LEGAL THREATS AGAINST DOWNLOADERS PROVOKE ANIMATED

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 SINGAPORE 001736 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE PASS TO USTR FOR AUSTR WEISEL, DAUSTR BELL, AND TBOLLYKY COPYRIGHT OFFICE FOR MPOOR E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KIPR ECPS EINT ECON ETRD EINV SN SUBJECT: LEGAL THREATS AGAINST DOWNLOADERS PROVOKE ANIMATED RESPONSE ¶1. (U) Summary: Recent events involving local anime (Japanese animation) distributor Odex highlight that Singapore is still struggling with certain facets of promoting and protecting intellectual property rights (IPR). Following a difficult enforcement campaign, Odex announced September 5 it would not take action against Internet users it had accused of illegally downloading copyrighted material. Odex's decision came after a judge on August 23 did not compel Internet service provider (ISP) Pacific Internet (PacNet) to release the names of subscribers suspected of illicit downloading. Different judges had previously ruled that two other Singaporean ISPs must turn over lists of subscribers to Odex. End summary. Background -------------- ¶2. (U) Singapore prides itself on having an IP enforcement regime that is arguably the strongest in the region, and it acknowledges the role its commitments under the U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement have played in this process. The government runs a highly visible campaign that urges young people to "honor intellectual property," and overall physical piracy rates are dropping. However, file sharing via the Internet and other electronic means is rising, according to industry representatives. Tokyo, We Have a Problem -------------- ¶3. (U) Odex conducted a six-month monitoring program in 2006 that uncovered more that 400,000 instances of illegal anime downloads in Singapore, CEO Stephen Sing told us recently. After reviewing the results of the study, an industry group comprised of Japanese anime companies authorized Odex to take action on behalf of its members, he said. In May 2007, Odex filed applications asking the Singapore court to compel the country's three ISPs -- Pacific Internet (PacNet),Singapore Telecommunications (SingNet),and StarHub -- to reveal the names of subscribers that Odex believed were involved in illegal downloading. A Surprise in Mailbox -------------- ¶4. (SBU) The SingNet and StarHub cases concluded quickly in favor of Odex. The company began sending out letters that contained an offer to settle out of court for sums ranging from S$3000 to S$5000 (US$2000 to US$3300). Approximately 40 percent of letter recipients, or their parents, had already complied with the terms of the letter, according to Sing. Odex used all monies collected to defray associated administrative costs. Sing asserted that neither Odex nor the companies it represented had profited from the campaign. PacNet--Odd Man Out -------------- ¶5. (SBU) Unlike the SingNet and Starhub cases, the PacNet case did not conclude for several months, and the judge eventually ruled against Odex. He questioned whether Odex was the correct party to act on behalf of the rights holders. Odex's attorney said he was surprised by the judge's reasoning, in particular because PacNet had not raised this issue during the hearing. Furthermore, both SingNet and StarHub had pursued this line of defense, which was rejected by two other judges. Odex's attorney speculated that backlash after the first rulings might have affected the judge's decision in the PacNet case. Revenge of the Nerds -------------- ¶6. (U) Odex's actions went relatively unnoticed by the general public until Sing made statements online in early August to the effect that suing people was consuming all of his time. His comments roiled the anime community, which up to that point had limited its reaction to chat room rants and relatively benign anonymous e-mails, according to Sing. After Sing's comments, the attacks turned personal. SINGAPORE 00001736 002 OF 002 Detractors began posting pictures of him and his wife and issuing death threats. Sing turned to the police, and the local media began covering the story in depth. Trial by Press -------------- ¶7. (SBU) A Straits Times (ST) newspaper columnist recently penned several articles that appear to favor the downloaders. (Note: ST is owned by Singapore Press Holdings, a private company with close ties to the government. End note.) The writer at first questioned whether the "fair use" provision of Singapore's Copyright Act might exonerate the accused. A regional representative of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) described this line of defense as "ridiculous." The ST columnist then changed tactics and wrote two articles suggesting that privacy should take precedence over "narrow interests", i.e., intellectual property rights. Odex's attorney called the articles "very irresponsible," and questioned ST's decision not to publish any of the counter-arguments Odex and AVPAS had submitted to the newspaper. Comment -------------- ¶8. (SBU) The GOS has been known to use Singapore's tightly controlled press to address problems and gauge public interest before announcing policy decisions via a carefully orchestrated outreach. The reluctance of its media to run articles fully debating the downloading issue suggests ambivalence in certain quarters about how far IPR enforcement against individual users should extend. We will closely monitor whether the recent ST articles translate into backpedaling on Singapore's enforcement of its IPR commitments under the FTA. Visit Embassy Singapore's Classified website: http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/eap/singapore/ind ex.cfm HERBOLD