wakaowalao
Senior Member
In which specific law section, I'm not aware of. I am not cracking jokes when I mention about the issue regarding making photos that destroy any part of Singapore regardless if it is posted or not. We have seen alot of medium in movies, advertisements and maybe drawings of important and prominent architectures in the United States being destroyed in the process. But unfortunately, Singapore law is pretty different from US.
Lets put a disclaimer that what I say may not be completely true. But believe it or not, I heard this from a friend. The source is reliable because the actual person who mention this is a lawyer whom practice law in Singapore. We discussed about this issue because my friend is interested in producing such kind of realistic photos that may depict destruction of any landscape of Singapore. After consulting a lawyer opinion, we got to know such media is highly not recommended because of the probable infringement of "instigation of destruction of Singapore" involved.
If you ask me if there is such an exact clause in the LAW that mentioned it, I will tell you frankly I don't know nor I will find out. But living in Singapore for 30 years for me, I know that when it comes to law in Singapore, if it is not mentioned, it doesn't mean it can be done. The "All Rights Reserved" doesn't belong to the plaintiff in most cases.
I brought it up just as a reminder to whom may have posted such photographs. My words can be ignored to whom may deem fit
Jokes comes in different level. Some jokes are fine and harmless, some jokes that may result in fear or confusion to the society is definitely not lightly taken in the aspect of law.
By stating some "facts" which you yourself aren't even sure of, you are also creating unnecessary turmoil. The actual fact that you heard this and that from A, B or C just plainly sounds like an auntie from the market crying, " You know hor, I heard someone from gaberment said we hor can do this hor, canot do that leh"