On May 21, the Ministry of Economic Affairs’ Intellectual Property Office (IPO) proposed an amendment to the Copyright Act (著作權法) to block foreign Web sites that engage in copyright violations. While the proposal triggered considerable opposition, the office said the public was exaggerating the issue.
However, the amendment will likely not be enough to curb copyright violations, and could hurt the nation’s image as a free and democratic country.
China is the most notorious of the countries that impose online filtering and censorship. The Chinese government’s network technology and law enforcement systems are not inferior to those of Taiwan’s government, but Beijing is still unable to prevent Chinese from “crossing the firewall” to browse Web sites blocked by the authorities.
If Taiwan were also to impose a system to block access to certain Web sites, Taiwanese would inevitably react by trying to cross the wall.
An information engineering professor has already said he would teach people how to cross the wall if the government does impose such measures. In that case, the amendment would not meet its goal of cracking down on copyright violations, and the nation would become just another country notorious for filtering and blocking Internet access.
Similar legislation has been defeated in the US and the EU because it was deemed to violate human rights and freedom.
At the beginning of last year, Wikipedia, Google and more than 7,000 other Web sites shut down for one day to protest against the US Congress’ proposed Stop Online Piracy Act, while more than 7 million US citizens signed a petition against it. In the end, Congress withdrew the proposal.
In the Europe, the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) signed by 22 members also triggered large street demonstrations in major cities. The agreement was rejected by the European Parliament on July 4 last year, with 478 votes against and just 39 votes for the act.
It should be noted that the IPO once pushed for Taiwan to sign the ACTA, and even planned to amend laws so that Taiwan could live up to the agreement’s “high protection standards.”
The IPO plans to establish a committee to determine if a Web site engages in copyright violation and so should be blocked, but who has the right to decide which Web sites 23 million Taiwanese can be allowed to browse? Such a violation of human rights is likely to cause much controversy.
Since the Web sites targeted by the IPO’s proposal are outside of Taiwan, why cannot copyright holders file suits in the countries where the sites are located? Why do they want the IPO, network operators and Taiwanese to protect their rights for them?
Wu Kuo-wei is the chief executive officer of the National Information Infrastructure Enterprise Promotion Association.
Translated by Eddy Chang
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS