Lawyers in Dallas Buyers Club action face punishment
Lawyers in Dallas Buyers Club action face punishment
Jared Leto and Matthew McCounaughey in Dallas Buyers Club.
KOH SWEE FANG VALERIE
valeriekohsf@mediacorp.com.sg PUBLISHED: 4:15 AM, MAY 17, 2016
SINGAPORE — The Law Society of Singapore (LawSoc) will be going after two former lawyers of the legal firm representing United States film studio Dallas Buyers Club LLC, following a complaint lodged last year on their conduct in civil claims against illegal downloaders of the movie.
In a reply to the complainant Internet Society (Singapore), which TODAY has seen, the LawSoc said an inquiry committee has decided that a formal investigation by a disciplinary tribunal was not necessary, but that the lawyers in question “should be given a warning, reprimand or order to pay a penalty of not more than S$10,000”.
The exact punishment will be decided by the LawSoc council after the lawyers respond to whether or not they wish to be heard on their side of the story in the matter — a procedural requirement under the Legal Profession Act (LPA).
“If a penalty or reprimand is imposed by Council, it will be published in the Government Gazette as required under the LPA,” said the society in a May 11 letter to Mr Harish Pillay, who is immediate past president of Internet Society (Singapore), a non-governmental organisation promoting Internet usage. The LawSoc letter was signed off by its director of conduct and chairman of the inquiry committee K Gopalan.
When contacted yesterday, the society declined to comment. “Under the LPA, the Law Society is required to maintain confidentiality for disciplinary proceedings save for information which the Society is required by law to publish,” said a spokesperson.
In June last year, Internet Society (Singapore) complained to LawSoc that Mr Robert Raj Joseph and Mr Lee Heng Eam, who were both still with Samuel Seow Law Corporation then, had issued letters threatening criminal proceedings to advance civil claims against the film’s pirates. These demand letters to 77 M1 subscribers asking for a written offer of damages and costs had spelt out a maximum fine of S$50,000 or imprisonment not exceeding three years for a conviction under Section 136(3) of the Copyright Act, and a maximum S$20,000 fine and six months’ jail term under Section 136(3A) of the Act.
At that time, Mr Samuel Seow, the firm’s managing director, had said a new batch of letters that were worded differently were sent to StarHub and Singtel subscribers who allegedly downloaded the movie illegally. He had also said Mr Raj, who was the director of the litigation and dispute resolution practice group in the firm, was leaving the firm, but the departure was not linked to his handling of the case.
The Law Society’s Practice Directions and Rulings Guide 2013 states that it is improper for a solicitor to “communicate in writing or otherwise a threat of criminal proceedings in order to achieve a stated objective in any circumstance, for example, to compel a witness to attend at the solicitor’s office to give a statement or to sign a written statement despatched to him”.
Both Mr Raj and Mr Lee could not be reached for comments yesterday. After leaving the firm, Mr Raj set up his own practice in July last year. Mr Lee left after him, and has since become an in-house legal counsel, according to Mr Seow.
Mr Seow added that he had not heard of the latest development from the LawSoc. “It would not be right for me to comment on this,” he said. “We want to take the position that we protect copyright owners. It’s unfortunate, but they are my former employees.”
- wong chee tat :)
Showing posts with label Dallas Buyers Club. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dallas Buyers Club. Show all posts
Monday, May 23, 2016
Friday, February 12, 2016
Dallas Buyers Club abandons fight against Aussie pirates
Dallas Buyers Club abandons fight against Aussie pirates
Date: February 11, 2016
Hannah Francis
Technology Reporter
It's a happy day for Aussie pirates: The Hollywood studio behind the film Dallas Buyers Club has abandoned its fight to extract huge sums of cash from alleged copyright infringers.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC had until midday Thursday to lodge a second appeal against an August Federal Court decision which effectively prevented it from engaging in so-called "speculative invoicing" in Australia.
Michael Bradley of Marque Lawyers, who represented the studio in the case, confirmed to Fairfax Media the studio had not appealed the decision by the deadline.
He said while his client was disappointed by the final outcome of the case, it was not the end of the war against piracy in Australia.
"The problem isn't going away; Australia is still one of the most prominent jurisdictions for infringement, and rights holders will continue to feel that they're losing a lot of money, so I expect they'll continue to look for ways of deterring that behaviour," Mr Bradley said.
"The infringement is so large scale and the financial losses involved are so big, I don't think that's the end of the story."
He said the case was "very technical" and centred around access to information, with no bearing on the actual underlying legal issues of infringement and damages.
"Presumably infringers will be happy about the result; whether it will influence their behaviour [in regard to continuing to pirate], I have no idea," Mr Bradley said.
However Graham Phillips of Thomson Geer lawyers, who led the defence by iiNet and other internet service providers whose customers' details were at the centre of the case, said the outcome effectively defeated the speculative invoicing business model in Australia.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC's application ultimately failed because the studio overreached, he said.
"The demands they wanted to make were excessive, unsupported by the evidence they collected," Mr Phillips said.
Mr Phillips praised the ISPs for defending their customers' privacy, singling out iiNet's outspoken former chief regulatory officer Steve Dalby for leading the charge.
"The case is a great legacy for Steve Dalby ... who was keen to protect his customers from DBC's unfair speculative invoicing practice," Mr Phillips said.
Rights holders could succeed where Dallas Buyers Club had failed in obtaining details of alleged pirates, if they were able to prove in court their claims for damages would be reasonable and within the law, he said.
Federal Court Justice Nye Perram granted Dallas Buyers Club access to the names and addresses of the alleged pirates back in April, but put a temporary stay on access until the studio could prove to the court it would not threaten and pursue individuals for excessive amounts of money.
Justice Perram rejected "several versions" of the studio's proposed correspondence with individuals before deciding in August to lift the stay but impose strict conditions on access. These included that the studio only seek damages from individuals for the cost of obtaining the film plus some out-of-pocket expenses, and that it forfeit a $600,000 bond if the terms were breached. The restrictions effectively made any further action from the studio against individual pirates prohibitively expensive.
In September, Dallas Buyers Club LLC appealed the decision and sought access to the contact details of only 472 alleged pirates with a $60,000 bond – 10 per cent of the original amount – plus the right to seek further compensation. Justice Perram rejected the request in December, ordering the case to be thrown out on February 11 unless further action was taken.
- wong chee tat :)
Date: February 11, 2016
Hannah Francis
Technology Reporter
It's a happy day for Aussie pirates: The Hollywood studio behind the film Dallas Buyers Club has abandoned its fight to extract huge sums of cash from alleged copyright infringers.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC had until midday Thursday to lodge a second appeal against an August Federal Court decision which effectively prevented it from engaging in so-called "speculative invoicing" in Australia.
Michael Bradley of Marque Lawyers, who represented the studio in the case, confirmed to Fairfax Media the studio had not appealed the decision by the deadline.
He said while his client was disappointed by the final outcome of the case, it was not the end of the war against piracy in Australia.
"The problem isn't going away; Australia is still one of the most prominent jurisdictions for infringement, and rights holders will continue to feel that they're losing a lot of money, so I expect they'll continue to look for ways of deterring that behaviour," Mr Bradley said.
"The infringement is so large scale and the financial losses involved are so big, I don't think that's the end of the story."
He said the case was "very technical" and centred around access to information, with no bearing on the actual underlying legal issues of infringement and damages.
"Presumably infringers will be happy about the result; whether it will influence their behaviour [in regard to continuing to pirate], I have no idea," Mr Bradley said.
However Graham Phillips of Thomson Geer lawyers, who led the defence by iiNet and other internet service providers whose customers' details were at the centre of the case, said the outcome effectively defeated the speculative invoicing business model in Australia.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC's application ultimately failed because the studio overreached, he said.
"The demands they wanted to make were excessive, unsupported by the evidence they collected," Mr Phillips said.
Mr Phillips praised the ISPs for defending their customers' privacy, singling out iiNet's outspoken former chief regulatory officer Steve Dalby for leading the charge.
"The case is a great legacy for Steve Dalby ... who was keen to protect his customers from DBC's unfair speculative invoicing practice," Mr Phillips said.
Rights holders could succeed where Dallas Buyers Club had failed in obtaining details of alleged pirates, if they were able to prove in court their claims for damages would be reasonable and within the law, he said.
Federal Court Justice Nye Perram granted Dallas Buyers Club access to the names and addresses of the alleged pirates back in April, but put a temporary stay on access until the studio could prove to the court it would not threaten and pursue individuals for excessive amounts of money.
Justice Perram rejected "several versions" of the studio's proposed correspondence with individuals before deciding in August to lift the stay but impose strict conditions on access. These included that the studio only seek damages from individuals for the cost of obtaining the film plus some out-of-pocket expenses, and that it forfeit a $600,000 bond if the terms were breached. The restrictions effectively made any further action from the studio against individual pirates prohibitively expensive.
In September, Dallas Buyers Club LLC appealed the decision and sought access to the contact details of only 472 alleged pirates with a $60,000 bond – 10 per cent of the original amount – plus the right to seek further compensation. Justice Perram rejected the request in December, ordering the case to be thrown out on February 11 unless further action was taken.
- wong chee tat :)
Friday, April 10, 2015
Dallas Buyers Club downloads: M1 passed customer details to law firm on court order
Dallas Buyers Club downloads: M1 passed customer details to law firm on court order
The Singapore telco says it was acting on an order from the High Court, which has also been received by StarHub
PUBLISHED: 10:01 AM, APRIL 8, 2015
SINGAPORE — Following a court order, M1 said it has disclosed customer information to a local law firm over alleged illegal movie downloads.
In response to queries from Channel NewsAsia, an M1 spokesperson said today (April 8) that it disclosed customers’ names, NRIC numbers and addresses to Dallas Buyers Club LLC following a High Court order in January.
The telco was responding to reports that customers who allegedly made illegal downloads of the movie Dallas Buyers Club had received letters asking for compensation. The letters reportedly claimed that M1 had received a court order to reveal subscribers’ information to a law firm representing Dallas Buyers Club LLC.
“M1 did not provide personal data of the affected customers to Dallas Buyers Club LLC when it first requested for the information,” a spokesperson for the telco told Channel NewsAsia today.
“Dallas Buyers Club LLC subsequently applied for a hearing at the High Court. After hearing the parties, the Assistant Registrar of the High Court granted an order compelling M1 to disclose the names, NRIC numbers and physical addresses of the affected customers.”
“M1 has accordingly complied with this order.”
STARHUB 'IN PROCESS OF COMPLYING'
Separately, StarHub on Wednesday told Channel NewsAsia that it had also received the High Court order.
“We have received a High Court order to provide details of some customers based on particular IP addresses, and are in the process of complying with this court order,” said Ms Caitlin Fua, Assistant Vice-President of corporate communications at StarHub.
StarHub added that it has engaged external litigation to act for the company, to "ensure that the plaintiff’s claim is properly assessed by the High Court".
On Monday, internet service providers in Australia were forced to hand over the personal details of almost 5,000 users who were alleged to have shared the movie on online file-sharing networks such as BitTorrent. Similar action is being sought by Dallas Buyers Club LLC in the United States.
The movie, made on a US$5 million (S$6.79 million) budget, won Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and Best Makeup at the 86th Academy Awards in 2014. CHANNEL NEWSASIA
- wong chee tat ):
The Singapore telco says it was acting on an order from the High Court, which has also been received by StarHub
PUBLISHED: 10:01 AM, APRIL 8, 2015
SINGAPORE — Following a court order, M1 said it has disclosed customer information to a local law firm over alleged illegal movie downloads.
In response to queries from Channel NewsAsia, an M1 spokesperson said today (April 8) that it disclosed customers’ names, NRIC numbers and addresses to Dallas Buyers Club LLC following a High Court order in January.
The telco was responding to reports that customers who allegedly made illegal downloads of the movie Dallas Buyers Club had received letters asking for compensation. The letters reportedly claimed that M1 had received a court order to reveal subscribers’ information to a law firm representing Dallas Buyers Club LLC.
“M1 did not provide personal data of the affected customers to Dallas Buyers Club LLC when it first requested for the information,” a spokesperson for the telco told Channel NewsAsia today.
“Dallas Buyers Club LLC subsequently applied for a hearing at the High Court. After hearing the parties, the Assistant Registrar of the High Court granted an order compelling M1 to disclose the names, NRIC numbers and physical addresses of the affected customers.”
“M1 has accordingly complied with this order.”
STARHUB 'IN PROCESS OF COMPLYING'
Separately, StarHub on Wednesday told Channel NewsAsia that it had also received the High Court order.
“We have received a High Court order to provide details of some customers based on particular IP addresses, and are in the process of complying with this court order,” said Ms Caitlin Fua, Assistant Vice-President of corporate communications at StarHub.
StarHub added that it has engaged external litigation to act for the company, to "ensure that the plaintiff’s claim is properly assessed by the High Court".
On Monday, internet service providers in Australia were forced to hand over the personal details of almost 5,000 users who were alleged to have shared the movie on online file-sharing networks such as BitTorrent. Similar action is being sought by Dallas Buyers Club LLC in the United States.
The movie, made on a US$5 million (S$6.79 million) budget, won Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and Best Makeup at the 86th Academy Awards in 2014. CHANNEL NEWSASIA
- wong chee tat ):
Illegal downloads: Singtel provides subscriber details after court order
Illegal downloads: Singtel provides subscriber details after court order
PUBLISHED: 12:57 PM, APRIL 8, 2015
UPDATED: 4:10 AM, APRIL 9, 2015
SINGAPORE — Singtel today (April 8) become the latest Internet service provider (ISP) here to comply with a court order to release the details of subscribers who allegedly downloaded the Oscar-winning film Dallas Buyers Club illegally.
A Singtel spokesperson said today it received the High Court’s order yesterday. It must now turn over requested information, including the names, IC numbers and addresses of subscribers linked to the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses identified, of some 150 subscribers to Dallas Buyers Club LLC, which owns the film’s rights, by the end of the month.
The telco, she said, had received a letter in October last year from Samuel Seow Law Corporation, which represents the United States-based film studio’s suit in Singapore, requesting identities of some of its subscribers.
It had refused to comply with the court order, and engaged a lawyer to contest the order.
Lawyer Edmund Eng from law firm Shook Lin and Bok had argued that Singtel had a legal obligation to keep its customers’ information confidential and requested the court to consider if evidence provided by Dallas Buyers Club LLC was sufficient to support their claims of infringement and compel disclosure of subscribers’ identities. However, the court allowed the order to proceed.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC has reportedly identified more than 500 Singapore IP addresses here through which the movie was said to have been downloaded illegally. Apart from Singtel, both M1 and Starhub, which had also engaged lawyers, were ordered by the court to turn over information about their subscribers.
Over the weekend, letters were reportedly sent to Internet users here asking for a written offer of damages and costs within three days of receiving the letter.
Lawyer Wendy Low from Rajah & Tann LLP said she has received informal queries seeking legal advice and confirmed the letters did not specify the amount of damages sought.
This is unlike the approach taken in the US, where legal action has been threatened against 1,000 Internet users. The users were told they were liable for damages of up to US$150,000 (S$202,500) in court unless settlement fees of up to US$7,000 were paid, reported the Sydney Morning Herald.
In Australia, the Federal Court yesterday ordered six local ISPs to disclose the identities of some 4,700 people it alleges infringed the film’s copyrights.
Lawyers TODAY spoke to found it unusual that a settlement amount has not been specified in Singapore. Digital media lawyer Matt Pollins from Olswang Asia noted it is difficult to determine a precise level of damages here as there are fewer past cases of infringement claims against end users, in contrast to the US where benchmarks are more certain.
Under the Republic’s Copyright Act, statutory damages are subject to a ceiling of S$10,000 for each copyrighted work.
Mr Bryan Tan from Pinsent Masons said that the studio might be lending users a hand by allowing them to make offers reasonable to them. “This will also allow them to resolve more cases faster,” he said.
Technology and intellectual property lawyer Han Teng Wah, however, felt legal action is not the best way to deter copyright infringement.
“The people you round up are young and ignorant, they may not know what their legal rights are. The system should move to educate users on how illegal sharing will kill the creative industry,” said Mr Han.
- wong chee tat :)
PUBLISHED: 12:57 PM, APRIL 8, 2015
UPDATED: 4:10 AM, APRIL 9, 2015
SINGAPORE — Singtel today (April 8) become the latest Internet service provider (ISP) here to comply with a court order to release the details of subscribers who allegedly downloaded the Oscar-winning film Dallas Buyers Club illegally.
A Singtel spokesperson said today it received the High Court’s order yesterday. It must now turn over requested information, including the names, IC numbers and addresses of subscribers linked to the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses identified, of some 150 subscribers to Dallas Buyers Club LLC, which owns the film’s rights, by the end of the month.
The telco, she said, had received a letter in October last year from Samuel Seow Law Corporation, which represents the United States-based film studio’s suit in Singapore, requesting identities of some of its subscribers.
It had refused to comply with the court order, and engaged a lawyer to contest the order.
Lawyer Edmund Eng from law firm Shook Lin and Bok had argued that Singtel had a legal obligation to keep its customers’ information confidential and requested the court to consider if evidence provided by Dallas Buyers Club LLC was sufficient to support their claims of infringement and compel disclosure of subscribers’ identities. However, the court allowed the order to proceed.
Dallas Buyers Club LLC has reportedly identified more than 500 Singapore IP addresses here through which the movie was said to have been downloaded illegally. Apart from Singtel, both M1 and Starhub, which had also engaged lawyers, were ordered by the court to turn over information about their subscribers.
Over the weekend, letters were reportedly sent to Internet users here asking for a written offer of damages and costs within three days of receiving the letter.
Lawyer Wendy Low from Rajah & Tann LLP said she has received informal queries seeking legal advice and confirmed the letters did not specify the amount of damages sought.
This is unlike the approach taken in the US, where legal action has been threatened against 1,000 Internet users. The users were told they were liable for damages of up to US$150,000 (S$202,500) in court unless settlement fees of up to US$7,000 were paid, reported the Sydney Morning Herald.
In Australia, the Federal Court yesterday ordered six local ISPs to disclose the identities of some 4,700 people it alleges infringed the film’s copyrights.
Lawyers TODAY spoke to found it unusual that a settlement amount has not been specified in Singapore. Digital media lawyer Matt Pollins from Olswang Asia noted it is difficult to determine a precise level of damages here as there are fewer past cases of infringement claims against end users, in contrast to the US where benchmarks are more certain.
Under the Republic’s Copyright Act, statutory damages are subject to a ceiling of S$10,000 for each copyrighted work.
Mr Bryan Tan from Pinsent Masons said that the studio might be lending users a hand by allowing them to make offers reasonable to them. “This will also allow them to resolve more cases faster,” he said.
Technology and intellectual property lawyer Han Teng Wah, however, felt legal action is not the best way to deter copyright infringement.
“The people you round up are young and ignorant, they may not know what their legal rights are. The system should move to educate users on how illegal sharing will kill the creative industry,” said Mr Han.
- wong chee tat :)
Mixed response from local film-makers on illegal download crackdown
Mixed response from local film-makers on illegal download crackdown
Some say movie piracy penalties must have ‘bite’ to be effective while others say in order to curb piracy education is better than punishment
BY SERENE LIM
PUBLISHED: 11:33 AM, APRIL 9, 2015
UPDATED: 11:34 AM, APRIL 9, 2015
SINGAPORE — Responses from the film community here to the news that the producers of the Oscar-winning movie Dallas Buyers Club are seeking compensation for allegedly illegal downloads have been mixed.
Some felt the move made a strong statement against piracy, while others felt it would do little to stamp out the problem as new ways will be found to circumvent any crackdown.
The studio, Dallas Buyers Club LLC, has identified more than 500 Internet Protocol addresses in Singapore and has hired Samuel Seow Law Corporation to serve letters to them, demanding compensation. Internet service providers M1, StarHub and Singtel have been ordered by the High Court to turn over the identities of their subscribers who allegedly downloaded the film.
Mr Thomas Chia, director of independent film distributing company Lighthouse Pictures, said the move was a welcome one. “Piracy to me is like mugging of film-makers and everyone who works on a film in broad daylight,” he said. “Look at how piracy has affected the film industry — mum and pop video stores have gone under. What disturbs me is how so many people think it’s their birthright to download, and that there’s nothing wrong at all (with illegal downloading).”
However, film-maker Royston Tan, best known for box office successes 881 and 12 Lotus, said he was not in favour of legal action, because “it’s like severing a relationship with the audience”.
“The more you suppress it, the more people will find ways to get around this. They can change their IP addresses or use a VPN (Virtual Private Number),” said Mr Tan, adding that education was better than punishment.
Mr Ken Kwek, the director of Unlucky Plaza, which is set for release later this month, felt such a crackdown would probably result in people finding new means to get free movies. “I guard my work from script to screen, but once the film’s been released, especially on online platforms and digital formats, I know somebody’s going to pirate it,” he said. “Maybe I’m pessimistic, but I don’t think there’s anything you can really do to prevent piracy. It’s too big a thing.”
Mr Chia was also sceptical if legal action would be the silver bullet to end piracy. “It would depend on severity of the penalty. It has to bite for it to be effective,” he added. SERENE LIM
- wong chee tat :)
Some say movie piracy penalties must have ‘bite’ to be effective while others say in order to curb piracy education is better than punishment
BY SERENE LIM
PUBLISHED: 11:33 AM, APRIL 9, 2015
UPDATED: 11:34 AM, APRIL 9, 2015
SINGAPORE — Responses from the film community here to the news that the producers of the Oscar-winning movie Dallas Buyers Club are seeking compensation for allegedly illegal downloads have been mixed.
Some felt the move made a strong statement against piracy, while others felt it would do little to stamp out the problem as new ways will be found to circumvent any crackdown.
The studio, Dallas Buyers Club LLC, has identified more than 500 Internet Protocol addresses in Singapore and has hired Samuel Seow Law Corporation to serve letters to them, demanding compensation. Internet service providers M1, StarHub and Singtel have been ordered by the High Court to turn over the identities of their subscribers who allegedly downloaded the film.
Mr Thomas Chia, director of independent film distributing company Lighthouse Pictures, said the move was a welcome one. “Piracy to me is like mugging of film-makers and everyone who works on a film in broad daylight,” he said. “Look at how piracy has affected the film industry — mum and pop video stores have gone under. What disturbs me is how so many people think it’s their birthright to download, and that there’s nothing wrong at all (with illegal downloading).”
However, film-maker Royston Tan, best known for box office successes 881 and 12 Lotus, said he was not in favour of legal action, because “it’s like severing a relationship with the audience”.
“The more you suppress it, the more people will find ways to get around this. They can change their IP addresses or use a VPN (Virtual Private Number),” said Mr Tan, adding that education was better than punishment.
Mr Ken Kwek, the director of Unlucky Plaza, which is set for release later this month, felt such a crackdown would probably result in people finding new means to get free movies. “I guard my work from script to screen, but once the film’s been released, especially on online platforms and digital formats, I know somebody’s going to pirate it,” he said. “Maybe I’m pessimistic, but I don’t think there’s anything you can really do to prevent piracy. It’s too big a thing.”
Mr Chia was also sceptical if legal action would be the silver bullet to end piracy. “It would depend on severity of the penalty. It has to bite for it to be effective,” he added. SERENE LIM
- wong chee tat :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)