Singapore proposes new website blocking system

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Singapore proposes new website blocking system

The Ministry of Law is seeking comments on proposed amendments to the Copyright Law allowing rights holders to take judicial action against infringing websites

The bill, introduced earlier this week, would allow rights holders to apply for an order from the High Court to block access to sites deemed to be flagrantly infringing. Whether a site is a “flagrantly infringing online location” depends on several factors, including whether its primary purpose is to commit or facilitate infringement, whether the site contains directories or indexes of means to infringe on copyrighted material, whether the site has been blocked by other countries and whether the site owner demonstrates a general disregard for copyright.

In order to obtain a blocking order, the rights holder must also establish that the internet service provider knew of the infringing site. This requirement may be satisfied with a written notice to the ISP.

Similarly, the rights holder must serve a written notice to the operator of the targeted site, though the court may waive this requirement if it determines that the rights holder is unable to identify or locate the operator after reasonable attempts to do so.

Beyond the safe harbour

In the public consultation document, the Ministry of Law notes that rights holders can already request that an ISP remove access to infringing material under the safe harbour provisions. However, it said that the system is not effective because rights holders have found it too burdensome to sue ISPs who do not comply with such notices. The system in the proposed amendment, according to Ministry, is designed to be more efficient and avoids reliance on action by the ISP.

Comments on the proposed bill may be submitted to MLAW_Consultation@mlaw.gov.sg until April 21. The text of the proposed amendment can be found here.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Leaders at US law firms explain what attorneys can learn from AI cases involving Meta and Anthropic, and why the outcomes could guide litigation strategies
Attorneys reveal the trademark and copyright trends they’ve noticed within the first half of 2025
Senior leaders at TE Connectivity and Clarivate explain how they see the future of innovation
A new action filed by Nokia against Asus and a landmark ruling on counterfeits by South Africa’s Supreme Court were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how they’re navigating patent prosecution matters and highlight key takeaways from Federal Circuit cases
A partner who joined Fenwick alongside two others explains what drew her to the firm and her hopes for growth in Boston
The England and Wales High Court has granted Kirkland & Ellis client Samsung interim declaratory relief in its ongoing FRAND dispute with ZTE
A UDRP decision that found in favour of a small business in a domain name dispute could encourage more businesses to take a stand in ‘David v Goliath’ cases
In Iconix v Dream Pairs, the Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal was wrong to interfere with an earlier ruling, prompting questions about the appeal court’s remit
Chris Moore at HGF reflects on the ‘spirit of collegiality’ that led to an important ruling in G1/24, a case concerning how European patent claims should be interpreted
Gift this article