Not long ago, a Taiwanese entertainer, who is the chief executive officer of a professional basketball league, was criticized for using a Ubox to stream pirated content from the Tokyo Olympics. As Ubox and many other set-top boxes, also known as “illicit streaming devices,” provide access to TV channels and video content via the Internet, would consumers be contravening the Copyright Act (著作權法) if they use such devices at home? Will the government continue to strictly safeguard copyright after the Olympics? These are issues that should be given consideration.
The seller of Ubox emphasizes during the sales process that the device is examined by the authorities and everything is legal.
However, passing the examination merely means that the hardware’s radio frequency is normal; it does not guarantee that the video content accessed via the device is legally authorized by copyright holders. In other words, if the streaming content is not authorized by the local or international media, such content is illegal.
When the National Communications Commission issued an approval certificate for Ubox in 2017, it specifically included a warning saying that the scope of approval does not include the video content available once the device is connected to the Internet.
The commission added a passage in February last year, saying that the seller and the buyer of the device must pay attention to and respect intellectual property rights. This shows that the approval does not include the streaming content.
A Ubox sells for about NT$4,000, and there are no additional subscription fees. In comparison, an annual subscription for cable TV is about NT$6,000. This shows that the cost of a Ubox is even less than the cost of a one-year cable TV subscription. How could that include authorization by TV stations?
Absurdly, many of the apps that can be downloaded to a Ubox to stream channels can only be used on the device. Most people seem to believe that since purchasing the device is not against the law, they can get away with using it, but if a consumer is aware that the content streaming on the device is pirated, they could be in contravention of the act.
Furthermore, if a piracy streaming control room is found by police, user devices at the receiving end lose their signal, so their usage rights cannot be protected.
The operation of a commercial enterprise requires huge capital. TV stations need to pay massive broadcasting rights fees to air the Olympics, and producing a show also requires a lot of capital. Producing high-quality shows is a display of a country’s soft power, but that power is eroded when people watch pirated content on set-top boxes.
Besides, it takes a lot of national resources to crack down on piracy, including prosecutors and police collecting evidence, targeting control rooms and dealers, applying for search warrants, and questioning and investigating the suspects after raids.
If everyone says “no” to piracy, perhaps the national resources that are allocated to the fight against streaming piracy could be reallocated to where they are truly needed. That being so, Taiwan’s film and TV industry would likely increase its international visibility and soft power.
Tai Chih-chuan is a lawyer.
Translated by Eddy Chang
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
Liberals have wasted no time in pointing to Karol Nawrocki’s lack of qualifications for his new job as president of Poland. He has never previously held political office. He won by the narrowest of margins, with 50.9 percent of the vote. However, Nawrocki possesses the one qualification that many national populists value above all other: a taste for physical strength laced with violence. Nawrocki is a former boxer who still likes to go a few rounds. He is also such an enthusiastic soccer supporter that he reportedly got the logos of his two favorite teams — Chelsea and Lechia Gdansk —
RSS