<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=GB2312" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
On Monday 22,June,2009 07:06 PM, suhaw koh wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1ce0dbe90906220406x3e835ebeqfd3b8f62766355b6@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi Chew,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Many thanks for your input: They are most instructive in this
discussion.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If we were to get bogged down by may/may-not questions, we will
never get anything done.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>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: <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.elections.gov.sg/agc/presidentialSubLeg10.htm">http://www.elections.gov.sg/agc/presidentialSubLeg10.htm</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>:-)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Cheers.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>suhaw</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2009/6/22 chewearn <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:chew4097@gmail.com" target="_blank">chew4097@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>2009/6/22 suhaw koh <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:kohsuhaw@gmail.com" target="_blank">kohsuhaw@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Hi
Chew,
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>2009/6/22 chewearn <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:chew4097@gmail.com" target="_blank">chew4097@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="gmail_quote">2009/6/22 suhaw koh <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:kohsuhaw@gmail.com" target="_blank">kohsuhaw@gmail.com</a>></span>
<div><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><edit>
<div><br>
<div>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. <br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div><br>
</div>
<div><edit><br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
My point is that the Law could be broadly worded, such that the
"device" could reasonably be applied to a Personal Computer.</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Most laws are broadly worded as they cannot be expected to
deal with every minute detail.</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">In
other
word, the decss package <b>could</b> be considered illegal in
Singapore (just like in US), because it's enable circumvention of the
DVD access control.</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>While circumvention of DVD access control <span
style="font-weight: bold;">may </span>be illegal, we also know that t<span
style="border-collapse: collapse;">here 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.</span></div>
<div> </div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div><br>
<br>
Sorry, I used the wrong words previously.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">My
personal
opinion: in practice, Singapore is a very pro-business
country. It is very likely that anything we do <b>in this matter</b>
that would be detrimental to "business" would get us into trouble.</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div>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.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<br>
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).<br>
<br>
<br>
Perfectly legal things that TUSG do could be promoting Ubuntu, having
release parties, open source education, etc.<br>
<br>
<br>
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).<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
Chew<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
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 :)<br>
<br>
Thanks Nick<br>
</body>
</html>