本案是香港第一宗引用《版权条例》检控P2P用户的案件、也是全球第一宗以BitTorrent发放侵权档案被刑事定罪的案例。我对这个案子的判决理由相当不同意——注意，我说的是“判决理由”（reasoning），换句话说，我之不同意，不是出于利益平衡、价值选择等等一类“立法上的考虑”（art of legislation），而是在于我认为法官没有正确地进行法律解释或者说法律适用过程出现了错误——时间有限，这里就不具体解释了，只把资料放在这里。- 判决书
- TMCC 1268/2005 屯门裁判法院判词 (英语)
- HCMA 1221/2005 高等法院原讼法庭判词 (英语)
- FACC No. 3 of 2007 终审法院判词 (英语)
相关文章
- Dong Hao, Revisit the Nature of Copyright Law, in Blawgdog.com.
- Michael Filby, Confusing The Captain With The Cabin Boy: The Dangers Posed To Reform Of Cyber Piracy Regulation By The Misrepresented Interface Between Society, Policy Makers & The Entertainment Industries, Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology (JICLT), Vol 2, No 3 (2007);
- Sylvia Kierkegaard, Cybercrime convention: narrowing the cultural and privacy gap?, International Journal of Intercultural Information Management, Volume 1, Number 1 / 2007, pp. 17-32;
- Simon Teng, Hong Kong’s first criminal file-sharing conviction, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2007 2(4):206-207;
- Dr Stuart Weinstein and Dr Charles Wild, The Hong Kong BitTorrent Case (HKSAR v CHAN NAI MING): Will Big Crook Go Down Big Time for a Little Infringement?;
- Deriving cse-specific live forensics investigation procedures from FORZA;
- 沈木珠：网络侵权罪与非罪的把握和思考
- 管瑞哲：析BT 软件相关行为之刑事责任