[Ubuntu-SG] Should we "Say No to Piracy"?
Tom Goh
tomgohj at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 19:35:30 UTC 2009
suhaw koh wrote:
> Hi XP,
>
> I am fully aware of the pro-business stance IPOS. But if the
> non-business interests (such as us) do not make our voices heard, can
> you blame the government for being pro-business ? :-)
>
> I am aware of the arguments against software patents. There was a
> course I attended at NTU last year that had a long-running and very
> fierce debate on precisely this issue. In summary, we sorta agree on
> the following (though my classmates may differ, depending on who you ask):
> * Software patents seem ridiculous in many cases
> * But the general patent regime is sound and has proven itself in many
> non-software cases
If they are for real innovations and inventions.
> * If we were to scrap/ban software patents, where do we draw the line
> so that it does not also invalidate/void non-software patents ?
Companies are patenting the human genome. That belongs to me. Is some
company going to charge me money one day because I have chromosome x.
Companies are patenting herbs used in traditional medicine. So does
that mean I have to pay someone to eat some herb that was in use for
thousands of years.
Monsanto patents their seed crops and because you cannot stop cross
fertilizing by wind and insects, traditional farmers get monsantos
genetics in their heirloom seeds. They they get sued by Monsanto
So where do you draw the line?? There appears to be no line these days.
Thats why I can never ever support it. Not unless there is a major
change in the way it is run.
> * Personally, I favour a do-nothing approach: When the courts see how
> ridiculous the software patents are, they can always decide to rule
> against the patent-holders, just as they have done in many non-software
> patent cases.
> * I posed the following hypothetical case to my classmates who could
> not provide a satisfactory answer: Why should you deny patent protection
> to an inventor if he were to write a ground-breaking software that can
> identify and delete all spam emails with zero false-positives ? Maybe
> you can provide a better response than my classmates.
Well we are not saying the original patent philosophy is wrong. What we
are saying is that it is broken beyond repair. Plus the spam thing
would be an algorithm not a business process.
>
> May I humbly suggest that we do not throw the baby out with the bath
> water. No law is perfect. If we disagree with any aspect of the law,
> we should work within the system to effect change rather than to dismiss
> everything and embrace anarchy. :-)
I am fine to work within the system. Does not mean I have to support
this organization. It represents so much that I think is wrong in this
world.
My vote is a clear NO.
>
> Cheers.
>
>
>
> suhaw
>
>
> 2009/6/22 Chen Xiangpeng <xp at xp.sg <mailto:xp at xp.sg>>
>
> Hi Suhaw,
>
> It's true that the copyright is essential to enforce GPL. You might
> also recall that the GPL exist because of the existence of copyright
> laws in the first place :)
> I am all for the enforcement of trademarks and such, but I think
> software patent is a really bad idea. I am a firm supporter
> content/artistic copyright.
>
> I am not sure if IPOS is pro-People in the first place given the
> pro-business stance of the government :P
>
> XP
>
> 2009/6/22 suhaw koh <kohsuhaw at gmail.com <mailto:kohsuhaw at gmail.com>>
>
> Hi XP,
>
> Please also recall that copyright is absolutely essential in
> allowing the enforcement of GPL and all other variants.
>
> Intellectual Property covers not just software patents, but also
> all other types of patents, copyrights, trademarks, service
> marks and even passing off.
>
> 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.
>
> 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 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
> <http://www.ipos.gov.sg/topNav/prg/gen/HIP+%28Honour+Intellectual+Property%29+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
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ________________________
> Koh Su Haw 许树浩
> http://suhaw.teresaville.org/
>
More information about the Ubuntu-SG
mailing list