User talk:Judgefloro/Archive 23
Latest comment: 3 years ago by JWilz12345 in topic File:09791jfQuiapo Quezon Boulevard Manila Bridge Riverfvf 05.jpg
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
File:0533jfCaloocan City Barangays C-9 East Road Rizal Avenuefvf.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0533jfCaloocan City Barangays C-9 East Road Rizal Avenuefvf.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:21, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0044jfCaloocan City Barangays C Three West East Road Rizal Avenuefvf 08.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0044jfCaloocan City Barangays C Three West East Road Rizal Avenuefvf 08.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
- I took this, kasi po nakatiwangwang yan, pinabayaan na nila, and I remember in 1979 at Ateneo Law School, a leading case about Manhole man case nahulog sa imburnal, kasi walang takip and manhole; subject of Bar Exams; kaya itong mga Kagalanggalang na Man... this photo is one of the examples of eye sores dami nyan nakukunan ako na pinabayaan; :By the way, the reason I take redundant or duplicates is due to many traumas I suffered, in taking blurry unreadable photos; for example last night, at Bulakan Shrine Installation of Fr. Ver Joaquin, I discovered just minutes ago that the N Museum Original Signed Certificate of Important Cultural Property is blurry and good I had one more; I had experienced many such problems, so I take duplicates and upload them both; just frustrated but when I go back to take Photos of beside the Church Bambang Coronada Image at the Parish and the Bulacan Airport, I will take a good one, oops, it is not my fault it is the fault of the church binatilyo who took the blurry picture but my fault I did not zoom and view,
- I remember when I approached my seatmate Recom Echiverri in Insurance subject before Nani Perez 1978, he rejected my appeal, and look at these eye sores, now where is my classmate maybe here or if he comes back as Mayur, malilinis din iyan
sincerely ........Judgefloro (talk) 08:32, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
File:06575jfSaint Andrew the Apostle Church Bel-Air Kalayaan Nicanor Garcia Street Makati Cityfvf 18.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:06575jfSaint Andrew the Apostle Church Bel-Air Kalayaan Nicanor Garcia Street Makati Cityfvf 18.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:53, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:SM City Telabastagan
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:9917Expressways in the Philippines 26.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:9917Expressways in the Philippines 26.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:56, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:588 Shopping Mall
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:58, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- I vehemently object to the deletion on Substantive Legal Grounds, under my Lawyer's and Judge's Oath of Office, and as Authority on Criminal Law Review based on my Ateneo Law School records; I submit to the Commons Community In Seriatim, objectively (and based on USA and Philippine Jurisprudence vis-à-vis Substantive laws both Civil - Copyright law of the Philippines amending the New Civil Code provisions on the Law of Property) and Criminal law 1932 Revised Penal Code as amended by the Penal Provisions of both [ https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/09/12/republic-act-no-10175/ Republic Act No. 10175] - Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 and Copyright Penal Provisions especially [https://acg.pnp.gov.ph/main/2-uncategorised/263-acg-cyber-security-bulletin-no-132-understanding-the-risk-of-cyberstalking Cyberstalking Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk or harass an individual, group, or organization - monitoring, threats, or gathering information that may be used to threaten or harass);
- Now a) Who can question with Legal Personality to the Special Courts on Copyright and Trademark Infringement - Vide: The Intellectual Property of the Philippines (IPOPHL) vis-à-vis the Supreme Court’s (SC) 2020 Special Rules on the Prosecution of Intellectual Property (IP) Cases; and b) within what period of time based on Civil Law on Extinctive Prescription); here are my legal grounds to dismiss the Nomination or Request for Deletion, to wit:
- i) I talked to the former Parish Priest Msgr. Jo Aguilan whom I healed as healing Judge in the Barasoain Convent and in his room, now deceased and b) Parish Priest on 24 August 2014, 18:50:54 Fr. Dario V. Cabral, incumbent Parish Priest of Barasoain Church; he confirmed in our discussion, that the Titular Bishop Oliveros now Dennis Villarojo has acquired all rights and properties, Torrens titles of Barasoain Church including all the Monuments therein; hence, the Creator of the Statues transferred all his rights by virtue of the Strict Provisions of Canon law of the Catholic Church on Parish Creation; and in this case, Saint Andrew the Apostle Church the Titular Bishop of Broderick Pabillo the apostolic administrator of the sede vacante Archdiocese of Manila.
- ii) I also talked with the PIO Office of Baliuag including Tourism Office, when I was requesting for photos of the Feb 2 2021 Episcopal Coronation; I was told that Mayor Ferdie Estrella, as SOP, following the Strict LGU DILG guidelines, has a signed written contract between the paid official photographer to have waived all his rights in favor of the Municipal government of Baliuag whoever is the Mayor; under the Local Government Code and DILG Laws, all architects and sculptors cannot retain copyrights without violating the Penal Provisions of these codes and the Anti-Graft Law RA 3019 as amended; Ergo, all LGUs including the herein Malolos City Government ipso facto acquires all moral rights surrendered by alleged and all creators of Copyrights subjects and objects;
- ii) I will quote here my past rendition for emphasis: 29 January 2012 [File:Emilio222jf.JPG this file] by virtue of Substantive Philippine law on Extinctive prescription of FOUR YEARS from Commons Uploading, that is, legal public and open publishing in any forum or format, nobody including the alleged creators can now question in any court or forum even by the Creator; [File:FvfMalolos1335 01.JPG this also] 18 April 2014, 15:45:57; This also, [File:FvfMalolosCity1317 15.JPG This also] This also [File:FvfMalolosCity1317 17.JPG This also] 18 April 2014, 15:42:36; assuming Ex Gratia Argumenti or Arguendo, that Flickr Photobucket or any Commons Editor has opined otherwise, even if the IPO Bureau of Copyright and IPO Director now incumbents, would say otherwise, even if possibly reversing the former Learned Verbal Answers to my Personal Query and long discussions with my Ateneo School Mate Director Blancaflor, still, the Laws, I cited hold; it is for the Commons Community to decide between my submitted Legal Treatise any the alleged IPO zooms and others;
- At this point, I humbly ask a transcript of the IPO Zooms for the guidance of the Bench and the Bar; I would like to examine Legally the contents thereof for a single purpose: I will try my best if I have time and access due to COVID 19 restrictions to personally talk with the a) Integrated Bar of the Philippines President at Pasig City Main Office and b) the IPO Director and Bureau of Copyrights; if they will maintain wrong legal Opinions, then I reserve my Lawyer's Judge's Right to question them individually with the Ombudsman regarding Gross Ignorance of the Law or possible Disbarment in the IBP Office;
- Counter-Argument versus alleged Dicta, sayings, Virtual Answers or even Email correspondence of the Bureau of Copyright and IPO Director: Burden of proof (law) - Rule 131. BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS - Burden of Evidence and Preponderance of the evidence : Judicial Supremacy of the S.C. of the Philippines:
- i) FIRST, the Copyright Law cannot be interpreted by them for ONLY the Supreme Court of the Philippines (in a ripe judicial controvery elevated to it either by Petition for Review or Appeal from Special Courts on Copyrights towards Certiorari under Rule 65 to the Court of Appeals) has original and exclusive Jurisdiction expressly GRANTED and mandated by the 1987 Constitution to Say with definiteness what the Law is, that is Stare Decisis or Philippine Specific Jurisprudence on a) who has the copyright or moral rights with legal personality to file in the Special Courts created under the law and S.C. latest Circulars under C.J. Peralta - infringement of copyrights or trademarks b) within 4 years from publication so public in public domain like Commons Uploading in Meta Details, under the New Civil Code law on Extinctive Prescription and Copyright Law; c) any ruling issued on Copyright whether virtual, email or correspondence including Zoom Zoom Zoom or Arbitration FB discussions; d) any ruling or the DOJ Opinion by the Secretary of Justice my classmate; Vide: 2019 Amendments to the 1989 Revised Rules on Evidence A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC
- ii) SECOND: it is legally absurd to claim that the Burden of Evidence is upon the herein Uploader Editor; in any country including Germany and USA, inter alia, the Burden of Proof vis-a-vis Burden of Evidence are clearly defined by Federal Rules and here the 1989 Rules on Evidence as amended by C.J. Peralta's Watch New Rules of Court - Burden of Proof is fixed: it stays with the a in Criminal cases particulary Penal Provisions of Copyright Law, the Complainant, here, the creators, architect or sculptors and owners of trademarks and their heirs, assigns or successors-in-interest, must must must, alleged in the Criminal Information to be filed by the Private Prosecutor under the control of the Fiscal, the ultimate facts, their rights to Copyright or Trademark; the Proof of the Burden is Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt, that is Moral Certainty to Convict by Majority Vote of S.C. Justices on Appeal; any Decision whether by the Special Court or IPO or Bureau or DOJ if not elevated and ruled upon by the S.C. are or is not Law or Jurisprudence b) in Civil Cases, the Proof is Preponderance of Evidence resting on the Plaintiff, the creators, architect or sculptors and owners of trademarks and their heirs, assigns or successors-in-interest; III) the Burden of Evidence shifts from the Proponent, that is, the Plaintiff, or herein Nominator of Deletion Request in Commons, or in Flickr or in any Fora, if he or she has the right emanating by Special Power of Attorney from the creators, architect or sculptors and owners of trademarks and their heirs, assigns or successors-in-interest; the Burden of Evidence is shifted by Law on Evidence to the defendant, that is, the alleged Copyright violator, when the Judge rules in the Trial amid objections from the opposing counsel or parties; iv) The IPO Director and Bureau of Copyright Head, can never interpret the Copyright Law; it is only in one case that the Executive Department acquired quasi-judicial powers to rule: in P.D. 1529, the LRA Administrator can say what is the Law on Torrens title upon filing of fees in En Consulta cases versus the Register of Deeds; but but but that is not jurisprudence; the ruling only becomes jurisprudence when elevated to the C.A. and finally to the S.C. issuing a Stare Decisis Decision; this is the same banana with Quasi-Judicial Powers and Rulings of the Executive Agencies, like Immigration, Bureaus of Customs, here Bureau of Copyright (who has no such power); v) The Integrated Bar of the Philippines has jurisdiction to discipline the IPO Director and Bureau of Copyright heads if lawyers based even on Anonymous Complaint more frequently under R.A. 6713 which is broader than Sunlights in the Philippines, or R.A. 3019; the IBP has concurrent jurisdiction with the SC Disbarment Office to suspend or dismiss lawyers including IPO Director and Bureau of Copyright heads if they issue comedy of errors or simply put, refusal to reply to my 2 Letters within a fast time required thereat; but the Lawyer under and representing Director Blanclaflor replied to my query: Can I upload any photos falling under FOP in Commons? He replied yes, since if there is no proviso in the Copyright law prohibiting it, then, the Law permits what is not prohibited; I understand that Blancaflor was succeeded by the former and the incumbent IPO Director; YES, they can reply by email and they should under the mandatory provisions of R.A. 6713 "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees" or even via Zoom Zoom Zoom or Arbitration Virtual under COVID-19 pandemic restrictions; but they can never interpret the Copyright Law, only, they should as they had issued Implementing Guidelines or Circulars;
- vi) More important Now is the Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the Department of Justice via the NBI's Cybercrime Monitoring Division to assume jurisdiction even upon Anonymous Complaint or NOW by Pandemic Emails against 2 matters that I often repeat and repeat herein as Law and Jurisprudence : a) creation of Anonymous Accounts b) Cyberstalking (which incidentally, I state as my opinion, is part and parcel of the specific provisos of the 2012 Cybercrime Philippine Law, as I did read Wikipedia's edit regarding Congress Bills on the matter; for me that is a surplusage; c) Cybercrime proper : to be specific En Masse (including schemes, habit or trends towards) deletion of Photobucket, Flickr, Instagram or here, Commons Valued Photos of National Interest like Churches, Schools, Monuments and Memorial which are Owned by the Domain here Commons Photos uploaded under Public Domain License, like mine, specifying that My Authorship need not be cited when anybody copies my Commons Photos, permanently transferred to Commons Ownership without anything remaining to me; Vi) In all my archives including my Ramon FVelasquez Photos, I never objected to deletions but most rarely; in Template, I just say submitted to the sound discretion of Commons Community; since 2012, many of my files were deleted under either Speedy Deletion or Regular Deletions filed even by Commons Administrators; Vii) But now, I have a reasonable Ground to fear that there is a "Testing of the Waters", that is a) start or stub deletions by trickles just 1% of 99% edits by a specific editor that apparently is aimed towards b) Domino Deletions or En Masse Deletions as had been done by a) Parent and b) Child anonymous Mass Deleters beginning September 2020 stopping just lately but Nakaabang lang po or just watching for opportune time; On the advice that I should obtain COM:OTRS from the Sculptors, I state with all fairness and legality, that it is a legal absurdity to obtain any permission from the heirs of the Deceased alleged but not proven Copyright holder; Anastacio Caedo (14 August 1907 – 12 May 1990) was a Filipino sculptor; and FYI, the Intestate or Testate Courts would first issue Letters Testamentary or Letters of Administration with the Will Annexed(Letters of Administration by Probate Court Letters Testamentary) only the One Armed with the RTC Probate Orders of Appointment can legally issue the COM:OTRS; and this will take maybe 20 years of protracted litigations;
- Example of stupidity because of False News: Fr. Ladra said the church’s interior now features a ceiling painting called “Communion of Saints” by Maestro Eladio Santos; I always come to this Church; I witnessed personally how the ceiling was painted; I saw with my 2 eyes the Bayanihan or Communal Donation of Money and Labor; specifically, it is next to impossible for Maestro Eladio Santos to have painted the ceiling; Does he have the legs to climbs thereat look at his age - paid workers, like stonemasons, carpenters, catwalks scaffoldings and painters were paid sorry to say minimum wages and other for free due to Bayanihan; I saw Fr. Labra talking to architects; but I suppose these architects and alleged Maestro Eladio Santos may have suggested the Brand of Oil Paints or sketches; but Why deny these Men at Work in Bulacan the Copyrigthts they waived for this Great Shrine? “Communion of Saints” was not done by Maestro Eladio Santos: PROMISE.
Keep I humbly submit the Unabridged Legal Treatise, ONLY as persuasion to Keep; I underscore that amid my Legal Expertise, I have just One Commons Editor Vote co-equal with any Nominator or Opposing Uploader under the Commons Admin who will keep or deletes; the foregoing Legal Submissions are not meant to touch upon Commons Legal Policy on FOP;
- Keep PREMISES CONSIDERED, I humbly submit and register a the Strongest Legal Objection EVER to the Requested Deletion and Fervently Appeal to Commons Community to wait for the Supreme Court Ruling on the Matter of FOP and I guess that would be my starting point... I reiterate with all due respect, that I respectfully and humbly submit to the Sound Discretion of the Commons Community considering that the subject photos are National Cultural Treasures Most Valued Photos for present and future generations, very sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 08:54, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:08645jfIntramuros Anda Circle Bonifacio Drive Port Area Manilafvf 49.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:08645jfIntramuros Anda Circle Bonifacio Drive Port Area Manilafvf 49.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0515jfCaloocan City Barangays C-15 East Road Rizal Avenuefvf.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0515jfCaloocan City Barangays C-15 East Road Rizal Avenuefvf.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0023jfCaloocan City Barangays C Three West East Road Rizal Avenuefvf 17.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0023jfCaloocan City Barangays C Three West East Road Rizal Avenuefvf 17.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:35, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Roxas Boulevard (Malate, Manila section)
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:57, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:05242jfStreets Mabini Ocampo Roxas Boulevard Malate Manilafvf 09.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:05242jfStreets Mabini Ocampo Roxas Boulevard Malate Manilafvf 09.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:59, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Roxas Boulevard (Malate, Manila section)
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:15, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:09385jfKalaw Avenue Roxas Boulevard South Road Rizal Park Ermitafvf 02.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:09385jfKalaw Avenue Roxas Boulevard South Road Rizal Park Ermitafvf 02.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0319jfSacramento California Paco Churches Landmarks Building Manilafvf 04.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0319jfSacramento California Paco Churches Landmarks Building Manilafvf 04.jpg E4024 (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
- Good afternoon from hereat Philippines amid Tropical storm Tropical Depression 01W (Auring); I was invited to this Heritage building, as I passed by and they saw my Nikon AW100 camera; this is the Photo of Philippine President; I do not know why this is here; No Objection to the deletion on the ground that the Photo is just one of millions of Political ads, and thank you for your visit: please come to the Beautiful Philippines In Time Sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 05:17, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
File:7876Balete Drive Quezon City Landmarks 38.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:7876Balete Drive Quezon City Landmarks 38.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:04, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:U.P. Town Center
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0143jfSan Vicente U.P. Campus C. P. Garcia Avenue Quezon Cityfvf 19.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0143jfSan Vicente U.P. Campus C. P. Garcia Avenue Quezon Cityfvf 19.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:19, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0163jfSan Vicente U.P. Campus Town Center C. P. Garcia Avenue Quezon Cityfvf 14.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0163jfSan Vicente U.P. Campus Town Center C. P. Garcia Avenue Quezon Cityfvf 14.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Partial Consolidated Reply
- a) and ) I witnessed the men at work there installing Araw ng mag Puso Kiskisan ng mga Nguso Handicrafts of the Philippines; no architect is involved in this trivial thing, but they keep it for next years Sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 05:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC) b) It was you request to take overcast photos and you specified from start to finish, so, I want to be sure the photos belong to the Balete Drive; in Ramon FVelasquez, an Adminstrator said "I want to see the sign" saying that he wants me to assure Commons that the Category photos include the inside Boundaries; here corner Mabolo Street; c) : Amid Tropical storm Tropical Depression 01W (Auring); c) These photos were taken as part of an Educational tour of Street (political) nuisances -Republic Act 386 or the Civil Code of the Philippines. ... The law defines nuisance as “any act, omission, establishment, ... with the free passage of any public highway or street, or any body of water; xxx"; many photos I took will teach the youth called millennials about Ganito Kami Noon, Paano Kayo Ngayon and the Thirsty jobless politicians of the former admins are taking advantage of Election Honeymoon period, that is, it is a Mad Rush to be appointed to Juicy or Tulo Laway Positions; I scolded this morning my Fish Vendor, since she sells the fish at very low price; alis ka dyan, magwalis ka na lang sa PilHet o janitress ka sa Cotoms may classmate ako don ginamot ko sila noon, I remember Nora and Christopher in that Movie have you seen it; and these Nuissance photos is part of Filipino Folklore Sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 05:37, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Santa Ana Public Market, Manila
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Agoo Basilica
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
File:2231City Proper San Fernando, La Union 61.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:2231City Proper San Fernando, La Union 61.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:27, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Ma-Cho Temple 2020
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
- CONSOLIDATED REPLY I vehemently object to the deletion on Substantive Legal Grounds, under my Lawyer's and Judge's Oath of Office, and as Authority on Criminal Law Review based on my Ateneo Law School records; I submit to the Commons Community In Seriatim, objectively (and based on USA and Philippine Jurisprudence vis-à-vis Substantive laws both Civil - Copyright law of the Philippines amending the New Civil Code provisions on the Law of Property) and Criminal law 1932 Revised Penal Code as amended by the Penal Provisions of both [ https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/09/12/republic-act-no-10175/ Republic Act No. 10175] - Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 and Copyright Penal Provisions especially [https://acg.pnp.gov.ph/main/2-uncategorised/263-acg-cyber-security-bulletin-no-132-understanding-the-risk-of-cyberstalking Cyberstalking Cyberstalking is the use of the Internet or other electronic means to stalk or harass an individual, group, or organization - monitoring, threats, or gathering information that may be used to threaten or harass);
- Now a) Who can question with Legal Personality to the Special Courts on Copyright and Trademark Infringement - Vide: The Intellectual Property of the Philippines (IPOPHL) vis-à-vis the Supreme Court’s (SC) 2020 Special Rules on the Prosecution of Intellectual Property (IP) Cases; and b) within what period of time based on Civil Law on Extinctive Prescription); here are my legal grounds to dismiss the Nomination or Request for Deletion, to wit:
- i) I talked to the former Parish Priest Msgr. Jo Aguilan whom I healed as healing Judge in the Barasoain Convent and in his room, now deceased and b) Parish Priest on 24 August 2014, 18:50:54 Fr. Dario V. Cabral, incumbent Parish Priest of Barasoain Church; he confirmed in our discussion, that the Titular Bishop Oliveros now Dennis Villarojo has acquired all rights and properties, Torrens titles of Barasoain Church including all the Monuments therein; hence, the Creator of the Statues transferred all his rights by virtue of the Strict Provisions of Canon law of the Catholic Church on Parish Creation; and in this case, Saint Andrew the Apostle Church the Titular Bishop of Broderick Pabillo the apostolic administrator of the sede vacante Archdiocese of Manila.
- ii) I also talked with the PIO Office of Baliuag including Tourism Office, when I was requesting for photos of the Feb 2 2021 Episcopal Coronation; I was told that Mayor Ferdie Estrella, as SOP, following the Strict LGU DILG guidelines, has a signed written contract between the paid official photographer to have waived all his rights in favor of the Municipal government of Baliuag whoever is the Mayor; under the Local Government Code and DILG Laws, all architects and sculptors cannot retain copyrights without violating the Penal Provisions of these codes and the Anti-Graft Law RA 3019 as amended; Ergo, all LGUs including the herein Malolos City Government ipso facto acquires all moral rights surrendered by alleged and all creators of Copyrights subjects and objects;
- ii) I will quote here my past rendition for emphasis: 29 January 2012 [File:Emilio222jf.JPG this file] by virtue of Substantive Philippine law on Extinctive prescription of FOUR YEARS from Commons Uploading, that is, legal public and open publishing in any forum or format, nobody including the alleged creators can now question in any court or forum even by the Creator; [File:FvfMalolos1335 01.JPG this also] 18 April 2014, 15:45:57; This also, [File:FvfMalolosCity1317 15.JPG This also] This also [File:FvfMalolosCity1317 17.JPG This also] 18 April 2014, 15:42:36; assuming Ex Gratia Argumenti or Arguendo, that Flickr Photobucket or any Commons Editor has opined otherwise, even if the IPO Bureau of Copyright and IPO Director now incumbents, would say otherwise, even if possibly reversing the former Learned Verbal Answers to my Personal Query and long discussions with my Ateneo School Mate Director Blancaflor, still, the Laws, I cited hold; it is for the Commons Community to decide between my submitted Legal Treatise any the alleged IPO zooms and others;
- At this point, I humbly ask a transcript of the IPO Zooms for the guidance of the Bench and the Bar; I would like to examine Legally the contents thereof for a single purpose: I will try my best if I have time and access due to COVID 19 restrictions to personally talk with the a) Integrated Bar of the Philippines President at Pasig City Main Office and b) the IPO Director and Bureau of Copyrights; if they will maintain wrong legal Opinions, then I reserve my Lawyer's Judge's Right to question them individually with the Ombudsman regarding Gross Ignorance of the Law or possible Disbarment in the IBP Office;
- Counter-Argument versus alleged Dicta, sayings, Virtual Answers or even Email correspondence of the Bureau of Copyright and IPO Director: Burden of proof (law) - Rule 131. BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS - Burden of Evidence and Preponderance of the evidence : Judicial Supremacy of the S.C. of the Philippines:
- i) FIRST, the Copyright Law cannot be interpreted by them for ONLY the Supreme Court of the Philippines (in a ripe judicial controvery elevated to it either by Petition for Review or Appeal from Special Courts on Copyrights towards Certiorari under Rule 65 to the Court of Appeals) has original and exclusive Jurisdiction expressly GRANTED and mandated by the 1987 Constitution to Say with definiteness what the Law is, that is Stare Decisis or Philippine Specific Jurisprudence on a) who has the copyright or moral rights with legal personality to file in the Special Courts created under the law and S.C. latest Circulars under C.J. Peralta - infringement of copyrights or trademarks b) within 4 years from publication so public in public domain like Commons Uploading in Meta Details, under the New Civil Code law on Extinctive Prescription and Copyright Law; c) any ruling issued on Copyright whether virtual, email or correspondence including Zoom Zoom Zoom or Arbitration FB discussions; d) any ruling or the DOJ Opinion by the Secretary of Justice my classmate; Vide: 2019 Amendments to the 1989 Revised Rules on Evidence A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC
- ii) SECOND: it is legally absurd to claim that the Burden of Evidence is upon the herein Uploader Editor; in any country including Germany and USA, inter alia, the Burden of Proof vis-a-vis Burden of Evidence are clearly defined by Federal Rules and here the 1989 Rules on Evidence as amended by C.J. Peralta's Watch New Rules of Court - Burden of Proof is fixed: it stays with the a in Criminal cases particulary Penal Provisions of Copyright Law, the Complainant, here, the creators, architect or sculptors and owners of trademarks and their heirs, assigns or successors-in-interest, must must must, alleged in the Criminal Information to be filed by the Private Prosecutor under the control of the Fiscal, the ultimate facts, their rights to Copyright or Trademark; the Proof of the Burden is Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt, that is Moral Certainty to Convict by Majority Vote of S.C. Justices on Appeal; any Decision whether by the Special Court or IPO or Bureau or DOJ if not elevated and ruled upon by the S.C. are or is not Law or Jurisprudence b) in Civil Cases, the Proof is Preponderance of Evidence resting on the Plaintiff, the creators, architect or sculptors and owners of trademarks and their heirs, assigns or successors-in-interest; III) the Burden of Evidence shifts from the Proponent, that is, the Plaintiff, or herein Nominator of Deletion Request in Commons, or in Flickr or in any Fora, if he or she has the right emanating by Special Power of Attorney from the creators, architect or sculptors and owners of trademarks and their heirs, assigns or successors-in-interest; the Burden of Evidence is shifted by Law on Evidence to the defendant, that is, the alleged Copyright violator, when the Judge rules in the Trial amid objections from the opposing counsel or parties; iv) The IPO Director and Bureau of Copyright Head, can never interpret the Copyright Law; it is only in one case that the Executive Department acquired quasi-judicial powers to rule: in P.D. 1529, the LRA Administrator can say what is the Law on Torrens title upon filing of fees in En Consulta cases versus the Register of Deeds; but but but that is not jurisprudence; the ruling only becomes jurisprudence when elevated to the C.A. and finally to the S.C. issuing a Stare Decisis Decision; this is the same banana with Quasi-Judicial Powers and Rulings of the Executive Agencies, like Immigration, Bureaus of Customs, here Bureau of Copyright (who has no such power); v) The Integrated Bar of the Philippines has jurisdiction to discipline the IPO Director and Bureau of Copyright heads if lawyers based even on Anonymous Complaint more frequently under R.A. 6713 which is broader than Sunlights in the Philippines, or R.A. 3019; the IBP has concurrent jurisdiction with the SC Disbarment Office to suspend or dismiss lawyers including IPO Director and Bureau of Copyright heads if they issue comedy of errors or simply put, refusal to reply to my 2 Letters within a fast time required thereat; but the Lawyer under and representing Director Blanclaflor replied to my query: Can I upload any photos falling under FOP in Commons? He replied yes, since if there is no proviso in the Copyright law prohibiting it, then, the Law permits what is not prohibited; I understand that Blancaflor was succeeded by the former and the incumbent IPO Director; YES, they can reply by email and they should under the mandatory provisions of R.A. 6713 "Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees" or even via Zoom Zoom Zoom or Arbitration Virtual under COVID-19 pandemic restrictions; but they can never interpret the Copyright Law, only, they should as they had issued Implementing Guidelines or Circulars;
- vi) More important Now is the Exclusive Original Jurisdiction of the Department of Justice via the NBI's Cybercrime Monitoring Division to assume jurisdiction even upon Anonymous Complaint or NOW by Pandemic Emails against 2 matters that I often repeat and repeat herein as Law and Jurisprudence : a) creation of Anonymous Accounts b) Cyberstalking (which incidentally, I state as my opinion, is part and parcel of the specific provisos of the 2012 Cybercrime Philippine Law, as I did read Wikipedia's edit regarding Congress Bills on the matter; for me that is a surplusage; c) Cybercrime proper : to be specific En Masse (including schemes, habit or trends towards) deletion of Photobucket, Flickr, Instagram or here, Commons Valued Photos of National Interest like Churches, Schools, Monuments and Memorial which are Owned by the Domain here Commons Photos uploaded under Public Domain License, like mine, specifying that My Authorship need not be cited when anybody copies my Commons Photos, permanently transferred to Commons Ownership without anything remaining to me; Vi) In all my archives including my Ramon FVelasquez Photos, I never objected to deletions but most rarely; in Template, I just say submitted to the sound discretion of Commons Community; since 2012, many of my files were deleted under either Speedy Deletion or Regular Deletions filed even by Commons Administrators; Vii) But now, I have a reasonable Ground to fear that there is a "Testing of the Waters", that is a) start or stub deletions by trickles just 1% of 99% edits by a specific editor that apparently is aimed towards b) Domino Deletions or En Masse Deletions as had been done by a) Parent and b) Child anonymous Mass Deleters beginning September 2020 stopping just lately but Nakaabang lang po or just watching for opportune time; On the advice that I should obtain COM:OTRS from the Sculptors, I state with all fairness and legality, that it is a legal absurdity to obtain any permission from the heirs of the Deceased alleged but not proven Copyright holder; Anastacio Caedo (14 August 1907 – 12 May 1990) was a Filipino sculptor; and FYI, the Intestate or Testate Courts would first issue Letters Testamentary or Letters of Administration with the Will Annexed(Letters of Administration by Probate Court Letters Testamentary) only the One Armed with the RTC Probate Orders of Appointment can legally issue the COM:OTRS; and this will take maybe 20 years of protracted litigations;
- Example of stupidity because of False News: Fr. Ladra said the church’s interior now features a ceiling painting called “Communion of Saints” by Maestro Eladio Santos; I always come to this Church; I witnessed personally how the ceiling was painted; I saw with my 2 eyes the Bayanihan or Communal Donation of Money and Labor; specifically, it is next to impossible for Maestro Eladio Santos to have painted the ceiling; Does he have the legs to climbs thereat look at his age - paid workers, like stonemasons, carpenters, catwalks scaffoldings and painters were paid sorry to say minimum wages and other for free due to Bayanihan; I saw Fr. Labra talking to architects; but I suppose these architects and alleged Maestro Eladio Santos may have suggested the Brand of Oil Paints or sketches; but Why deny these Men at Work in Bulacan the Copyrigthts they waived for this Great Shrine? “Communion of Saints” was not done by Maestro Eladio Santos: PROMISE.
- Keep I humbly submit the Unabridged Legal Treatise, ONLY as persuasion to Keep; I underscore that amid my Legal Expertise, I have just One Commons Editor Vote co-equal with any Nominator or Opposing Uploader under the Commons Admin who will keep or deletes; the foregoing Legal Submissions are not meant to touch upon Commons Legal Policy on FOP;
- Keep PREMISES CONSIDERED, I humbly submit and register a the Strongest Legal Objection EVER to the Requested Deletion and Fervently Appeal to Commons Community to wait for the Supreme Court Ruling on the Matter of FOP and I guess that would be my starting point... I reiterate with all due respect, that I respectfully and humbly submit to the Sound Discretion of the Commons Community considering that the subject photos are National Cultural Treasures Most Valued Photos for present and future generations, very sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 10:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
File:9794Cuisine of Bulacan Province 11.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:9794Cuisine of Bulacan Province 11.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:28, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
- Tumutulo kasi, kaya ang angulo harap sa araw, at maaga pa sikat masarap talaga, so tasty: Fried marinated with kalamansi and luya Fish from Bancas of Hagonoy, of course mas masarap and Bonuan or Binmaley of Dagupan or Bolinao Bangus - Never buy or eat fish in restaurants, they are FIFO so dirty, nakita ko lahat yan while in the kitchen, PROMISE; if you have nothing to do, do cook; I also saw how the cook of Mar as I waited for him while talking to the Architect before the Communion of Saints was painted by the poor poor poor less paid painters; by serendipity, because of this Sinigang na Bangus, I talked for an hour at SM Baliwag with undefeated 3 x Vice Mayor very handsome daw ang son niya, nagsabi daw sa kaniyang madalas tumingin dito ang Pari Kulili, because of serving as altar boy; while I was eating Sinigang na Bangus at Jollibee; e I suffered trauma for not taking photos of the P 500, tau na Communion Rails na pinagawa ng cute na Parish priest; cenon went to Louisville, Kentucky noon; surrounded by able bodied altar boys, the Rail was removed sayang ang ginastos doon for confidential reasons according to your V mayor Navarro; Sincerely Judgefloro (talk) 08:47, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
File:0133jfSanta Cruz Recto Avenue Binondo Streets Manilafvf 17.JPG (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:0133jfSanta Cruz Recto Avenue Binondo Streets Manilafvf 17.JPG JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Notification about possible deletion
Bundle DR:
Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Quezon Boulevard
Affected:
And also:
Yours sincerely, JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
File:09791jfQuiapo Quezon Boulevard Manila Bridge Riverfvf 05.jpg (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:09791jfQuiapo Quezon Boulevard Manila Bridge Riverfvf 05.jpg JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:14, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
