[Ubuntu-SG] Should we "Say No to Piracy"?

[Nick HS]

On Monday 22,June,2009 07:06 PM, suhaw koh wrote:
> Hi Chew,
>
> Many thanks for your input: They are most instructive in this discussion.
>
> Yes, I fully agree that there are many ambiguities in the law: Being
> very broadly worded, they may (or may not) cover many aspects. And the
> truth is that nobody (even lawyers) can say for certain whether any
> specific thing is or is not covered until they are actually tested in
> the courts, ie somebody bring about a legal suit.
>
> So, the only reliable guide we have as to what the law covers is based
> on the cases that have been decided in the courts. Thus far, the
> courts have been quite reasonable. For example, a strict reading of
> the law would define the buffer and RAM memory in computers as making
> illegal copies whenever a program is run, no court would every take
> such a nonsensical interpretation.
>
> My point is simply that I propose we work on the assumption that the
> law is reasonable and where there are undesireable features of laws,
> we should work to helping the legislators/government iron out the kinks.
>
> If we were to get bogged down by may/may-not questions, we will never
> get anything done.
>
> And now for a little trivia regarding your point about "Perfectly
> legal things that TUSG do could be promoting Ubuntu, having release
> parties, open source education, etc." Check this out:
> http://www.elections.gov.sg/agc/presidentialSubLeg10.htm
>
> :-)
>
> Cheers.
>
>
> suhaw
>
>
>
> 2009/6/22 chewearn <chew4097 at gmail.com <mailto:chew4097 at gmail.com>>
>
>
>
>     2009/6/22 suhaw koh <kohsuhaw at gmail.com <mailto:kohsuhaw at gmail.com>>
>
>         Hi Chew,
>
>
>         2009/6/22 chewearn <chew4097 at gmail.com
>         <mailto:chew4097 at gmail.com>>
>
>             2009/6/22 suhaw koh <kohsuhaw at gmail.com
>             <mailto:kohsuhaw at gmail.com>>
>
>                 <edit>
>
>                 As for the more recent Nov 2008 DL article about Sim
>                 Lim raids that Chew quoted, they are specifically
>                 about modifying devices to circumvent access control
>                 measures, ie modifying the Wii machines to play
>                 pirated software.
>
>
>                 <edit>
>
>
>             My point is that the Law could be broadly worded, such
>             that the "device" could reasonably be applied to a
>             Personal Computer.
>
>
>         Most laws are broadly worded as they cannot be expected to
>         deal with every minute detail.
>
>
>             In other word, the decss package *could* be considered
>             illegal in Singapore (just like in US), because it's
>             enable circumvention of the DVD access control.
>
>
>         While circumvention of DVD access control may be illegal, we
>         also know that there is also an express provision in Section
>         261C(10) allowing for import or sale of devices whose sole
>         purpose is to control market segmentation for access to films
>         e.g. multi-coded DVD player.
>
>
>
>     Sorry, I used the wrong words previously.
>
>     What I meant by "access control" was of being able to read/play
>     but not copy a DVD; something which the CSS encryption (together
>     with the copy bits and DVD consortium licensing agreement) is
>     meant to do.
>
>     I did not mean "access control" with respect to the DVD region
>     code. I agree that the Law has a specific exception to invalidate
>     DVD region coding.
>
>
>
>             My personal opinion: in practice, Singapore is a very
>             pro-business country. It is very likely that anything we
>             do *in this matter* that would be detrimental to
>             "business" would get us into trouble.
>
>
>         In that case, the very existence of TUSG would get us into
>         trouble: Anything we may want to do can be considered as being
>         detrimental to business.
>
>
>     Let's not "over-extrapolate". I am referring to specific
>     potentially illegal circumvention packages, such as decss,
>     win32codecs, etc. (note: I emphasis the words "in this matter" to
>     my previous reply above).
>
>
>     Perfectly legal things that TUSG do could be promoting Ubuntu,
>     having release parties, open source education, etc.
>
>
>     Btw, it seems we are going a bit off track from your initial post.
>     I don't mean to say I am against joining HIP (at the moment, I am
>     undecided).
>
>     I replied to this thread because I have previously worked for a
>     MNC designing DVD devices, so I thought I could add my 2 cents
>     knowledge in this area.
>
>
>     Regards
>     Chew
>
>

I'm not for TUSG joining HIP as I (personally) fail to see how our
agendas are aligned, and if push ever came to shove HIP and the
Singapore government would be more then likely to trumpet the
pro-business ideals along with strict patent laws. However that's just me :)

Thanks Nick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-sg/attachments/20090622/2ea04211/attachment.html>