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

[Tom Goh]

suhaw koh wrote:
> 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.
> 
>  
> 
>     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.

care to explain how TUSG would get us in trouble.

I run an open source company that is good for businesses.  IBM, Redhat
and Novell make money selling and promoting open source.  If procter and
gamble used open source they would benefit too.



> 
> Cheers.
> 
>  
> suhaw
> -- 
> ________________________
> Koh Su Haw  许树浩
> http://suhaw.teresaville.org/
>