Foong Cheng Leong | Articles

I am an advocate and solicitor of the High Court of Malaya and a registered trade mark, industrial designs and patent agent. I am also the author of the books, Compendium of Malaysian Intellectual Property Cases consisting of two (2) volumes, namely, trade marks and copyright and industrial designs, and Foong’s Malaysia Cyber, Electronic Evidence and Information Technology Law.

  • Can a franchise agreement be executed before the registration of the franchise in Malaysia?

    In a recent High Court case, the Court held that a licence agreement can qualify as a franchise agreement and a licensor cannot offer to sell or provide a franchise until his franchise is registered in Malaysia. Munafya Sdn Bhd v Profquaz Sdn Bhd The Defendant operates an Islamic education system or syllabus for preschool…

  • BFM Podcast: Intellectual Property Rights and Social Media

    Foong Cheng Leong, a lawyer tells of the intellectual property laws governing social media and what businesses ought to look out for and not infringe. If a business outsources the management of its social media activities, who is responsible for infringements?   Your browser does not support native audio, but you can download this MP3…

  • Malaysia Personal Data Protection Act to come into force Jan 1

    The Star Newspaper reported that the Malaysian Personal Data Protection Act 2010 will be in force on 1 January 2013. However, at the time of publication of this blogpost, the date of enforcement has not been gazetted in the Government Gazette. It’s alarming that the Deputy Minister has taken the view that consent to process…

  • Date of Coming into Operation of the Franchise (Amendment) Act 2012

    The Malaysian Ministry of Domestic Trade, Co-operatives and Consumerism has appointed 1 January 2013 as the date on which the Franchise (Amendment) Act 2012 comes into operation. For a write up on the changes to the Malaysian Franchise Act 1998, please see our article “Amendment to the Malaysian Franchise Act 1998”

  • Anonymity, is your time up?

    A. Asohan, my fellow comrade from the Stop 114A Committee, quoted me in his article in Digital News Asia regarding internet anonymity. I am an advocate of privacy rights and to me certainly would extend to online privacy. We now live in a world where enterprises are hungry for personal data to be exploited commercially.…

  • China Domain Name Scams

    If you received an unsolicited email informing you that someone in China will be registering your trade mark / name in China, you may ignore the said email as it is a well known online scam. The email may look something like this:- Dear Manager, (If you are not the person who is in charge…

  • Cyber café and centres owners and users take note

    If you’re running a cybercafé or a cyber centre in Kuala Lumpur or frequents such places in Kuala Lumpur, you should take note of the new Cyber Centre and Cyber Cafe (Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur) Rules 2012 (“Rules”) which came into force on 15 June 2012. Under the Rules, any person operating a cybercafé…

  • Free Document Conversion Tools

    1. Online-Convert (web based). Converts Image (including PDF) to word, text and odt. 2. PDF to Word (web based). Whether this tool works depend on the format of the PDF file. If the PDF file has not enabled text conversion, this tool may not work. One alternative is to print the document and then scan…

  • 拉昔巴星:114A苛刻‧應有更多機制保護無辜

    I was quoted in Sin Chew newspaper regarding the weakness of S. 114A Evidence Act 1950. 拉昔巴星:114A苛刻‧應有更多機制保護無辜 2012-10-24 08:22 布城23日訊)今年8月1日通過的證據法令114A條文,雖然經過總檢察署多次召開閉門會議討論,但仍無法消除各界人士對此條文的爭議。 應站在公眾立場考慮 【新潮】就像沒有一個女人會嫌自己瘦一樣,從來沒有一個男人會嫌自己的“小弟弟”過大。 大馬律師公會刑事法委員會主席拉昔巴星認為,檢察司應該站在公眾的立場考慮,而114A條文中應該有更多的防禦機制來保護無辜的人。 “但反過來想想,如果114A條文需要更多的保護機制以免錯誤使用的話,那為甚麼我們還要保留這樣的一個條文呢?” 他今日受邀在總檢察署主辦的114A研討會的發言時,提出上述看法。 總檢察署沒收財產(forfeitureof property)單位主任安森在回應其論點時多次強調,114A條文雖是以事實推定(presumption of fact),但若沒有其他證據支持,這也是無法入罪的。 他指出,事實推定並非法律新詞,根據基本常識判斷的情況也不只是應用在114A的情況中。 “像在一個人身上搜出大量毒品,我們也會推定他是販毒者。” 採用事實推定不恰當 對此,拉昔巴星反駁道,在114A中採用事實推定並不恰當,毒品不容易取得,栽贓嫁禍相當困難。 “但我們可以輕易地取得某人的手機發出誹謗性、煽動性言論陷害他人,而如果這個人根本不記得誰碰過自己的手機而無法找到時間證人,那他就被無辜冤枉了。” 他強調,資訊科技的發展如此迅速,設立114A條文是非常苛刻(Draconian)的。 針對拉昔巴星對114A的批判,他解釋,檢察司在收集證據時會考慮到當時的情況與背景才做出推斷。例如某人用電腦發出誹謗言論,但他所使用的電腦並非他專屬,那這項證據將非常薄弱,不足以提控某人。 “嚴峻的情況便需要採取苛刻的管制方法。” 瑪麗亞特:事實推定更易取真相 專精於知識產權與知識管理的律師瑪麗亞特認為,事實推定是為了更易取得真相。 “事實推定不是自動發生的,檢察司需要蒐集證據,確定器材的所有人後,才由被告舉證保全自己的清白。但就算某人被證實為發出訊息的器材的所有人,他也未必有罪。 單是這一項證明是無法讓他入罪的。” 但她指出,如果沒有114A條文的話,主控官同樣能夠援引114條文提控被告,而他們也能夠取得同樣的成果。 瑪麗亞特也是論壇的3名嘉賓之一,她認為大馬律師公會代表的立場強硬,但他們以公眾利益出發為考量,情有可原。 但她也認為,各方的爭議在於對114A條文有所誤解,他們必須詳細解讀整個證據法令,才能瞭解為甚麼要有114A條文。 “114A比114條文更明確,是因網絡上有人採用匿名方式犯罪而設的,但這項條文中並沒有列明只限用於資訊科技中。” 研討會分2部份進行 這場由總檢察署舉辦的研討會共分兩個部份進行,前半部為安森與扎布里講解114A條文的應用,以及數碼鑑證科無法找出電腦罪案兇手的困境,後半部則由三位論壇嘉賓針對114A的爭議發表看法。 研討會獲得來自律師、大學代表以及電訊服務供應商的響應,出席者近百人,會場幾乎座無虛席。 吳文徉:被告者難證明清白 出席研討會的律師吳文徉指出,以一名律師的立場來看,被告一旦被證實為通訊器材的持有者,如何證明自己的清白對他們而言是困難的,因為一般人大多不具法律常識。 而雖然無辜者事後可能因為證據不足而不被提控,事實推定指他涉罪的話,已經足以導致讓此人名譽受損。 馮正良:危害資訊科技發展 114A應取消或重擬 吉隆坡律師公會資訊工藝委員會主席馮正良認為,114A條文應該被取消或撤回重擬,因為它將危害資訊科技的發展。 他指,用戶創建內容(user-generatedcontent)的網絡平台依賴網民評論和留言來獲得瀏覽率,繼而獲得廣告收入。…

  • End to data abuse

    I was quoted in The Sun Daily regarding the weaknesses of the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 (PDPA). Note that The Sun Daily also reported that the PDPA will be in force come 1 January 2013. End to data abuse Posted on 23 October 2012 – 05:24am Pauline Wong newsdesk@thesundaily.com PETALING JAYA (Oct 23, 2012):…