geni wrote:
On 10/15/06, Ray Saintonge <saintonge(a)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