Singapore cracks down on anime piracy
-
(o.o)y
-
Originally posted by CoolMyth:(o.o)y
-
nope, i only collect osts.Originally posted by Vigelic:Scanlations are technically illegal since chuangyi sells the same comic in singapore.
in other words chuang yi can do the same thing odex does. because when u download scanlations the artwork is the same as the chuang yi ones (except in some chuang yi ones are censored)
of cos this all boils down to whether their sales is affected by you downloading manga. do u buy the manga after u download? do u buy the characters? do u contribute back to the industry?
-
[TODAY 5-SEP-2007 ODEX NEWS]WHO WILL Protect THE KIDS from copyright oWNers?
THOMAS KOSHY
IT WAS in September 2003 that the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) fired the first salvoes in the war against home users who had infringed copyright by downloading music off the Internet.
.
Four years and thousands of claims later, the battle still rages on. And the casualties have included even pre-teen children accused of such copyright infringement.
.
The tsunami of claims by copyright owners against home users that originated in America has generated ripples in Singapore, seen in the demands made by Odex against youths who had allegedly downloaded copyright-infringing anime off the Internet.
.
One of the 105 Odex claims that have been settled reportedly even involved a nine-year-old child. Most of the other offenders were in their late teens or early twenties.
.
So, does the law afford any protection to such youths, especially those who have yet to attain the age of majority?.
To start with, copyright infringement can lead to criminal and civil proceedings. Generally, criminal proceedings lead to punishments such as imprisonment and fines. Civil proceedings normally result in money or damages being paid to the claimant.
.
The Penal Code states that no act by a child under seven years of age is an offence. Children between seven and 12 years old will not be held criminally-liable if they had not attained sufficient maturity of understanding to judge the nature and consequences of the act.
.
It follows that a child below seven years of age cannot be convicted for a copyright offence (or any other crime for that matter), and the same may apply to children up to the age of 12.
.
Even if a child does commit a copyright offence, one would expect him to be warned rather than be hauled to court. And even if the child were charged in court, the expected punishment would be probation rather than any fine or imprisonment. Children below the age of 14 may not be sentenced to imprisonment at all.
.
In the face of these laws to protect children, it would seem inappropriate to send letters to children threatening them with fines and imprisonment. .
Threatening criminal prosecution unless some form of compensation is paid could very well be illegal in itself.
.
It may be useful if the Public Prosecutor, who is the fount of authority to prosecute crimes, makes it clear that private persons should not threaten criminal proceedings in pursuing claims for compensation.
.
It is also worth considering if the Public Prosecutor should, as a matter of policy, refuse to issue fiats for private prosecution of offenders who are minors.
.
After all, profit-driven copyright owners cannot be trusted to have the interests of minors at heart. Cases involving minors are probably best dealt with by the Public Prosecutor.
.
How about civil claims against children then? Most people are aware that minors do not have the legal capacity to enter into contract. Under Singapore law a minor is anyone below 21 years old.
.
But a claim for copyright infringement is not based on a contract and so the rule about minors not having the capacity to contract has no relevance. Therefore, one is apparently never too young to be sued for copyright infringement.
.
Still, even if there is no legal impediment to suing minors for copyright infringement, doing so may prove futile.
.
There is little satisfaction in obtaining a paper judgment against a minor who is unable to cough up any money to satisfy such a judgment — a classic case of throwing good money after bad.
.
This is probably why the RIAA decided not to pursue its now notorious court case in the US against Brittany Chan who was 12 years old when she was accused of downloading copyrighted files through a peer-to-peer file-sharing network.
.
The RIAA had tried to hold Brittany's mother Candy liable for facilitating the illegal downloads but withdrew their claim when faced with Candy's application for it to be struck out.
.
The law protects minors in court by demanding that the minor be represented by an adult guardian. Prior to court proceedings, there is currently no impediment to copyright owners sending a demand letter directly to a child suspected of copyright infringement.
.
Given that many of those who may find themselves on the wrong side of copyright laws are likely to be children and youths, this may be a cause for concern. The reaction of a child to such an unexpected threat of dire legal consequences may be unpredictable and disproportionate to the actual situation.
.
Allowing copyright owners to enter into settlements with minors may also lead to exploitation.
.
In a world where children may inadvertently find themselves tangled in confrontations with big businesses, it may be worth considering whether more can be done to protect the interests of the young.
.
Copyright owners have a loud voice when it comes to lobbying for legislation. But who will speak for the children? The law must achieve the right balance to protect even the mute.
.
The writer is a legal academic.
.
These are his personal views.
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/209316.asp -
If Odex believes in charity, it should issue a stern warning — and stop at that SingNet's 'consent': What is the actual position
Letter from Matthew Yim Yew Fei
Letter from Steven Lo Chock Fei
I wish to raise some legal concerns over Odex's crackdown on anime pirates..
After Odex's failure to get a court order against Pacific Internet, the firm invited executives from Japanese anime firms like Toei to come to Singapore to defend its actions. In an interview, Odex's founders, Mr Peter Go and Mr Stephen Sing, vowed to continue their crackdown. However, certain legal issues relating to such a crackdown need to be resolved.
.
Odex is just a local distributor of anime in Singapore. It is unlike the Business Software Alliance (BSA) or the Composers and Authors Society of Singapore (Compass).
.
When the BSA legally settles and receives compensation from somebody who had used use pirated software, it is taken that the culprit has paid his or her dues to the legal owners since the BSA has links to major software firms. Likewise for music infringement, Compass acts on behalf of the many music composers and publishers, saving the wrong-doer from further legal burden unless he commits another infringement.
.
When a person who illegally downloads settles with Odex, is he or she still liable for other lawsuits if other anime distributors and production houses also wish to sue? Can a Japanese production company like Toei still sue the person over other downloaded anime which the firm owns but which Odex does not have the licence to distribute?.
If Odex does not have the legal right on behalf of other firms, families who have settled may face further lawsuits and possible financial ruin because of the foolish act of the children.
.
A Government agency like the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore should look into this to reach a deal for everyone.
.
Odex said that it would donate any excess compensation to charities. My question to it: Why can't Odex be charitable to those families with mitigating reasons and let them off with a stern warning?.
In the recent court case where Odex was seeking details of those who downloaded anime illegally, District Judge Earnest Lau said that "for the SingNet case, the court order was made by consent" and that "SingNet did not even appear in court".
.
However, SingNet subsequently clarified that it did not "consent" to the demands by Odex. This clarification contradicts the District Judge's words.
.
Perhaps the authorities could clear the air on the issue.
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/209147.asp -
The New Paper Exclusive
Local anime fans berate Odex's voice-overs
Mr Edward Choy, 28, frequently bursts into loud sobs and peals of laughter.
It is all in a day's work at the studio for the actor, who had voiced at least 15 anime (Japanese animation) characters for local anime distributor Odex.
But he is now caught in tn Internet firestorm.
Anime fans on the Internet say that poor voice-overs in Odex's products is one of the reasons they turn to illegal downloads of anime.
Source: wo bao (mypaper, page 2)
If I remember correctly, I do not think there was anyone complaining about the voice-overs being inferior, rather it was the lousy subtitling and long delay in releasing the anime. 154th media, cant expect much anyway. -
the mrbrown show: pride and punishment
How did those people downloading anime get caught? The mrbrown show team investigates.
http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2007/09/05/the-mrbrown-show-pride-and-punishment/ -
LOL. so another words, the reasons given by odex were all inaccurate at best, and at worst, are just plain lies.
in the court you lie, isn't that something punishable?
you threaten others legally and using lies and inaccurate facts as the basis for your action.
-
Originally posted by tortoise55:
knn. why they oso comprain abt the voice-overs sia... damn unfair to tt guy
[b]The New Paper Exclusive
Local anime fans berate Odex's voice-overs
Mr Edward Choy, 28, frequently bursts into loud sobs and peals of laughter.
It is all in a day's work at the studio for the actor, who had voiced at least 15 anime (Japanese animation) characters for local anime distributor Odex.
But he is now caught in tn Internet firestorm.
Anime fans on the Internet say that poor voice-overs in Odex's products is one of the reasons they turn to illegal downloads of anime.
Source: wo bao (mypaper, page 2)
If I remember correctly, I do not think there was anyone complaining about the voice-overs being inferior, rather it was the lousy subtitling and long delay in releasing the anime. 154th media, cant expect much anyway.[/b] -
Well written article, but what's done cannot be undone. The kids have been fined and some have paid up.Originally posted by duotiga83:
-
i like this.. although some parts are not the facts of the case but its still nice =DOriginally posted by tortoise55:the mrbrown show: pride and punishment
How did those people downloading anime get caught? The mrbrown show team investigates.
http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2007/09/05/the-mrbrown-show-pride-and-punishment/ -
mr brown finally did a podcast on this issue.
-
i read in the newspaper today, odex said that they're confident in winning back the public's trust and favour, although its a uphill task.
-
TO ODEX: MADA MADA DANE.... HAHA
-
-
xedo is KIRA????Originally posted by tortoise55:the mrbrown show: pride and punishment
How did those people downloading anime get caught? The mrbrown show team investigates.
http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2007/09/05/the-mrbrown-show-pride-and-punishment/ -
I'm very surprised they got Rick Clements to talk about their PR disaster.
But if you need to ask someone about PR, you have to think of this guy first. -
no, is misa.Originally posted by duotiga83:xedo is KIRA???? 
those whose ip addresses are written inside the black note book will be sued! -
hey it rythms!!!!!Originally posted by Gordonator:no, is misa.
those whose ip addresses are written inside the black note book will be sued! -
*pukes*
The picture is er xin. Not just er xin, it's called er xin dao ji dian -
Why dun you might as well add some pi sai or long nose hair to the face ?
-
He is really an ugly person. Not even photoshop can help him.
-
nice pic
-
my eyes!!
-
Good Lord! I would have gladly wrote my own name in the book without saying anything!Originally posted by Gordonator:no, is misa.
those whose ip addresses are written inside the black note book will be sued!