Bro, u spokeman for QALA?...:think:
:bsmilie::sweatsm:
Odex Directors wanna sue anime downloaders in Singapore.
- Thread starter FooFighter
- Start date
- Status
:bsmilie::sweatsm:
Del_CtrlnoAlt
Senior Member
dun report to IRAS ok... :sweatsm:
okie, okie....
actually very disappointed with the way Sinktell handled the whole episode, showing a total disregard of the trust, a betrayer, they have with their subscribers ..... they did not even TRY to stand up for their customers! :cry::cry:
if only they fought back ........
what QALA?
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/cna/20070825/tap-odex-had-no-right-of-civil-action-ag-231650b.html
this keeps getting better and better. Judge Lau is truly a learned man!!!
Del_CtrlnoAlt
Senior Member
Del_CtrlnoAlt
Senior Member
hehe, only got license for Gundam Seed.... no license for Gundam Seed Destiny... ho say liao..
Hooray for Pacnet.
Singnet & Starhub :sticktong. When will they stand up for their customers. Have they not heard of privacy.
How come our laws so confusing. One judge said this; another said that. So who is right?
Del_CtrlnoAlt
Senior Member
well, depends how the lawyers present themselves to the judge wat, jugde only base on what is presented before him to make judgement...
obviously, pacnet lawyers are reading our threads and form various sources... i suspect vince123123 is the lawyer for pacnet... :devil:
hopefully its the same judge or a like minded one.
glennyong
Senior Member
Jury ?
i think Odex confirm lose until siao.... no matter what happens, the public will not agree to such punishments metted out by such people.
and when the accuse lawyers throw out information about the game shop thing.. sure xedo lose the case one...
no clean records already... and they can all GG... :bsmilie:
In the first ST and SH, there wasnt any real defence. It wouldnt appear good if any bros change the verdict since the judgement was spelt out in details...... Odex had "no right of civil action" against illegal downloaders.
In fact, I believe even the first batch of downloaders who received the letters can just junk the letters away ....:think:
Odex never learnt anything from the old NKF .... "dont bank your luck too far. If the going is too good, it's time to stop" .... If only Odex would stop and "forgive" all those downloaders and not going for the PN lists, they would have received "unmeasurable GOODWILL" (which they do not even deserved) from everyone. It simply a case of being too greedy la .... $3,000 x 3,000 = $9,000,000 +
still it means something that the judge point out that singnet did nothing...shows that he wants to listen to both sides.
Ok, wait. Which Jeannie are u all talking about? The lady with the 70-200VR in her avatar? The very same one?
But personally, the MOST INTERESTING parts which I'd found frm TodayOnline was from this:
Out of 13 authorisation letters ONLY 3 (distributors themselves and not the copyright holders) directly appointed Odex to act for them.
Now check this out....
The letters of demand that were sent out to the infringers carried the Odex Letterhead INSTEAD OF AVPAS OR R&T's LAW FIRM LETTERHEAD.
Granted, someone did mentioned about law firm drafting 1 letter as a template and the company to save cost uses their own letterhead. However, Odex, being a member of AVPAS seems to be using its membership within AVPAS to carry out such a *erm* "Draconian" act which it currently SEEMS TO BE the sole member of.
In addition to the contradiction which Odex seemed to have continually shot itself in the foot with....
$3000 to $5000 compensation? The open letter that was sent to Talkback Live 938, The New Paper as well as what was being told to those who made appointment and went down to the office, the $3K to $5K 'compensation' was actually to cover the 'administrative & investigation costs' and in apparently no way it was a settlement fee.
The extremely skewered clauses in the LoU clauses 5, 6 & 7 seemed to skewer things in their extreme favour and apparently ppl who had signed the LoU probably did it under duress facing the 'potential charge of infringing copyright law' (as we could see some of the anguish blogs around). Could anyone reasonably well-versed in Business Law tell us what would happen to a contract or any LoU if its signed UNDER DURESS?
And lastly...
Hmm.... BAYTSP DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE IN FAVOUR OF ODEX? Well, well, well....
What are potentially looking at in this situation? I'm not insuniating at anything whatsoever ok.
And finally
1 upz for the Learned & Wise Judge Mr Earnest Lau!
In their open letter found on their website: www.odex.com.sg, which was filed on 20 August 2007 (Singapore). It was mentioned that....
Reference Paragraph 10, Line 2
Given a conservative estimate of 50% off the figure of 1000 IP addresses which would mean approximately 500 subscribers were involved.
It would mean (given the maximum estimated 'admin fee claimed' of $5K):
SGD$5000 x 500 = SGD$2.5 million
Erm... dat doesn't really mean u can continue downloading leh. :sweat:
P/S: Are u in the IT line as well? *ahem*
Ok, wait. Which Jeannie are u all talking about? The lady with the 70-200VR in her avatar? The very same one?
But personally, the MOST INTERESTING parts which I'd found frm TodayOnline was from this:
Out of 13 authorisation letters ONLY 3 (distributors themselves and not the copyright holders) directly appointed Odex to act for them.
Now check this out....
The letters of demand that were sent out to the infringers carried the Odex Letterhead INSTEAD OF AVPAS OR R&T's LAW FIRM LETTERHEAD.
Granted, someone did mentioned about law firm drafting 1 letter as a template and the company to save cost uses their own letterhead. However, Odex, being a member of AVPAS seems to be using its membership within AVPAS to carry out such a *erm* "Draconian" act which it currently SEEMS TO BE the sole member of.
In addition to the contradiction which Odex seemed to have continually shot itself in the foot with....
$3000 to $5000 compensation? The open letter that was sent to Talkback Live 938, The New Paper as well as what was being told to those who made appointment and went down to the office, the $3K to $5K 'compensation' was actually to cover the 'administrative & investigation costs' and in apparently no way it was a settlement fee.
The extremely skewered clauses in the LoU clauses 5, 6 & 7 seemed to skewer things in their extreme favour and apparently ppl who had signed the LoU probably did it under duress facing the 'potential charge of infringing copyright law' (as we could see some of the anguish blogs around). Could anyone reasonably well-versed in Business Law tell us what would happen to a contract or any LoU if its signed UNDER DURESS?
And lastly...
Hmm.... BAYTSP DID NOT GIVE EVIDENCE IN FAVOUR OF ODEX? Well, well, well....
What are potentially looking at in this situation? I'm not insuniating at anything whatsoever ok.
And finally
1 upz for the Learned & Wise Judge Mr Earnest Lau!
need to wait and see what happen in 13 days. IF appeal falls thru for them, they're finished.
V
vince123123
Guest
Hehe looks like what I've been saying about owner/exclusive licensee has been picked up on and endorsed by the court 
- Status
Similar threads
