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

[John Thng]

2009/6/22 Nick HS <nick at daenim.com>

>  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>
>
>>
>>
>>  2009/6/22 suhaw koh <kohsuhaw at gmail.com>
>>
>>> Hi Chew,
>>>
>>>  2009/6/22 chewearn <chew4097 at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>> 2009/6/22 suhaw koh <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
>
> --
> Ubuntu-SG mailing list
> Ubuntu-SG at lists.ubuntu.com
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-sg
>
>
For patents, software patents should not last so long. Patents has been
infecting the MP3 codec and others. There's no definite date when will MP3
codec be free.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3#Licensing_and_patent_issues

And do not confuse the term IP with others.
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html

Regards
John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-sg/attachments/20090622/3d55cac7/attachment.html>