More proof and articles

http://originallyferolare.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/excuse-me-is-that-stephan-the-stephan-sing/

http://atalude.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/how-do-i-gotten-pwnt/

It can't be having the copyrights for all animes of the world.

A bit long, but having followed this whole saga for a while, thought I'd shed some light on what's going on.

SAGA 1

They formed AVPAS (Anti Video Priracy Association Singapore) back in 2003 to regulate anime, and I believe Odex's top honchos sit on that board. They also roped in the Japanese studios as members, so they claim they haev the right to go after anything that's illegal, regardless whether they're licensed here or not.

Nothing wrong in that, so far. Also, fansub downloads are also illegal in a technical sense, so legally Odex has a case. What complicates this issue, though, is that standard copyright issues like Berne Convention is inadequate for the digital age.

For anime, which is more than a product but in fact an entire subculture similar to Trekkies and Harry Potter manics etc, such fansubs have helped generate and sustain anime markets. Most notable example is how they transformed the US from an anime backwaters ten years ago into a thriving market.

For the uninitiated, fansubs are typically this: latest anime programme that's shown in Japan are subtitled by fan groups (hence fansub) and distributed to the anime community to promote the latest shows for free,as movie clips. These fans don't get a cent for their work, and are against the use of these clips for profit.

Unlicensed shows are subbed by fans and distributed for free, but once a company acquires the license, they let these groups know and the series is pulled off the Net. With interest in the series already generated by these fansubs, fans then have to buy original, which they do if they like the show. There are rogues, but these get sued and ostracised by teh anime community in general.

Companies in the US appreciate what these fans do, thus rather than banning fansubs altogether, they create good rapport with fans to get them to support originals.

The same phenomenon took place here. The only reason why Singapore can even think of becoming an animation hub is because of such fandom. But rather than earning the goodwill of fans here, Odex refused to engage the community.

When fans complained of poor quality of their shows, citing bad translations, poor image quality, lousy packaging, VCD releases rather than DVDs etc, Odex brushed them aside as "perception problem", and blamed poor sales entirely on fansubs.

Then recently, they took action against downloaders. Hiring a third-party in the US to track downloaders, they got local ISPs to reveal these people's IPs, and sent out letters to them. The letter's content was simple: settle this, which means paying Odex around $3k-$5k for lawyer fees etc (no mention that these are for "damages") or see you in court (and run the risk of $10,000+++ fines and jail term). No warning letters were issued before hand. Many of those caught were students (one as young as 9); how many files you downloaded didn't matter; when you downloaded them didn't matter too, since you may have stopped since June but Odex is backdating your downloading activity (some fans say to up to 2 years).

Odex insisted the Japanese studios made them to it, and it was a last resort. But nothing like this is happening elsewhere, not even in the US where most fansubs originate. Singaopre (and Odex) were the only one persecuting downloaders. The company also warned this is just the beginning--and with Odex backdating their IP logs, this can drag on.

An incensed anime fan community accused Odex of legally extorting fans for money. Some said Odex's website is never updated, so no one would know what's licensed and not except for what you see in the stores.

SAGA 2

Amid the furore, someone stumbled across a posting my Stephen Sim, Odex director who handles this case. Those who got the letter and have met him say he seemed nice enough, but in his online postings, Sim was bragging about being too busy "sueing people", and how he "doubled-6ed downloaders".

On top of that, others accuse that an apparent friend of his (and former Odex-attachment student) downloads fansubs herself -- hence the issue of double-standards from a copyright enforcer.

Call in indignance, call it saving the anime community, fans are turning to the press and internet to demand some justice from what they see as Odex milking easy money from easy prey--when they should be improving their product and reaching out to their potential customers.

Okay, so this is the situation. :)

He looks exactly like a cheebaikia... like one of those no-life SAF regulars living out their sad existences in camp.

What's that he's holding in his hands - a Kotex pad?

Those of U who have downloaded Anime, DESTROY all of it NOW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odex#Odex_.22Catching.22_Methodology

Odex "Catching" Methodology

As of now, Odex method for IP harvesting is very similar to MediaSentry's(The company behind RIAA IP gathering) technique.

Basically they monitor file-sharing networks for infringements of the media. The gathering technique has been argued as unlawful and shouldn�t be used as legal evidence based on Dr Johan Pouwelse opinion, and was proven to be so on Dutch court[[4]].

This is due to the fact that inorder for Odex or any other company to retrieve a list of IP addresses that are sharing a specific file through the BitTorrent Tracker, the company itself must be connected to the Tracker as well, and inorder for the company to obtain a positively confirmation that you are downloading or sending through the P2P network, the company itself must be part of the sharing process through either sending to the illegal downloader or recieving the illegal material from the illegal sharer. Which means, the company itself is also breaking the law.

Although Odex or any other firm can argue that they could have just connected to the Tracker to obtain the list of IP address without taking part in the uploading and downloading process through a customized BitTorrent client, it is impossible to prove that the IP in that list are all illegal downloaders or uploaders since Odex did not take part in the uploading or downloading process first hand. Which means, the ISP of the culprit must provide packets sent and recieved by the cultprit network to recontruct the media in question which requires a network professional and a file recontruction expert, if the file happen to be destoryed in the culprit computer.

Due to the complexity of P2P file sharing system, it is impossible to proof that someone has complete an actual download of a certain file. A simple analogy would be that Mary(BitTorrent Tracker is watching Joe(Uploader 1) and Tom(Uploader 2) passing half of their apples(bits and pieces of the file) from their individual basket(complete file) to Kelly(Downloader). Mary then announced to everyone who is part of the apple passing that Kelly has a full basket. Jim(Odex) was hiding in a corner listening to what Mary is annoucing, suddenly declare that Kelly has stolen his special apple and decided to sue Kelly.

1) Jim(Odex) only evidence is a annocement made by Mary(Tracker).
2) Kelly(Downloader) is unable to confirm that the basket of apple she has are all special apples and not normal apples until she taste them all. Which in Odex case, both Kelly and Odex is unable to confirm that the media in question is really a real copyright infrigement media and not random file with similar name until they obtain and watch it.
3) Mary(Tracker) the provider of the grey evidence, is somehow not involved in the court case.

When Odex first send out the legal warning letters, the time frame has allowed the illegal downloader to destory the medias in question. Whereby solid evidence could no longer be obtain unless Odex is able to request the ISP do perform the above mention media reconstruction. Some argue that Odex should have just goes through the law enforcement channel and perform a house raid, but the problem lies in the fact that their so called evidence are insufficient "evidence of infringement" to obtain a search warrant.