Nothing political in nature. this post is about the recent progress of the namewee crisis. malaysiakini and merdekareview respectively reported the decision of government against namewee – Sedition Act will come into scene.

Something interesting that spurs my interest in writing this post – regarding our dearest minister Nazri warning against cyberspace.

纳兹里也警告公众不能转载《我爱我的国家Negarakuku》，并表示要采取行动对付分享Youtube的视频及违法刊登敏感材料的其他部落客。(excerpt from merdekareview)

According to merdekareview, Nazri Aziz warned the public not to republish the video “Negarakuku”, and said he will take action against any blogger that share (that) youtube channel and post sensitive materials, which against the law of Malaysia.

I just wonder, is he serious? At the pervasive era of Internet, how can one thinks that he could actually warn (or threaten) to take action against anyone who shares youtube videos?

I believe there’s two issues we need to ponder upon, objectively:

1. Equation? We need to first understand the definition of “republication” and “sharing” in the aspect of Internet. Can we equalize “sharing youtube videos” as “republicating youtube video”? Can we actually consider sharing youtube video (in forms of inserting youtube video links in email, posting the link in our blog, sending youtube video url through instant messaging, etc.) as republication?

2. Sedition? Is sharing youtube video by all forms of its nature is being considered as seditious? Even if the law does insist sharing youtube video is republicating youtube video, is its nature is being considered as seditious?