back to article Singapore decides 'three strikes' laws are too intrusive

Singapore's Ministry of Law has decided that a “three strikes” regime for online copyright infringement is too intrusive for Internet users, and has excluded such an approach from consultations over takedown mechanisms. The consultation, described in full here, is canvassing changes to that country's copyright act to deal with …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Thorne

    Too intrusive for Singapore

    Just right for Australia.....

    1. Eradicate all BB entrants

      Re: Too intrusive for Singapore

      Would it make it better if you had Nick Fury/Samuel L. Jackson telling you about internet filters like us lucky folks in the UK get?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Too intrusive for Singapore

        Wow, we only get him for Capital One credit cards over here.

        1. Eradicate all BB entrants

          Re: Too intrusive for Singapore


          We also had Bruce Willis informing us about download limits and Al Pacino discussing bandwidth (While practicing his golf drive atop a white grand piano).

  2. Justin Stringfellow


    What, too difficult to think of something that wasn't identical to the headline?

    Need the el reg headstone icon back please.

    1. M Gale

      Re: subheading

      I think an easy one would be to append "...for SINGAPORE!?"

      Yeah. When the Singapore govt says something is too intrusive, the govts in the West who are lapping the bullshit up like coprophagic dogs really should sit up and fucking well listen.

      To add a little bit of hyperbole, that's like a certain charismatic German leader from the 1930s to 1940s saying that what you're doing to them jews is a bit harsh.

  3. frank ly

    re. " ... Singapore’s context ..."

    Do they mean the local culture and 'social norms' would feel this was too intrusive? I thought that Singapore was a place where the government forbids you to chew gum and forces 'long' haired males to have a haircut before they can enter the country.

    Can anyone who knows Singapore well comment on this?

    1. jungle_jim

      Re: re. " ... Singapore’s context ..."

      The long hair thing is bollocks these days, don't know about before though.

      That said

      I didn't see anyone chewing gum, and when I brought some over from the UK the guys in the office got really excited about it.

      I was lead to believe you could only get gum from a pharmacy.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: re. " ... Singapore’s context ..."

        Internet in Singapore is govenment sanctioned anyway, and you need to be fairly savvy to get around the blocks. So if you're using the necessary VPNs, encryption etc, the government actually getting a strike on you is probably quite hard.

        Importing gum over and above "personal use" still carrys harsh penalties, but not as harsh as they used to be (which was 1 year in jail and 5,000GBP fine as recently ago as 2004)

        It's a clinically clean country - basically if you can imagine someone with OCD getting their way by making anything that pissed them off illegal by way of fines, jail and floggings, including complaining about it then you're not far off. That of course does mean it's a kind of paradise - clean, crime free, people are never out to take advantage of you; until you get to view the undercurrents within the populous from being so controlled, and if you like to live dangerously, well good luck. you'd last a week. That and after 6 months it's just... boring. Maths and science are given huge importance, but to the point where art, culture and expression is squashed. Being in Singapore for too long feels like all work and no play.

        But if they're saying 3 strikes is too harsh, then yes, you bloody well listen. It's like the music industry admitting they were wrong about internet downloads. Well, maybe not quite - the Singaporean government may be controlling, but the reason they've got away without a revolution for so long is because they make good, solid, logical arguments about their laws which are very hard to disagree with.

        1. dogged

          Re: re. " ... Singapore’s context ..."

          I miss Singapore.

          Amazing food, nice people, sticky climate but who cares, tall buildings, crazy jungle and work 14 hours days six days per week.


          Better than being in the UK, having childcare to do after work, a commute via First Great Western Fuck You We Already Got Your Money, Bitch and this shitty weather.

      2. Triggerfish

        Re: re. " ... Singapore’s context ..."

        AFAIK the laws against long hair was introduced due to hippies it gave customs an excuse to turn them away at the borders, (although I think it was also enforced if you were a gov worker - long hair was associated with the drug culture and they are very much against that sort of thing).

        The gum was because they thought it was a real litter problem.

  4. Paul0987

    Singapore is a leading nation other nations should follow

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Singapore justice 1.0

    The Rattan Cane!

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Singapore's three stikes, usually...

    Whack!, whack!, whack!

  7. Robert Grant

    No RIAA lobbyist money

    That's why.

  8. JaitcH

    There must be an ulterior reason ...

    for the ever dictatorial Singapore to do this.

    Singapore has newspaper censorship; radio & TV censorship, movie censorship; it monitors all domestic InterNet connections ruthlessly; telephone calls are monitored voice + metadata. An really oppressive system. And their are limits on chewing gum!

    An Three Strikes is right down the single governments alley.

    So, the question is, Why?

    1. Youngdog

      Re: There must be an ulterior reason ..

      No ulterior motive required - just an understanding of realpolitik out there

      Singtel, Starhub and M1 were all spawned from the national telecoms one way or another and Temasek Holdings still has fingers in all the pies so making ISPs liable is in not in the Governments interests. Allowing overseas copyright owners to extract money from the population under the government's noses is also undesirable - it undermines their authority and suggests Sing's house isn't in order!

  9. Oninoshiko

    whoda thunk it?

    Guilt should be decided by a court.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019