it's Maybelline.	Maybelline	1991		Robin Andersen, Jonathan Gray, Battleground: The Media‎ (2008), p. 7.
Melts in your mouth, not in your hands.	M&Ms	1954		Joël Glenn Brenner, The Emperors of Chocolate: Inside the Secret World of Hershey and Mars, (1999), p. 172.
Nothing outlasts the Energizer. It keeps going and going and going.	Energizer batteries			Robert Goldman, Stephen Papson, Sign Wars: The Cluttered Landscape of Advertising‎ (1996), p. 45.
Obey your thirst.	Sprite			Robert Goldman, Stephen Papson, Sign Wars: The Cluttered Landscape of Advertising (1996), p. 263.
Oh, what a feeling!	Toyota	1979		Donna Jean Umiker-Sebeok, Marketing and Semiotics: New Directions in the Study of Signs For Sale (1987), p. 524.
Pork. The Other White Meat.	National Pork Board	1987	Bozell, Jacobs, Kenyon & Eckhardt	Philip H. Dougherty, "ADVERTISING; Dressing Pork for Success", The New York Times (January 15, 1987).
Probably the best lager in the world.	Carlsberg	1973	Saatchi & Saatchi	Jack S. Blocker, David M. Fahey, Ian R. Tyrrell, Alcohol and Temperance in Modern History: An International Encyclopedia (2003), p. 140.
Put a tiger in your tank.	Esso/Exxon			Brian Ash, Tiger in Your Tank: The Anatomy of an Advertising Campaign (1969), p. 60.
So easy a caveman can do it.	GEICO			Laura Lowell, 42 Rules of Marketing (2007), p. 21.
Sometimes you feel like a nut, sometimes you don't.	Peter Paul Almond Joy & Peter Paul Mounds	1953	Dancer-Fitzgerald-Sample	Linda K. Fuller, Frank Hoffmann, Beulah B Ramirez, Chocolate Fads, Folklore & Fantasies: 1,000+ Chunks of Chocolate Information (1994), p. 60.
Taking Care of Business.	Office Depot			Arthur A. Winters, Peggy Fincher Winters, Carole Paul, Brandstand: Strategies for Retail Brand Building (2003), p. 148.
The lion leaps from strength to strength.	Peugeot	1980s		J. Jonathan Gabay, Gabay's Copywriters' Compendium: The Definitive Creative Writer's Guide (2006), p. 602.
The pause that refreshes.	Coca-Cola	1929	D'Arcy Co.	Edward Collins Bursk, The world of business‎ (1962), p. 335.
The world's local bank.	HSBC			Philip Kotler, Waldemar Pfoertsch, Ines Michi, B2B Brand Management (2006), p. 102.
There is no spit in Cremo!	Cremo cigars by American Tobacco	1929		Radio campaign on the new Columbia Broadcasting Service (CBS); cited in Erik Barnouw, The Sponsor: Notes On a Modern Potentate, Oxford University Press, 1978, page 25, ISBN 0-19-502614-4.
We do it all for you.	McDonald's	1975		Robert Goldman, Reading Ads Socially (1992), p. 97
We drink all we can. The rest we sell.	Utica Club	1965	Doyle Dane Bernbach	Art Direction‎ (1967), p. 133.
We love to see you smile.	McDonald's	2000	DDB Chicago, an affiliate of DDB Worldwide	Howard Cannon, Brian Tarcy, The Complete Idiot's Guide to Starting Your Own Restaurant (2001), p. 138.
What would you do for a Klondike bar?	Isaly Dairy Company's Klondike bar	1984		Dwain Neilson Esmond, Can You Hear Me Now?: Young Adult Devotional (2004), p. 140.
When it absolutely, positively, has to be there overnight.	Federal Express	1982	Ally & Gargano	Steve Cone, Powerlines: Words That Sell Brands, Grip Fans, and Sometimes Change History‎ (2008), p. 136.
With a name like Smuckers... it has to be good.	Smuckers			Cynthia S. Smith, Step-by-step Advertising (1984), p. 74.
You deserve a break today.	McDonald's	1971	Needham, Harper & Steers	Steve Cone, Powerlines: Words That Sell Brands, Grip Fans, and Sometimes Change History‎ (2008), p. 136.
You're in good hands with Allstate.	Allstate			Sidney J. Levy, Dennis W. Rook, Brands, Consumers, Symbols, & Research: Sidney J. Levy on Marketing (1999), p. 15.
You got peanut butter in my chocolate! You got chocolate in my peanut butter! (Voiceover) Two great tastes that taste great together.	Reese's Peanut Butter Cups	1970		Andrew Hargadon, How Breakthroughs Happen: The Surprising Truth about how Companies Innovate‎ (2003), p. 56; reported in part in Andrew F. Smith, Encyclopedia of Junk Food and Fast Food‎ (2006), p. 228 (specifying date and attributing authorship to Ogilvy & Mather).

Supreme Court decision on a Nestle trademark case on confusing similarity on milk products

It is FINAL. The Supreme Court has denied the Motion for Reconsideration filed by our opposing counsel in    favorable decision of the Court  on a Nestle trademark case on confusing similarity on milk products.. I personally handled the appeal case in the CA and SC level...

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/august2010/172276.htm

Nestle owns the “NAN” trademark for its line of infant powdered milk products, consisting of PRE-NAN, NAN-H.A., NAN-1, and NAN-2.  NAN is classified under Class 6 — “diatetic preparations for infant feeding.” Respondent Martin  Dy, Jr. owns 5M Enterprises.  He imports Sunny Boy powdered milk from Australia and repacks the powdered milk into three sizes of plastic packs bearing the name “NANNY.”  NANNY is is also classified under Class 6 — “full cream milk for adults in [sic] all ages.”  Dy, Jr. distributes and sells the powdered milk in Dumaguete, Negros Oriental, Cagayan de Oro, and parts of Mindanao.



Applying the dominancy test in the present case, the Court finds that "NANNY" is confusingly similar to "NAN.""NAN" is the prevalent feature of Nestle's line of infant powdered milk products. It is written in bold letters and used in all products. The line consists of PRE-NAN, NAN-H.A., NAN-1, and NAN-2. Clearly, "NANNY" contains the prevalent feature "NAN." The first three letters of "NANNY" are exactly the same as the letters of "NAN." When "NAN" and "NANNY" are pronounced, the  aural effect is confusingly similar.

NANNY and NAN have the same classification, descriptive properties and physical attributes.  Both are classified under Class 6, both are milk products, and both are in powder form.  Also, NANNY and NAN are displayed in the same section of stores — the milk section.

The Court agrees with the lower courts that there are differences between NAN and NANNY: (1) NAN is intended for infants while NANNY is intended for children past their infancy and for adults; and (2) NAN is more expensive than NANNY.  However, as the registered owner of the “NAN” mark, Nestle should be free to use its mark on similar products, in different segments of the market, and at different price levels.   

The scope of protection afforded to registered trademark owners is not limited to protection from infringers with identical goods. The scope of protection extends to protection from infringers with related goods, and to market areas that are the normal expansion of business of the registered trademark owners.

Taking UP Oblation's picture a restricted/prohibited act?

I almost got into a heated argument  with the security-in-charge at the UP Admin bldg when they tried to stop us from taking this photo as he said that it is prohibited to take such photo. I answered back with an irritated voice "Graduate ako ng UP twice: School of Econ and College of Law. This is my university. You cannot stop me."

The security personnel sort of panicked when i begun raising my voice  and said that i am a lawyer  especialy when i asked the reason. His answer  "basta bawal" or it is just prohibited.  

After posting said picture in my facebook account. a discussion ensued and someone said there was indeed an order restricting/ prohibiting picture taking of oblation,  I  guess they will use the  "trademark" argument as their rationale for the prohibition  but that runs counter to the "academic freedom" that we are so proud of as UP graduates. In the first place,  i will use the photo for my personal use'

my  oble photo taken in early 90s during my collegian days

I found out in the internet that  On 4 August 2006. UP President  EMERLINDA R. ROMAN issued Administrative Order No. PERR-06-55:  "Trademark over the Name University of the Philippines, the Official UP Logo and the Oblation" which states:

      "The UP name and seal is now a registered trademark exclusively belonging to the University of the Philippines.The name “University of the Philippines”, the official logo of theUniversity of the Philippines, the Oblation or any derivative of these marks are registered trademarks of the University of the Philippines.
        To protect its goodwill, the UP shall actively prosecute any person or entity engaged in any commercial transaction involving any product containing these marks not covered by any licensing agreement dulyapproved by the University of the Philippines.
       No UP unit, academic or non-academic personnel shall be allowed to use or purchase any product bearing our registered trademarks from unauthorized sources. This includes “blue books”, examinationbooklets, t-shirts, wearing apparel, bags, hats, pens, pencils, stickers, et al.
       Duly recognized student, academic and administrative organizations may continue to use UP name and logo in accordance with existing guidelines. However, the commercialization of any product bearing these registered marks must be covered by the proper license agreements. Other organizations wishing to use the name and logo of the University of the Philippines shall apply for accreditation with the Vice President for Development.
       The Vice President for Legal Affairs by himself or, at his discretion, through any of the legal offices in any constituent university, is authorized to commence and prosecute the proper administrative, civil and criminal actions necessary to protect the goodwill of the University of the Philippines. Application for licenses shall be addressed to the Vice President for Development. The Office of the President shall approve all licensing agreements."

   

          When i researched further on this aspect, i looked into the website of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO)  and found out that two registration certificates for  the "oblation" trademark were issued to UP. The first was issued on April 28, 2006 covering serviced under class 41 (EDUCATIONAL SERVICES) but was later cancelled by the IPO. Then UP refiled .it in July 1, 2009 now covering more classes, to wit, 41 ( EDUCATIONAL SERVICES) and 16 (BOOKS, BLUEBOOKS, PAMPHLET, JOURNALS, STICKERS).The registration certificate was issued on July 16, 2010.

      In the first cancelled  registration, the oblation was described as " A NUDE YOUNG MAN, HEAD GAZING UPWARD AND ARMS OUTSTRETCHED IN QUIET OFFERING." On the other hand, the new issued registration, oblation was more specifically described as " A COMPLETELY NUDE FIGURE OF A YOUNG MAN WITH OUTSTRETCHED ARMS AND OPEN HANDS, WITH TILTED HEAD, CLOSED EYES AND PARTED LIPS MURMURING A PRAYER, WITH BREAST FORWARD IN THE ACT OF OFFERING HIMSELF."


            Section 22 of the Trademark Law holds a person liable for infringement when, among others, he "uses without the consent of the registrant, any reproduction, counterfeit; copy or colorable imitation of any registered mark or tradename in connection with the sale, offering for sale, or advertising of any goods, business or services or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive purchasers or others as to the source or origin of such goods or services, or identity of such business; or reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate any such mark or tradename and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used upon or in connection with such goods, business or services."

  
     Thus, i think the security personnel should be "debriefed" that picture taking of oble per se is not prohibited but the " commercial transaction involving any product containing the marks not covered by any licensing agreement duly
approved by the University of the Philippines."

After doing some more  research in the web, i also chanced upon this posting on legal issues of photography http://www.photosecrets.com/can-i-take-this-photo.html

"The are no general laws against taking photos. Photography is considered an artistic expression which, if anything, is protected not prohibited.

The laws that do affect photographers are mostly about the subject of the photo. The laws are there to defend the subject’s property and prevent you from “stealing” what is valuable to someone else.

The property in question can be: a person’s image and reputation (privacy); artwork (copyright); business reputation (trademark); land (trespassing). We know that you don’t intend to steal someone’s property, we just want to make sure that you do so inadvertently.

Private Property

You can photograph whatever you can freely see. If the public is allowed to enter, then you can take photographs. This includes shopping malls, the lobbies of office buildings, parks, and shops. If a place is open to the public then permission to enter (and thus photograph) is assumed. However, that permission can be revoked. If you are asked to leave and do not, you are then trespassing, which is a separate issue.

What if someone says not to shoot?

They don’t have a legal right to stop you from taking photographs, and they can’t threaten you or demand your camera. Only law enforcement officers (and officers of the court) can do that, and only with a court order or while making an arrest. Anyone else can be charged with a variety of things such as coercion, harassment, conversion, false imprisonment, kidnapping, assault, violation of constitutional rights, or theft. The only thing a private security person can do is ask you to leave the premises.

“In general, it is unlawful for anyone to instill a fear that they may injure you, damage or take your property, or falsely accuse you of a crime just becuase you are taking photographs.”
—The Photographer’s Right, by Bert P. Krages II

What if a mall security guard says to stop taking photos?

This comes down to photographing and trespassing being two different things. If a private security guard asks you to stop taking photos, you do not have to comply; you can still take photos. But if they ask you leave, then you have to leave, as your permission to enter has been revoked and you are now trespassing. However, you can take photos while walking out, and you can still publish those pictures. 

Perhaps a reaction on this issue, i recently saw a posting  dated  April 5, 2011 at the  UP website which says:

"Non-commercial picture-taking at UP Diliman allowed

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

You are free to have your picture or video taken at any landmark of UP Diliman (including the Oblation statue in front of Quezon Hall). The only time you will need a written permit from the Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Community Affairs (OVCCA) is if your photograph or footage is for "commercial use." In this case, you have to write a letter to OVCCA at least two days before your photo or video"