sabahlaw

Got this from a friend who got it from some unknown person, pretty funny and serious at the same time but more pertinent to our Sabah situation.

Know where to cross the border…

If You Cross The North Korean Border Illegally
You get 12 years Hard Labour.

If You Cross The Iranian Border Illegally
You Are Detained as a spy
 
If You Cross The Afghan Border Illegally
You Get Shot.
 
If You Cross The Saudi Arabian Border Illegally
You Will Be Jailed.
 
If You Cross The Chinese Border Illegally
You May Never Be Heard Again.
 
If You Cross The Venezuelan Border Illegally
You Will Be Branded A Spy And Your Fate Will Be Sealed.
 
If You Cross The Cuban Border Illegally
You Will Be Thrown Into Political Prison To Rot.
 
If You Enter Britain Illegally
You Will be Arrested, Prosecuted And Sent To Prison And Deported
 
If You Are An Indonesian AND ILLEGALLY CROSS THE MALAYSIAN BORDER (particularly on the State of Sabah)

YOU GET:
 
MyPR (Permanent Residence / Pemastautin Tetap)
A Driving License,
Voting Rights
Job Reservation,
Special Privilege to be Consider as Bumiputra,  [prince of the soil  ]
 

Credit Cards,

Subsidized Rent Or A Loan To Buy A House,

Free Education,

Free Health Care,

and if you are a clever dickie, you can be a Menteri Besar  [chief minister]  or even Prime Minister!

Oh Malaysia , what a great country ….. unless you are not a Bumiputra or Indonesian.

The new fees forecasted by USPTO will certainly lighten a lot of wallets but I note that the rules also provide for a MICRO entity (in addition to small). See below

Sec. 123. Micro entity defined

`(a) In General- For purposes of this title, the term `micro entity’ means an applicant who makes a certification that the applicant–
`(1) qualifies as a small entity, as defined in regulations issued by the Director;
`(2) has not been named as an inventor on more than 4 previously filed patent applications, other than applications filed in another country, provisional applications under section 111(b), or international applications filed under the treaty defined in section 351(a) for which the basic national fee under section 41(a) was not paid;
`(3) did not, in the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which the applicable fee is being paid, have a gross income, as defined in section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, exceeding 3 times the median household income for that preceding calendar year, as most recently reported by the Bureau of the Census; and
`(4) has not assigned, granted, or conveyed, and is not under an obligation by contract or law to assign, grant, or convey, a license or other ownership interest in the application concerned to an entity that, in the calendar year preceding the calendar year in which the applicable fee is being paid, had a gross income, as defined in section 61(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, exceeding 3 times the median household income for that preceding calendar year, as most recently reported by the Bureau of the Census.
`(b) Applications Resulting From Prior Employment- An applicant is not considered to be named on a previously filed application for purposes of subsection (a)(2) if the applicant has assigned, or is under an obligation by contract or law to assign, all ownership rights in the application as the result of the applicant’s previous employment.
`(c) Foreign Currency Exchange Rate- If an applicant’s or entity’s gross income in the preceding calendar year is not in United States dollars, the average currency exchange rate, as reported by the Internal Revenue Service, during that calendar year shall be used to determine whether the applicant’s or entity’s gross income exceeds the threshold specified in paragraphs (3) or (4) of subsection (a).
`(d) Institutions of Higher Education- For purposes of this section, a micro entity shall include an applicant who certifies that–
`(1) the applicant’s employer, from which the applicant obtains the majority of the applicant’s income, is an institution of higher education as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1001(a)); or
`(2) the applicant has assigned, granted, conveyed, or is under an obligation by contract or law, to assign, grant, or convey, a license or other ownership interest in the particular applications to such an institution of higher education.
`(e) Director’s Authority- In addition to the limits imposed by this section, the Director may, in the Director’s discretion, impose income limits, annual filing limits, or other limits on who may qualify as a micro entity pursuant to this section if the Director determines that such additional limits are reasonably necessary to avoid an undue impact on other patent applicants or owners or are otherwise reasonably necessary and appropriate. At least 3 months before any limits proposed to be imposed pursuant to this subsection take effect, the Director shall inform the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee on the Judiciary of the Senate of any such proposed limits.’.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Chapter 11 of title 35, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new item:
`123. Micro entity defined.’.

(Complete Judgment at http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCA/2012/34.html)
This is an eye-opener for those looking to create the next ‘near live broadcasting’ or just about any type of digital recording. You will need to design a system where the USER is the principal actor to record and to view the ‘copyright’ material. In this case the copyright material is a FREE TV to air broadcast. You will also have to ensure that the user is using this for his own personal and private consumption. Apparently, Australia’s law provides Section 111 of the Copyright Act
“111 Recording broadcasts for replaying at more convenient time

(1) This section applies if a person makes a cinematograph film or sound recording of a broadcast solely for private and domestic use by watching or listening to the material broadcast at a time more convenient than the time when the broadcast is made.

Note: Subsection 10 (1) defines broadcast as a communication to the public delivered by a broadcasting service within the meaning of the Broadcasting Services Act 1992.

Making the film or recording does not infringe copyright

(2) The making of the film or recording does not infringe copyright in the broadcast or in any work or other subject-matter included in the broadcast.

Note: Even though the making of the film or recording does not infringe that copyright, that copyright may be infringed if a copy of the film or recording is made.

Dealing with embodiment of film or recording

(3) Subsection (2) is taken never to have applied if an article or thing embodying the film or recording is:

(a) sold; or
(b) let for hire; or
(c) by way of trade offered or exposed for sale or hire; or
(d) distributed for the purpose of trade or otherwise; or
(e) used for causing the film or recording to be seen or heard in public; or
(f) used for broadcasting the film or recording.

Note: If the article or thing embodying the film or recording is dealt with as described in subsection (3), then copyright may be infringed not only by the making of the article or thing but also by the dealing with the article or thing.

(4) To avoid doubt, paragraph (3)(d) does not apply to a loan of the article or thing by the lender to a member of the lender’s family or household for the member’s private and domestic use.” (bold emphasis added)

In Malaysia, the protection is much wider as long as it is for private and personal use and made by the person himself.

Section 13. Nature of copyright in literary, musical or artistic works, films and sound recordings.

(1) Copyright in a literary, musical or artistic work, a film, a sound recording or a derivative work shall be the exclusive right to control in Malaysia -

(a) the reproduction in any material form;

(aa) the communication to the public;

(b) the performance, showing or playing to the public;

(c) [Deleted by Act A994:s.4];

(d) [Deleted by Act A994:s.4];

(e) the distribution of copies to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership; and

(f) the commercial rental to the public,

of the whole work or a substantial part thereof, either in its original or derivative form provided that, without prejudice to paragraph (e) , the exclusive right to control the distribution of copies refer only to the act of putting into circulation copies not previously put into circulation in Malaysia and not to any subsequent distribution of those copies or any subsequent importation of those copies into Malaysia;

(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the right of control under that subsection does not include the right to control -

………………

(gg) the making of a sound recording of a broadcast, or a literary, dramatic or musical work, sound recording or a film included in the broadcast insofar as it consists of sounds if such sound recording of a broadcast is for the private and domestic use of the person by whom the sound recording is made;

(ggg) the making of a film of a broadcast, or a literary, artistic, dramatic or musical work or a film included in the broadcast insofar as it consists of visual images if such making of a film of the broadcast is for the private and domestic use of the person by whom the film is made;

………………….

( Also see section 41) -
(1) Any person who during the subsistence of copyright in a work or performers’ right -

(d) possesses, otherwise than for his private and domestic use, any infringing copy;

shall, unless he is able to prove that he had acted in good faith and had no reasonable grounds for supposing that copyright or performers’ right would or might thereby be infringed, be guilty of an offence and shall on conviction be liable –

(i) in the case of an offence under paragraphs (a) to (f), to a fine of not less than two thousand ringgit and not more than twenty thousand ringgit for each infringing copy, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years or to both and for any subsequent offence, to a fine of not less than four thousand ringgit and not more than forty thousand ringgit for each infringing copy or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or to both;

(2) For the purposes of paragraphs (a) to (f) of subsection (1), any person who has in his possession, custody or control three or more infringing copies of a work or recording in the same form shall, unless the contrary is proved, be presumed to be in possession of or to import such copies otherwise than for private or domestic use.

Therefore what can a competitor do ? The bottom line is nothing unless the competitor has a patent to stop the recording or transmission means. There is actually a patent US 7,688,683 (System and method of creating digital recordings of live performances) by Griner, et al. Fortunately for Optus, there was no similar filing in Australia or Malaysia.

In my opinion, the competitor would be smart to provide the same (free or bundle it with another service) and while the clients (at Optus) do not mind 90 secs delay, the competitor should aggressively advertise on this point. Consider what happened to Netscape when M$ muscled into the its business and you can get my drift. An appeal would be a long and uncertain process given that the rest of the world is not at variance with Australia and the many case laws would be persuasive. Even if this decision is reversed, for example to get around this all Optus has to do is to put its recorders in a copyright friendly nation favoring private usage. Obviously as this case has set a high mark, there will be more services to come and allowing each individual user to record and play at their convenience.

Effective 30 June 2011

PU(A) 210/2011

1. Citation and commencement

(1) These rules may be cited as the Rules of the High Court (Amendment) 2011.

(2) Rule 4 is deemed to have come into operation on 1 March 2011.

2. General amendment

The Rules of the High Court 1980[P.U. (A) 50/1980], which are referred to as the “principal

Rules” in these Rules, are amended by substituting for the words “8 per centum” wherever

they appear the words “4 per centum”.

3. Amendment of Order 35A

Order 35A of the principal Rules is amended:

(a) by substituting for rule 1 the following rule:

“1. Evidence-in-chief by way of witness statement.

Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, any witness in an action commenced by writ shall give

his evidence-in-chief by way of witness statement, in the form of question and answer,

tendered and read at the hearing before the witness is cross- examined on his witness

statement.”; and

(b) by substituting for rule 2 the following rule:

“2. Copy of witness statement to be furnished to the other party.

Unless otherwise ordered by the Court, a copy of such witness statement shall be furnished

to the other party not later than 7 days prior to it being tendered and read at the

hearing.”.

Amendment of Order 92

Order 92 of the principal Rules is amended:

(a) in rule 2, by inserting after the word “Court” the words “,and such seal shall include

an electronic seal”; and

(b) by inserting after rule 4 the following rule:

“5. Electronic filing.

Any document required to be filed or issued under these Rules may be filed or issued

electronically; and such filing or issue shall be deemed to comply with these Rules.”.

PU(A) 211/2011

SUB COURT

1. Citation and commencement

(1) These rules may be cited as the Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Rules 2011.

(2) Rules 3, 5 and 6 are deemed to have come into operation on 1 March 2011.

2. General amendment

The Subordinate Courts Rules 1980[P.U. (A) 328/1980], which are referred to as the

“principal Rules” in these Rules, are amended by substituting for the words “8 per centum”

wherever they appear the words “4 per centum”.

3. Amendment of Order 1

Order 1 of the principal Rules is amended in rule 6 by inserting after the definition of

“Judge” the following definition:

‘ “mechanical” means includes any equipment, device, apparatus or medium operated

digitally, electronically, magnetically or mechanically;’.

4. Amendment of Order 46

Order 46 of the principal Rules is amended in rule 2:

(a) by deleting the words “the proviso to section 6(2),”; and

(b) by inserting after the words “sections 11,” the words “16,”.

5. Amendment of Order 49

Order 49 of the principal Rules is amended in rule 3(1)(b) and 1)(b) by inserting after the

words “notes of evidence” the words “in proceedings recorded wholly or partly by mechanical

means”.

6. Amendment of Order 53

Order 53 of the principal Rules is amended:

(a) in rule 6, by inserting after the word “Court” the words “,and such seal shall include

an electronic seal”; and

(b) by inserting after rule 12 the following rule:

“13. Electronic filing.

Any document required to be filed or issued under these Rules may be filed or issued

electronically; and such filing or issue shall be deemed to comply with these Rules.”.

7. Amendment of Schedule A

Schedule A to the principal Rules is amended in Form 137:

(a) by deleting the word “and” appearing at the end of paragraph (g); and

(b) by inserting after paragraph (g) the following paragraph:

“(ga) an order taking possession of the goods by the plaintiff; and”.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/75107593/CPB2011-Draft

As it stands, Bill Gates, Apple’s founders etc will not be allowed to write any codes as they are not graduates/…

See about Institutional racism & Religious freedom

http://english.cpiasia.net/dmdocuments/Institutional%20racism%20&%20Religious%20freedom.pdf

Actually its a sad reading

Under the Report of the Inter-governmental Committee, 1962 (I.G.C. report) at Clause 17…it says

17. Certain aspects of religious education have been dealt with under the heading ‘Religion”. In addition :-
(a) although Education (item 13(a) of the Federal List in the Ninth Schedule) will be a federal subject the present policy and system of administration of education in North Borneo and Sarawak (including their present Ordinances) should be undisturbed and remain under the control of the Government of the State until that Government otherwise agrees. In particular : –

(i) the present policy in the Borneo States regarding the use of English should be continue.

The sanctity of the IGC report and the Malaysia Agreement has been upheld by two decisions of the Apex Court in Pihak Berkuasa Negeri Sabah v Sugumar Balakrishnan (2002) 3 MLJ 72 and Datuk Haji 12 Mohammad Tufail bin Mahmud and 5 others v Dato’ Ting Check Sii (2009) 4 CLJ 449.

I leave the rest to to you…

I recently saw this link below, written by someone who was visiting Sandakan..its something different because even a local like myself am impressed with his/her observation and details. Wonder how many of us (locals) really know about our town ?

Well the link n enjoy.

http://andyhay2.travellerspoint.com/s46/

It has come to my attention that most (new or amended) contracts between Financial Institutions and their clients have a clause which says to the effect that any dispute/litigation must be at a court where said Financial Institution is based. In most cases, this will mean in KL or West Malaysia which is a major issue for those who residing in Sabah or Sarawak. The clause becomes a way for the bank to quickly settle the case in a forum of its convenience. The client will not have much say in such contract other than to agree to this ’standard’ clause. The fact is that there is an alternative that can be argued under the

SUBORDINATE COURTS ACT 1948
ACT 92

THIRD SCHEDULE

(Section 99A)

ADDITIONAL POWERS OF SESSIONS COURTS AND MAGISTRATES’ COURTS

2. Stay of proceedings.

(1) Power to stay proceedings unless they have been instituted in the District in which-

(a) the cause of action arose;

(b) the defendant resides or has his place of business;

(c) one of several defendants resides or has his place of business.

(d) the facts on which the proceedings are based exist or are alleged to have occurred; or

(e) for other reasons it is desirable in the interests of justice that the proceedings should be had.

(2) (Omitted).

3. Transfer of proceedings.

(1) (Repealed).

(2) Power, on application or of its own motion, to transfer any proceedings to another court of co-ordinate jurisdiction.

From the above, you can ask the Court in KL or elsewhere to stay the application and to transfer the case to where you are based.

Obviously the financial institutions will oppose such an application and will cite the contract where the client had agreed to the clause.

One can argue that the clause is an attempt to contract out and its an abuse of the Court’s process specifically the above. Once the proceeding is stayed then one can also seek to transfer it to your state (ie Sabah or Sarawak).

Another point is that financial institutions have been slow to conform with the law as alluded in Diane Chee’s case way back in 2009. Effectively, it caps any losses through credit card at RM250 unless the Financial Institution can show fraud. It also places certain obligations on the credit card holder (like police report and informing the bank etc). In Diane’s case, the bank attempted to rewrite its own contract which is at variance with Bank Negara’s guidelines. Note that the guidelines are only obtainable from the Bank (not Bank Negara) but reproduced by the Judge in his judgment.

Here is a link to the above http://www.loyarburok.com/2010/01/16/those-bloody-banks-credit-card-companies-and-bank-negara/?doing_wp_cron

http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/MYS_1969_Ordinance.pdf

Interpretation
2. This Ordinance shall apply throughout Malaysia.

Breadth of territorial waters
3. (1) The breadth of the territorial waters of Malaysia shall be twelve nautical miles and such breadth shall except in the Straits of Malacca, the Sulu Sea and the Celebes Sea be measured in accordance with articles 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone (1958)…
(2) In applying the aforesaid articles, the expression “territorial sea” occurring therein shall be construed as
“territorial waters”.

Modification of laws
4. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), any reference occurring in any written law to territorial waters shall in so far as such reference affects federal law be construed subject to the provisions of this Ordinance.
(2) For the purposes of the Continental Shelf Act, 1966, the Petroleum Mining Act, 1966, the National Land Code and any written law relating to land in force in Sabah and Sarawak, any reference to territorial waters therein shall in relation to any territory be construed as a reference to such part of the sea adjacent to the coast thereof not exceeding three nautical miles measured from the low-water mark.

Publication of large-scale map
5. (1) So soon hereafter as may be possible or thereafter from time to time as he may consider necessary the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall cause to be published a large-scale map indicating the low-water marks, the baselines, the outer limits and the areas of the territorial waters of Malaysia.
(2) A copy of such map shall be published in the Gazette for general information.

Modification of territorial waters
6. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, pursuant to any agreement entered into between Malaysia and another coastal State, by order modify the areas of the territorial waters of Malaysia; and any modification so made shall be indicated in a large-scale map and a copy thereof shall be published in the Gazette for general information.

Evidence
7. In any proceedings before any court in Malaysia if a question arises as to whether an act or omission has taken place within or without the territorial waters of Malaysia, a certificate to that effect purported to be signed by or on behalf of the Minister charged with the responsibility for External Affairs shall be received in evidence and shall be prima facie proof of the facts stated therein.

****************************proposed amendment 2006*****

http://www.parlimen.gov.my/files/billindex/pdf/2006/DR142006E.pdf

An Act to amend the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance,
No. 7 1969.
[ 1

ENACTED by the Parliament of Malaysia as follows:
Short title and commencement

1. ( 1 ) This Act may be cited as the Emergency (Essential Powers)
Ordinance, No. 7 (Amendment) Act 2006.

( 2 ) This Ac t comes into operation on a date to be appointed by the Minister by notification in the Gazette.

Deletion of section 5
2. The Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance, No. 7 1969 [P.U. (A)307A/1969\, which is referred to as the “Ordinance” in thi s Ac t , is amended by deleting section 5.

Amendment of section 6
3. Section 6 of the Ordinance is amended by deleting the words ” ; and any modification so made shall be indicated in a large – scale map and a copy thereof shall be published in the Gazette for general information”.

Deletion of section 7
4. The Ordinance is amended by deleting section 7.2