[Ubuntu-SG] Should we "Say No to Piracy"?
Tom Goh
tomgohj at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 19:20:21 UTC 2009
suhaw koh wrote:
> Hi XP,
>
> Please also recall that copyright is absolutely essential in allowing
> the enforcement of GPL and all other variants.
Yes but we call it CopyLeft. There still appears to be a fundamental
disagreement to the copyright way in the FOSS community.
>
> Intellectual Property covers not just software patents, but also all
> other types of patents, copyrights, trademarks, service marks and even
> passing off.
Yes there is use for these things. But since these systems have been so
completely broken for so many years, I feel that it is no longer helping
society but hindering it. And here is why I think so:
Software Patents: Probably hundreds of thousand of useless patents for
this which could have been derived from basic business operation
improvements. Take one-click shopping at Amazon (Our first client at my
previous company). This patent was granted to Amazon when in fact one
click online credit card processing was being done for years in the Porn
Industry. One click shopping is an evolution that would have happened
eventually. Its called process optimization, its not an invention.
The Patent system was supposed to protect "REAL" innovations and
inventions, not useless things like 1 click which is a business process.
In this day and age when the system is so completely broken, it makes
no sense to me.
Wait till you get sued for patent violation on a business process. You
know how many millions of dollars it takes to fight that in court. Its
in the tens of million. Look at SCO vs IBM. It is still going on.
>
> There are many things about Intellectual Property that we agree with and
> should be supportive of. Imho, if we were to reject all IP just because
> of software patents, we risk being seen as supporting lawlessness.
>
I disagree. See above.
We are not supporting lawlessness. We are supporting freedom and
innovation.
> As for the current members of the HIP alliance, I see that as even more
> important that we should not cede that forum to them without at least
> voicing our stand. Do recall that IPOS is a government agency, they
> should be pro-the People, not just corporate interests. If we were to
They are not pro people. They are pro who ever gives them more money.
Please that is a naive notion.
Countries makes it living taxing MNC corporations for doing business in
their countries. All they have to do is lobby their government to put
pressure on a country to get what they want. Its called politics and it
is very corrupt. Granted Singapore is one of the least corrupt
countries in the world but we still cater to MNC businesses.
> sit back and do nothing, can you blame IPOS if the likes of MS and EA
> were to dominate the agenda and discussion ?
>
> Cheers.
>
>
> suhaw
>
>
> 2009/6/22 Chen Xiangpeng <xp at xp.sg <mailto:xp at xp.sg>>
>
> Hi,
>
> I am with Tom on this. The idea of intellectual property/software
> patent rights go against the spirit of cooperation and sharing in
> the world of Free or Open-source software. It's not a legality
> issue. It's an ideology issue.
>
> Take a look at the members of the HIP alliance:
>
> http://www.ipos.gov.sg/topNav/prg/gen/HIP+(Honour+Intellectual+Property)+Alliance.htm
>
> You see names like Microsoft(nuff said) and Electronic Arts(Biggest
> users of Securom DRM anyone?).
> It's a bad idea to join the alliance in my opinion. Just my 2 cents.
>
> Regards,
> XP
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 16:37, Muhammad Heidir
> <dave33bravo at yahoo.com.sg <mailto:dave33bravo at yahoo.com.sg>> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 16:11 +0800, suhaw koh wrote:
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> >
> > A quick response to your point about multi-region DVD players:
> >
> >
> > The Digital Life article by Alfred Siew you quoted was
> published in
> > 2004, prior to the amendment of the laws. Check out this FAQ
> from
> > IPOS website:
> > http://www.ipos.gov.sg/topNav/leg/pub/pas/FAQ+for+USSFTA
> > +Consultation.htm
> >
> >
> >
> > What if a person purchased and used a multi-coded player for
> films
> > e.g. DVD player? Would that also be considered an act of
> > circumvention?
> > No. 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.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
> >
> > Cheers.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > suhaw
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2009/6/22 chewearn <chew4097 at gmail.com
> <mailto:chew4097 at gmail.com>>
> > Caveat: IANAL.
> >
> > Check out this article:
> >
> http://www.asiaone.com/Digital/News/Story/A1Story20081117-101233.html
> >
> > Especially the last paragraph, quote:
> > "It is illegal under the Copyright Act to
> > 'circumvent...technological access control measures'.
> Those
> > convicted face up to $20,000 in fines or up to two years'
> > jail, or both."
> >
> > I leave it to you to make the appropriate conclusion.
> >
> >
> > Regards
> > Chew
> >
> >
> > 2009/6/22 Tom Goh <tomgohj at gmail.com
> <mailto:tomgohj at gmail.com>>
> >
> > Just did a search and I may be wrong about
> fair use in
> > singapore.
> >
> >
> http://computertimes.asiaone.com.sg/columns/story/0,5104,2804,00.html
> >
> > The Free Trade Agreement with the United States
> > obliges Singapore to
> > tighten up copyright laws by this year.
> Singapore's
> > stand, fortunately,
> > is an enlightened one.
> >
> > An important clause in the proposed changes
> states
> > that it is not
> > illegal to disable technology used for 'market
> > segmentation'. It ensures
> > that multi-region DVD players are okay to use
> here.
> >
> > It does not specifically state anything about
> > Singapore and decss.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > suhaw koh wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > Seeking your thoughts/inputs/advice on the
> following
> > idea.
> > >
> > > Further to the Schools project idea.
> > >
> > > Since a key tenet of this project is to
> reinforce
> > the students'
> > > awareness and respect for IP rights, I was
> thinking
> > of enlisting the
> > > assistance of IPOS.
> > >
> > > At there website, I came across the HIP (Honour
> > Intellectual Property)
> > > Alliance at this url:
> > >
> http://www.ipos.gov.sg/topNav/prg/gen/HIP+(Honour
> <http://www.ipos.gov.sg/topNav/prg/gen/HIP+%28Honour>
> > +Intellectual+Property)+Alliance.htm
> > >
> > > It describes the Alliance thus:
> > >
> > > "HIP Alliance Members
> > >
> > > The HIP Alliance members include organisations
> > involved in creative arts
> > > and the creative industries, international
> > organisations, industry
> > > bodies and private sector players that
> believe in
> > Singapore's message to
> > > Say No to Piracy."
> > >
> > > I was just wondering if TUSG should sign up
> to be a
> > member of the
> > > alliance ? I know it is not quite what was
> > envisaged, but I believe
> > > TUSG should be a strong supporter of
> "Singapore's
> > message to Say No to
> > > Piracy".
> > >
> > > What do you think ?
> > >
> > >
> > > suhaw
> > > --
> > > ________________________
> > > Koh Su Haw 许树浩
> > > http://suhaw.teresaville.org/
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Ubuntu-SG mailing list
> > Ubuntu-SG at lists.ubuntu.com
> <mailto:Ubuntu-SG at lists.ubuntu.com>
> >
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-sg
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > ________________________
> > Koh Su Haw 许树浩
> > http://suhaw.teresaville.org/
> > Tel : +65 6236 8194
>
> Hi,
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong. But this is what they meant:
>
> 1) As long as the media is purchased legally, then having a
> multi-coded
> DVD player is fine. May I conclude that, if you bought the DVD
> legally,
> and decide to rip it and save it as a backup, then it is ok. But
> if you
> share, sell or distribute then it is not ok.
>
> 2) Then if you build, sell or distribute systems that enable
> illegally
> obtained/pirated media to run, then it is considered an act of
> circumvention.
>
> Does these affect us joining the alliance then?
>
> Canonical/Ubuntu does not do those stuff. In anyway, there are
> totally
> Open Source solutions which are legal. I don't see any issue in
> having
> us a part of this alliance but more to adding credibility.
>
> Your views?
> --
> Best Regards,
> Muhammad Heidir
>
> Multiply:doksg | Yahoo!:dave33bravo
>
> --
> Ubuntu-SG mailing list
> Ubuntu-SG at lists.ubuntu.com <mailto:Ubuntu-SG at lists.ubuntu.com>
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-sg
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ________________________
> Koh Su Haw 许树浩
> http://suhaw.teresaville.org/
> Tel : +65 6236 8194
>
More information about the Ubuntu-SG
mailing list