geni wrote:
On 10/15/06, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
It would be interesting to see how Philippine courts have ruled on this.
Unlikely that they have.
That's probably correct.
The law as stated does contradict itself, and in those circumstances it is prefectly normal to choose the interpretation that most suits us.
No it isn't. It is prefectly normal to choose the interpretation that a) is legaly correct and b) keeps us safe.
I guess you don't read many legal reports. In ambiguous circumstances either position is legally correct. Beyond that there comes a point where the notion of keeping safe is nothing more than a coward's retreat into paranoia.
If a government drafts its legislation badly it needs to accept the consequences. I think that using such material as public domain material is perfectly safe.
Are you offering to be a test case?
I can very easily say, "Yes," based on the available information. Nevertheless, the complete unlikelihood of such a case makes either a "Yes" or a "No" response hollow and unrealistic. In such a case I can, however, safely presume that I would be the defendant rather than the plaintiff. Before there can be a case there also needs to be an allegation of a specific violation, and any test case cannot be purely theoretical. As the potential defendant my decision would depend on the particular text, image, or other medium in dispute. Who then would be the plaintiff? What country's courts would have jurisdiction? If this is to be handled by Philippine courts, how effective could they be in enforcing these decisions in other countries without starting up a whole new case in another country.
Your question is an empty bluff.
Ec