The Singapore Law Review

This is not the first time the SLR Lecture would be held at the NUS Law Faculty’s new campus, but admittedly it would be a new experience for many people: click on the map or click on more to find out how to get here and be on time for the lecture.

Street Directory Link.

(more…)

I have been reading the SLR and though most of the laws mentioned are rather difficult for me, a layman, to understand, I do appreciate the articles and comments made on the Odex case. Will you continue to comment on recent developments and help the struggling public with some legal feedback please?

Odex is not RIAA

Firstly, allow me to clarify that I am in no way saying that downloading fansubbed (fans who subtitled broadcast anime) anime is or should be legal. Indeed some reporters have mistakenly reported that Odex has been threatening lawsuits on people downloading anime ripped from their dvds. I can hear the ringing laughter from the anime community in Singapore for this hilarious joke.

In the light of recent events happening in the USA where RIAA has won a court case, Odex no doubt will be rejoicing in their new article which they can blow up to A3 size and wave around in the faces of the newly odexed. (Yes that is what they actually do during their ’settlement talks’ and they have even attempted a similar approach in court itself.)

The buzz on the forums lately has been that they have now resorted to direct phone solicitation instead of the second wave of letters which bore their legal firm’s letterhead.

Why is that? So that there will be no proof of demand? Isn’t this degenerating into some sort of blackmail tactic similar to loanshark actions, especially in the light of events when Odex has not even won their appeal against Pacific Net. I urge the public to not be taken in by their scare tactics, and focus on the real issues that we see.

In their recent FAQ on their now de-funct forums dating from Sep 13 to Oct 3, Odex’s stand was, I would like to highlight several points…

I quote :

“How does the PacNet decision affect what Odex is doing?

The decision in the PacNet case has no impact on the rights of the copyright owners and/or exclusive licensees to protect and enforce the copyrighted works. The copyright owners and/or exclusive licensees continue to have the right to authorize Odex to liase and negotiate with individuals who have been identified as downloaders.

“We are honoring the negotiated settlements with those have negotiated with us. Individuals who have agreed to settlements are still required to pay their settlement amount or they face legal action from the copyright holder. Those individuals who have received letters but not yet contacted us must do so or they face legal action from the copyright holder.

We want to state that refunds are not available, as it would not be fair to those individuals who have negotiated with and paid us in good faith.

What are the potential penalties for downloading? Individuals who are found guilty of downloading face potential criminal charges or civil penalties (including fines). Students face the risk of having their Internet connectivity disconnected or being expelled from school. Internet Service Providers have acceptable use policies posted on their websites addressing potential actions for violating their terms of service.

But after Judge Lau’s ruling has cast doubt on the integrity of their evidence on 23 August 2007… If the actual copyright owners attempt to take people to court, they will be unlikely to use the evidence collected by Odex, since it is tainted and should be inadmissible in court.

Doesn’t this mean that the way they are currently still carrying out their settlement action is illegal?

And what is that about threatening to expel students from school? Does Odex have some sort of arrangement with the MOE that has not been made public?

Odex is nothing like RIAA, who is a trade group of record labels and distributors who take on cases together and no doubt settle the cases and their gained compensation in their own way.

But Odex is only a local distributor - sub licensee of anime titles.. Why wasn’t AVPAS the organisation to send out the letters of demand? Why was it Odex the private entity with every suspect of making profit from such an endeavour? Why was the letter of undertaking binding to Odex and not AVPAS? From the way this company keeps changing their stand, who is to say they will not take the people who has settled to court, armed with their signed ‘confession’ and a clause which actually revoked their right for legal defense.

Odex has claimed to have started tracking from end of last year and have made people settle what was backlogged to the end of last year and yet, in Peter Goh’s affidavit states that their license for tracking has only been from 29 January 2007 to 6 May 2007. They have done sub-standard subbing for their titles, and have tried to shift the blame onto the Board of Censors, who fortunately have kept up with current affairs and refuted their remarks immediately.

Are we to trust such a company , with their unprofessionalism and dubious actions, to be the one to address the online downloading issue? They have based their current actions on a law which was never meant to target the man on the street , but rather to curb commercial piracy.

Are we going to just stand by and let such atrocities carry on, especially to the children, because it does not affect us personally ?

We need a higher level of awareness from the government and we need them soon.

If the government will not protect your citizens against such a blatant lack of respect for the law, then who will?

I am not a legal expert and the above views are all of from the perspective of the man on the street.

Sincerely,
Serbene Liew

Abstract of the 21st SLR Lecture

Twenty years on Myanmar has come full circle, repeating the events of 1988. Myanmar’s Saffron Revolution has come to a brutal halt amidst public outrage worldwide. Violent repression, where the State turns its guns (more…)

(more…)

You are cordially invited to the
21^ST Singapore Law Review Lecture 2007

A Lecture and Panel Discussion by Professor Lim Chin Leng on

“From Constructive Engagement to Collective Revulsion: the Myanmar Precedent of 2007”

on Friday, 9 November 2007, 6.30pm
at the Multi-Purpose Auditorium (3^rd Floor)

National University of Singapore, Faculty of Law, Bukit Timah Campus

Followed by refreshments thereafter

If you wish to attend, please Register by 8^TH November 2007 at http://www.singaporelawreview.org/2007/10/registration-form-for-21st-slr-lecture/.

(more…)

- Learn to write a law journal-quality article!

-Guest Speaker: Professor Michael Hor

Have you ever wondered what goes into producing that amazingly well-researched and superbly argued article in law journals? Or are you a Year One suffering migraines over LAWR and hungry for tips on writing technique to take you through your next few years in law school?

If so, we have just the thing for you - join us at the annual SLR Workshop for a delightful session on 26th October (Friday), 1 pm at SR 4-3 where Professor Michael Hor will share with us techniques and thought processes in writing law journal-quality articles!

(more…)

If you have received an Invitation Card or Email to RSVP, you have arrived at the right page. See below or click more to fill in your particulars and we will look forward to seeing you! If you have no idea what this is about but you would like to come for the 21st Singapore Law Review Lecture, you might have been looking for this page instead.

(more…)

Seats are limited at our lecture, as demand is usually quite high :). Click more if you would like to put your name down and avoid disappointment. Also, don’t keep the good things in life to yourself — tell a friend about the Singapore Law Review Lecture you’re attending! Click on Share This at the bottom of the page to find out some of the ways you can share this page with your friends.

More details about the SLR Lecture. (more…)