I WAS surprised to read that according to a Law Ministry spokesman, US law does not require network service providers (NSPs) to restore or "put back" a website if the website owner challenges an accusation of copyright infringement in "Copyright Act keeps online industry safe" (ST, Dec 15).
The US Copyright Office's analysis of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) states:
"If the subscriber serves a counter notification ... then unless the copyright owner files an action seeking a court order against the subscriber, the service provider must put the material back up within 10 to 14 business days".
This analysis as well as the full text of the DMCA are available at http://www. lcweb.loc.gov/copyright. Relevant extracts of the Singapore Act are available for comparison at http://www.sintercom.org.
The spokesman also claims that under Singapore's amended Copyright Act, NSPs would be less likely to pull out materials because the amendments reduce their legal liability.
In fact, the amendments do not reduce NSP's liability to copyright owners once an accusation of infringement has been made.
Since it is only copyright owners, not subscribers, who would sue an NSP to block a website, it seems more likely that Singapore's amendments will impede, rather than enhance, the free flow of information.
There is a marked difference in the way Singapore copyright law treats physical and virtual goods. For physical goods, copyright owners can ask the Customs and Excise Department to seize any imports which they allege are infringing copyright.
However, seized goods are automatically released after 10 working days unless the copyright owner can obtain a court order confirming the seizure. Prior to the seizure, the copyright owner may also be required to post a bond to cover the government's cost and potential damages to the importer.
A fair and efficient legal system was one of the foundations of Singapore's development as a sea port and trading centre.
Today, as we enter the digital era, Singapore's copyright law is efficient for copyright owners but it falls short of being fair.
NGIAM SHIH TUNG
Originally published in the Straits Times, December 27, 1999.