Thailand Law Forum Thailand Law Forum  
Feature Articles :

Green Policies Take   Off: Thailand’s Support   For Renewable Energy

The Darker Side of   Tropical Bliss: Foreign   Mafia in Thailand

US Sex Laws in Thailand
  Part 1

US Sex Laws in Thailand
  Part 2
US Sex Laws in Thailand
  Part 3
Foreign Investigators:
  Crime Fiction in a Thai
Considerations for
  International Prenuptial
  Agreements in Thailand
Medical Malpractice in

Submissions :

This case decision was researched and translated with the assistance of Chaninat & Leeds a full service law firm providing legal services for client requiring a K1 visa in Thailand.


Supreme Court Opinion Summaries (6359/2551)

Note concerning Thailand Supreme court opinions: Thailand is a civil law jurisdiction that also has elements of the common law system. Accordingly, the principle law sources are acts, statutes and regulations. However, published Supreme court decisions are an important part of the legal development of Thailand and are frequently used as a secondary authority. (Summaries sponsored by Chaninat & Leeds)


2551 Thailand Supreme Court Opinion (No. 6359) 2008
Public ProsecutorThe Prosecutor vs. Mr. Theerapool Uen-anuloom The Accused

Criminal Suspend the punishment (Section 56)
Copyrights Act (Section 29(1))

The Accused retransmitted the audio and visual works of foreign entertainment programs that was broadcasted by the two injured persons by secretly using the satellite dish as the signal receiving device to receive the signals, transmitting the signal into the signal integrated device, then retransmitting it through the cable line connected with the televisions of each apartment room. He requested money and benefits from the tenants in his apartment for such service by adding as monthly service charged included in the monthly room rental fees. The Accused did this works for business purpose that causing very much damage to the two injured persons because such apartment is opened publicly and consisted of many rooms. If the tenants of each room subscribe for the memberships to the two injured persons by themselves, the two injured persons would have received a lot amount of membership fees and monthly service fees. The act of the Accused is deemed severe case that if the Court does not punish the Accused, he would never reform, would commit subsequent offense and would become the bad model to other people. Therefore, the Court thinks it is fit to inflict punishment upon the accused and not allow the suspend punishment.

The Accused had publicly retransmitted the broadcasted works of two injured persons. The room tenants who lived in the apartment of the Accused could watch and listen to the broadcast programs through the signal cable which connected into the tenants rooms. The Accused retransmitted the audio and the visual signal from the programs which was being broadcasted by the two injured persons without prior recording. It deems that the Accused committed an offence by transmitting the works as prescribed under Section 29(1), of Thailand Copyright law.



© Copyright Thailand Law Forum, All Rights Reserved
(except where the work is the individual works of the authors as noted)