|
following the news of the 6 bloggers being charged for insulting the sultan, an eLawyer law conference 2009 themed ‘Blogging and Law’ was held on saturday. from what the lawyers had said there, it seems to me that i would have broken so many laws when blogging!
for the simple fact of posting a youtube video on my blog, it is consider ‘infringing copyright law’. huh? really? not only did i did it most of the time but almost all bloggers also did. you visit any blogs, most of the time you see a youtube video posted on the blogs and the bloggers never mentioned from where the video came or who made the video. from the NST article, ‘blog with care‘ (which i will provide the full article at the end of the post), according to lawyer foong cheng leong, if you post a youtube video: "You would have infringed copyright laws as you have reproduced material without consent"
sounds crazy to me. youtube videos are all over the net and anyone can take them and simply post them on their blogs or website - do we need to find out who the video belongs to and write to him/her for permission to use it? the video that appears on youtube does have the name of those who made the video but not necessary have their contacts. and i believe once someone posted up his/her video up on youtube, s/he wants people to use it! to pass it around! to post up on blog! If an image is taken of a website and posted on a blog, said Foong, the defence of fair dealing would be available if the website was credited to the proper owner.
well this i understand; that’s why i usually credit the image i put up on my blog, though at times i forgot or thought not necessary so. i find out though most bloggers didn’t! even famous bloggers like zorro, who have lots of images up - he never mentioned where he got those images from. maverick from cakap tak serupa bikin also is one of them who didn’t mention where he get the image from. i remember once i like an image he put up on his blog and wanted to copy it to put on my blog BUT before i did that, i asked him where he get the image from but he said he didn’t know, he had forgotten! this means at the time of posting it up, he already didn’t bother to credit the image. What if you link your blog to a website that contains defama-tory information or images? The courts, said Nizam, had held that it was fine if the link just contains the name of the site as opposed to its uniform resource locator.
well i did that several times before but of course each time i did it, i put in the link. i don’t quite understand the above. ‘link of the name of the site’ means i’ll have to put in the URL but it why nizam said "as opposed to tis URL"? Read more on how many other ways we have broken the law (and didn't the Sultan's webmaster break the law as well) at: http://lucialai.org/2009/03/16/2924/
 |
Tried Blocking website without knowing the use of mirror sites etc...., and now trying to hold individuals liable from statement posted by commenters.
Multimedia Super Corridor konon.....